pope

And then we have, "Pathetic. Dwayner, you suck. " This, I assume, is the style of discussion to which Dwayner should have been aspiring for three years, in order to be considered a serious contributor to bolt discussions, in order that his comments might be viewed as something other than interruptions? Joke.

Is he held to a higher standard than anyone else on this board? Or is it the content of the discussion that governs how people should behave? It seems to me that all topics here are fair game for any sort of "debating style", EXCEPT for bolting. On any other topic it's okay to fling the shit without restraint, but is this topic CC.Com's golden cow? As soon as the "bolting" topic comes up, staunch ethicists have to play nicey-nice while everyone else gets to tell them to pretty much "shut the fuck up" and "stick it up their ass"? Can he be abrasive? Absolutely, but no more so (and much less than) many of the other regulars. I have not once heard him make reference to anyone's mother, wife or girlfriend, tell anyone to "fuck off and die", nor has he physically threatened anyone. If you apply the same standards to the rest of these characters as you do to Dwayner, there wouldn't be a whole lot of people left here - and it would be a much more boring place. My dos centavos. Excellent observations, my friend. There is no basis for banning Dwayner, just a group of bolt clippers who feel guilty when Dwayner ridicules their behavior.

Hey, that was fun. Dirty Tom Flint.

How many? I know of two, one of which made it to the cover of Reader's Digest. We had a close call on the descent, just before stepping onto the glacier. I watched a softball-sized rock rocket down a steep chute and come within two feet of killing my friend (group of Mounties above), but outside of that we thought the route was kind of fun. You can easily descend with a single 50m rope.

Ah, face it dude. You got your butt kicked. So did I. I don't think it was 5.12. It felt like A1 to me.

Been teaching my daughter some jokes. Here's an old standard: A. Knock knock. B. Who dere? A. Interrupting cow. B. Interrupting cow wh.... A. (Before B finishes) Mooooooo! Here's an updated version: A. Knock knock. B. Who dere? A. Interrupting chicken with an identity crisis. B. Interrupting chicken wh... A. (Before B finishes) Mooooooo! Then here's one I made up that I tried on my wife (hope my daughter doesn't take it to school): A. Knock knock. B. Who dere? A. Help, I'm on fire. B. Help, I'm on fire wh....... A. (Before B finishes, A throws a glass of water at B!)

Hear about the new pirate movie? It's rated RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

OK. I agree that it is reasonable to ask him to be less abrasive. To expect it? Well, maybe, maybe not. I admit I'm a little biased because I think his contributions and comments about bolt abuse are not only on the mark but also hilarious. Regardless of your interpretation of the maturity of his behavior and the value of his offerings, I think it would be unfortunate to excommunicate him. That sounds too much like the tactics of those who support the Patriot Act, not a sage liberal.

I agree with you about that thing, Pope, but I believe you have just shown how little you get out. That aesthetic masterpiece has been there for several years, if I am not mistaken. You are right to argue that, just because your proposed rules of ethical bolting are old does not mean that they are no longer relevant. However, the "ground up" ethic is not only outdated, but it is just plain nonsense. And I suspect that you and others who advocate this approach are using it as a cloak for the real point that you hope such a rule would mean fewer routes being put up. A thoughtful and responsible routesetter can do a much better, safer, and cleaner job of putting up a route on rappel than they can on lead. They can also take the time to think about setting a route that will serve other people, instead of merely trying not to break their own neck and making their own accomplishment. If, on a given crag, there were going to be a certain number of new routes with a certain number of bolts, I'd much rather see them developed on rappel than on lead. If you and other "traditionalists" want to control who gets to put up routes and how many bolts they can use, lets have that discussion rather than some outdated and distracting discussion about leadership style. Careful there, Dad. Maybe I'm getting out more than you think. That aesthetic masterpiece left of Saints has been erased for more than a year now! Maybe you're the guy who needs to get out. You're on to me. I feel that adoption of a ground-up ethic would limit the number of new bolts and that would make me happy. However, I also feel that people who wish to put up bolted routes would feel three times the satisfaction from their projects once they try this. It is manly, it is real. It is leading. WITH SKILL AND EXPERIENCE, ground-up bolting is safe and the results can be very satisfactory for subsequent parties. I can drill a 3/8" hole in Leavenworth rock while hanging on a hook in about 15-20 minutes. I'm not saying that everybody needs to do it my way at every cliff, I just think that at certain cliffs, this should be the standard. The result would be that hardly any new bolts would be added, but also those that are added would be respected.

A formula for restoration success!

Well, perhaps they're no longer in vogue. However, had we continued to play by these rules, the mess we call Frenchman's Coulee wouldn't exist. Climbers wouldn't even consider retro-bolting at Castle Rock, Leavenworth. Without todays number of bolt-dependent routes and entire climbing areas (like the cave from which 400+ bolts were removed), we wouldn't have the crowds and the impact they bring. You can't refute an argument about the way things should be by simply stating how things currently are. That's not an argument. Furthermore, not every abandoned idea is a bad idea, even if you feel it was "left in the dust". Not much more than a year ago, I walked up to Castle Rock and noted a line of bolts on the arete that forms the Saints dihedral. This "climb" ended at a hanging belay just two feet below the massive ledge that is 40 feet up the Angel route. In an effort to stabilize loose blocks on this "new creation", somebody had pounded wooden wedges into several cracks. The whole thing just looked like shit. Am I supposed to just say, "Well, sport climbing is here to stay so I guess we'll just accept this chicken-shit addition to Castle's cragging."?

Place only 3/8" or larger bolts and place them well. Place them on the lead to save your life and drill by hand. If you can't handle this approach, don't put them in. Wait 'til a bigger stud than you are does it, then be content to clip up later and pretend you're leading. Or top-rope the route. Or go to a piece-of-shit cliff where your weak practices are commonplace. No bolts next to cracks. No new bolts on routes people have been leading or top-roping for years without bolts. There you have it. Logical and "thouht-out". Play by these rules and you'll stop the spread of sport climbing and feel good about your relationship with the environment. Nobody cares that nobody cares 'bout me.

This is.....um......Sphinx and PP matching wits?

So, Peter has this new forum called "rock sport" or "bolt climbing" or something like that, where all sorts of serious rock climbing talk transpires, and where spray is banned, and where perhaps Dwayner will be banned from "bitching about bolts".......I think this is how you refer to Dwayner's viewpoints when you can't match wits with him and what he has to say pisses you right off. Anyway, it's been more than a year since I had the idea for this resoration forum, where pussies like .....oh, I'll be discrete and not name names here.....WOULD be allowed to contribute but would be utterly ignored by those of us who take our work seriously. Jon, Tim and other national-socialist members of the moderatorial board.......when can we expect to see this new restoration forum? Huh?

He's one of the few who regularly represents a traditional viewpoint. You're welcome to join him.

As a fellow liberal, I'm a little surprised by your pragmatic interpretation of the 1st Amendment. Apparently, what you desire for this board is the realization of a forum in which like-minded people can spend the day agreeing with each other. Just so long as nobody disagrees with your opinion or with the majority viewpoint, as long as they are capable of contributing to the montone.....then and only then do you, MattP, support the free and unrestricted exchange of ideas. My advice to the man for whom I coined the phrase "effortlessly cool" ? On those days when being cool DOES require a little effort......it's still worth the effort. If you exclude Dwayner from these discussions, you might wish to change the name of the site to CASCADESPORTCLIMBERS.COM Good night, gentlemen.

Nothing better defines the word "robotic" by example than the perfunctory way in which you employ the word "nonresponsive" to anybody who won't give YOU and your disjoint logic the time of day.

From my experience with this I would have to disagree. Even the most careful cavers can disturb bat breeding or hibernating colonies. They have a very narrow range of tolerance of temperature and humidity, and an extremely high metabolic rate. Disturbing them out of a rest state, even if they don't fly, causes them to lose use precious energy. There's some good papers out there on the energy dynamics regarding recreation disturbance to bats and the consequences, to bats not people. So while the USFS should be ripped for many of their environmental policies they did the right thing here. Goes with climbing too, not every place has to be open as an outdoor gym. Dude, your paragraph has too many polysyllabic words for your average sport climber to process. You should try something like, "Bats are good."

Boooo hoooo. This is terrible news. I just feel sick!

When I did it (before it was in a guide), folks were saying it was 5.10d and it seemed reachy/strenuous. Not at all bad (probably **) for a short, bolted line.

Too bad the best development on this site since "The Year of Big Lou" was so ephemeral.

Oh, I thought he was on a jet ski. Maybe that wouldn't have been appropriate for a 50's sit-com.

Did Rumr bring his GriGri?

To what?

What is ACTUALLY funny is that Dwayner still finds entertainment value among all of the dull folks who regularly contribute to this long-since-done-jet-ski-jumped-the-predator-fish site. I don't know where he's at today. I'm home sick.