mattp

Censorship: what is it? As I indicated already, we received several requests to delete some of the angry criticism of Dan. We refused to do so, even though we thought some of that discussion was unnecessarily hostile, because we felt that folks should be able to express their opinions on this board. After receiving complaints about the level of general B.S. in the thread, I discussed it with others and decided that I could ask folks to stop spraying completely unrelated banter on the thread without stifling anybody's right to express theirself. Is it "censorship" to require someone who wants to post snafflehounds and pagetops to do it somewhere else on this board? Is that truly stifling anybody's right to express themself?

I believe Blix is working on it as we speak. A full report will be presented to the spray council and then we hope to pesent a reforendum.

Indeed, Ehnmic, it would be different. I have known a lot of climbers who sought to introduce their children to the world of climbing and, just as with any other parenting issue, there are a myriad different ways to handle these issues. But when a father seeks to impel their son to perform in such a dangerous endeavor, I think there is great potential for the son to be unable to excercise their own independent judgment. I don't know them and I know nothing about their plans. I am not expressing any opinion about the relationship between Roskelly and his son.

Dru- Believe it or not, we have been engaged in private discussions with some people who ARE interested in bringing more information to this discussion. We HAVE discussed with them exactly how that might be done, and whether THAT THREAD might be the appropriate place. I agree that a ten-page rant wherein all the important points were made in probably no more than 25 out of over 200 posts has almost by definition lost focus and that there are few people who are going to come into the discussion at this point and try to read the whole thing, and I agree that there is nothing "sacred" about it. But the fact is that I hiave disussed the thread with many people and there are lots of readers who feel it WAS a valuable discussion and who have thanked me for intervening. But I have no witnesses, of course. I can supply the GPS coordinates, if you would like.

I believe I read in the P-I that he was, like, 16. It serves me right for taking that as correct. Indeed, I would say there is a difference between being 16 and 20, and the fact that he has prior high altitude experience makes a difference too. I thought it was an interesting question, however, whether a father should or whether any of us as fathers might take a son on a dangerous expedition.

Robbob- No, it was not your posts that led me to shut down the discussion. It was the repeated posts from Dru and his avatars, and some others, where the only message was "I have a right to spray on this thread no matter what you, Mr. Moderator, may think." They weren't even pretending to address the topic of the thread, but simply posting bullshit and urging others to do so. I clearly explained several times in both public and private statements (the latter sent mainly to Dru), that we have received specific requests to control the banter on that thread and I asked that folks cooperate and stop fighting to be able to simply dump spray on it. Indeed, there are several people who have indicated interest in continuing the discussion but who said they would not do so unless the discussion was going to be severely moderated. We have repeatedly been asked to delete some of the angry criticism of an "obvious hoax," but we refused to do so precisely because we feel that people should be able to say what they think on this bulletin board. I did state, more than once, that I thought we had already seen 39 angry posts complaining that the liar should be discredited, and that the point had in my view been amply made. But I did not delete anybody's post to that effect. I discussed this thread with others before I took any action, and the off-topic banter was something that we felt we could try to reduce without stifling anybody's right to express themself. Can you really say that Dru's right to pile on extra posts so that he can claim another page top should outweigh the concerns of somebody who is interested in using this board to explore a hot topic that is obviously of interest to so many people? If you want to call me John Ascroft Jr. because I am willing to stand up to somebody who is fighting for their right to seek pagetops, go right ahead. Like Erik said - if you or Dru or anybody else just has to spray, simply copy any portion of the thread that you like and paste it to the spray forum.

One nearby and extremely accessible trail project that I believe was funded at least in part with funds from the Fee Demo program is the trail to Big Four Ice Caves, outside Granite Falls. On that trail, there is a very large new bridge over a pretty small stream that is, like, 75 feet long and built witih 4 or 5 foot high glue lam's and would be strong enough to hold a sherman tank. The whole thing was helicoptered in there. The prior footbridge in the same location was less than a tenth as big and to replace it would probably have cost 1% as much. I think a good argument could be made that this is an example of government waste at its worst, but an equally good argument could be made that the Ice Caves trail is the most popular hiking trail in the district, and it is appropriate that they spent a large percentage of their trails budget there and made it something that serves families and probably even wheelchairs. If it was in fact built with funds from fee demo, it might be interesting to mention that the program supports this kind of project in addition to more remote and primitive backcountry trails.

I could lbe wrong, but I think almost nobody who was in on the committee meetings related to the fixed anchor ban would describe Scott Silver as either patient or "not wacko." From what I understand, people who were for and against the ban found him to be, at best, unnecessarily divisive. While he certainly couldn't be said to be objective about fee demo and I would question some of his "information," I do think he has worked hard on the issue and would be a good source.

RobBob, you are mistaken if you think that I would feel compelled to shut down this thread. And I'm hurt that you would say such a thing. Meanwhile, back to your regularly scheduled program. I find it amazing, and somewhat worriesome, that a famouns mountain climber would take his fifteen year old son (or is he sixteen?) to try to climb Mount Everest. Not surprising, perhaps, but .... What do you folks think about this?

wdietsch is probably right about how you probably won't be able to drive very close to the mountain, but about a month ago I believe the road to the south side was driveable to pretty close to the trailhead at Morrison Creek, which is really not all that far below the higher Cold Springs trailhead that usually doesn't open until June or July. I'm jut guessing, but my bet is you will be able to get much closer to the mountain on the main south approach than you will on the road to Bird Creek Meadows, for the Mazama Glacier. I've never been up the Mazama, but I have been up the Avalanche and I've skied the SW Chutes several times. I would not recommnd the SW Chutes as a climbing route unless you are looking for workout on a relentless climb of 3500 feet up one single slope. Either the Mazama or the Avalanche Glacier route would have more variety of terrain and things to look at. Wdietsch is also probably right that the crevasse issues will be minimal in April, but I wouldn't assume there will be little or no objective hazard. On any of these routes, you could encouter an avalanche hazard and there is at least some possibility of encountering rockfall (particularly during a warming spell) or steep icy slopes where you dare not stumble.

I would guess that one reason it may be the case that climbers from out-of-state get into trouble more than locals (if that is so) might be that they are less likely to turn around or cancel their climb when the conditions are less than optimal. If you live here and you have a partner or two who are also local, you can wait for a weather window more easily but if you're going to fly out here from Chicago, you purchase your plane tickets a month in advance and can't so easil postpone your climb by a week or two. Once on the mountain, the same factor will come into play: the local can turn around while telling themself that they'll be back next week. The vacationer cannot.

Indeed I did downclimb those blocks. That was more frightening than anything I found higher on the route.

Nathan mentions a short pitch on steep rock at the base of the ridge. When I did it, the tracks all went straight to a short rock pitch, and I believe folks were going that way because there was an easy path between crevasses that lead straight to that spot and they didn't want to or maybe didn't have the skills that would have been needed to climb in and out of a crevasse to get somewhere else. Not wanting to test a new path unroped, I went that way too. But that rock pitch was SCARY! I had the distinct impression that I could easily pull out the wrong block and bring the whole thing down on myself. Had I been there with a partner, I would likely have insisted upon going around some other way.

Actually, it think it was MS4+. It was mixed spray, or spray covered information. In better conditions, it might have been only S2.

In the spring, when the snowpack warms up, it starts creeping downhill in steeper areas. This causes the formation of "creep cracks" that sometimes look like miniature crevasses, usually near the top of a slope and below some type of terrain anchor or maybe at the bottom of a gully or something. I don't think this type of crack necessarily indicates the kind of snowpack instability that is likely to cause an avalanche, but they do show that the whole mass is sliding and, depending on where that whole mass is headed - whether it is sliding down into a flat bottomed bowl or over a cliff or whatever, the whole thing could let go and slide big. Might this be what you saw?

This thread is fine, but I repectfully request that you don't screw with me in the route reports section. Dru added a fine post to the Lib Ridge discussion which he concluded with the taunt "maybe a moderator will lose it and delete this post." If you do that sort of thing, at least if you do it today, I will lose it and delete it. That is today's new arbitrary rule. Grow up, Dru.

Right on Mike. I didn't mean to sound as if I was advocating soloing the route, and I know that there are lots of folks out there who will need two tools on it -- so maybe they should consider bringing at least one extra tool in the party in case somebody drops one. I know that's not the fashionable super- alpine-light-and-fast approach but didn't a party get stranded near the top last year or the year before precisely because they had lost a tool or some tools and were afraid to go up or down?

Just to be clear: I'm NOT picking a fight with Caveman but the fact is that I don't think anybody has ever been banned or that a post has ever been erased because someone stated their view on ANY topic around here, unless their view was that they want to kick somebody's ass, or that faggots must die, or that it is funny to talk about raping little kids, or something like that. Consider the bolting arguments, the political discussions, or even the Rainier Speed Record thread -- I don't think any particular viewpoint has been targetted for mind control. Some whiners around here will argue that I or some other moderator exercises too heavy a hand. But the fact is you can post just about whatever you want, as long as you aren't rude about it. Jon is right on when he says he doesn't understand how you guys passed special ed: the rules of civility here are really no different than they are in any social situation -- including your own living room. If you are talking to your climbing buddy about what gear you are going to bring on your next climb of Liberty Crack, you will tell your buddy #2 to shut up if they keep interrupting your discussion to talk about all the dingleberries in your butt crack or if they tell you that you are a dipshit because only dipshits would attempt that route in the first place. If that same buddy #2 then responds by turning up the music to prevent your planning your climb, or if he tells you that you can kiss his god damn ass, you will probably consider him rude and take corrective measures.

I used a 70 cm axe and a 50 cm hammer. As to your question about the retreat if you drop a tool: you might well want to downclimb because the steepest snow or ice pitch is the last one, a short wind-roll to the summit ridge. On the other hand, even that pitch is well less than vertical and you could climb it with a single tool. It is a judgment call you are going to have to make at the time but my point in suggesting that you think about it is that you should consider the possibility of downclimbing the route even if you hope to carry over -- and that I think people get themselves in trouble when they discard the possiblity of retreating once they leave Thumb Rock or once they have passed the Black Pyramid or whatever.

Veggie- My apologies, but what I saw happening there was that the thread was about to be completely abandoned for nothing but spray. I could either ship the entire mess to spray, close the thread, or try to erase a few posts and send a message. I tried to take the pruning sheers to it in an evenhanded manner. Honest I did.

Dru, you are full of horsecock. You are right that there is lots of spray in that thread, but that does not imply, as you suggest, that the entire thing is worthless. And as I already told you, there are lots of readers who find it interesting, even though some have complained about what they see as the unnecessary spray and personal attack. You say that if I had balls I would delete the whole thing -- but would that be a show of balls or would it just a show of complete arbitrariness to the point of absurdity (to erase a discussion that in fact may have been much more important in terms of NW climbing history than 90% of what is current on this bulleting board just because a small handful of posters don't know how to follow the rules). You dismissively ask "what sort of evidence is going to come forth now?" I don't know the answer to that but I can assure you that the discussion there is completely dead if we simply write the thread off as another "Muir on Saturday" and ship it Spray or delete it entirely, or if it degenerates into nothing but another quest for page tops and a contest to see who can post the crudest picture and get away with it. Is there anything more to say on the topic? I don't know. Does anybody else know anything about the matter? Maybe. If there is some measure of moderation to the discussion on this board, there is some chance that we might make a further contribution to the issue here. Lastly, I will admit that I have not been consistent in my attempts to moderate the route reports forums. One reason is that I simply don't have time to read every post and weigh it against the rules and then, if a post seems out of line, to figure out how to cleanly remove it and still leave other posts making sense. I know its sad, but the fact is that I have other things to do in my life besides babysit this board. Another reason I may not be consistent is because the rules are not clear: with regard to deviations from the topic in the route reports forum, for example, I explained that it is generally agreed that a couple of posts off-topic are OK, but when it grows to most of a page that is merely spray, it doesn't belong; or with regard to personal insults, we have stated that threats will not be tolerated and gratuitous insults do not belong in the route reports section but there is no clear line between what is a gratuitous insult and a complaint about someone's personality flaw. You and some of the other posters on this site find it amusing to play games with these issues, testing the moderators to see just how much you can get away with. And you know what? It gets annoying. So yes, if you keep playing games with me, I will very likely get arbitrary on you and delete posts that aren't really all that offensive. Yesterday, I sent you at least three private messages asking you to stop with the pissing match. And you kept at it, eventually enlisting your avatars because (presumably) you though I wouldn't know it was you. Maybe you don't have any respect for the "speed record" thread or those who have participated in it. But some folks around here do.

Grow up, Drew. We have probably received more requests to moderate that thread than any other in the HX of CC.Com, save perhaps the Goran Kropp thread. You and your friends who think it is cool to piss on every topic in this board are not the only people in this world.

I agree, Nathan, that Liberty Ridge is a serious route that should not be undertaken by a weak or inexperienced party, but this section of the board is dedicated to the discussion of specific routes. Yes, he could look at a topo map and a guidebook and calculate the mileages involved, but his questions thus far don't appear to me to merit a critical response. As to the relative distances: For me, Liberty Cap is the "climber's summit" because most of technical routes on the mountain end there, or nearby. And the top of the Liberty Ridge route is Liberty Cap. So if you consider (as I did on that occasion) a climb to Liberty Cap as a complete ascent of the Liberty Ridge, it is probaby just as far and more work to descend via the D.C. route (assuming you had good conditions on the Liberty Ridge like I did). As to the "difficulty:" Sexy, you said you are a "relative newby" so Nathan's warning may be warranted. The route is not known for steep ice or rock climbing but you may have to climb into and back out of a crevasse somewhere on the Carbon Glacier, there could be some ice climbing with poor protection in an exposed setting, and you may encounter a rotten rock band -- difficulties that have stumped rock and ice climbers of considerable experience. Also, a slip from almost anywhere on the entire climb from the Carbon Glacier to Liberty Cap could be fatal; and climbers, rocks and ice blocks all fall down the route on a regular basis. So yes, "conditions" are important, but even when in "good" shape, the route is a serious one.

Pete- You may already know this, but that is one of the better huts to be stuck in, should you find the snow conditions to be unfriendly. Also, there is good tree skiing nearby, so you ought to be able to at least do SOMETHING (though I was once there for a week when it snowed over a foot every day and there was one day where it wasn't even safe to go out to the water hole).