Off_White

Thanks for the synopsis Will. While I was striking a pose, I was also curious just what your job was up there. on the good work. I am curious how many here are self-employed. It struck me as funny that of the few I'm aware of, AlpineK, MattP and I land on the left end of the balance and only RobBob on the right. That's contrary to the mythology of just what sort of person is a self-starting entrepreneur.

How many of you free enterprise types work 50 hours a week or more? How many of you are self employed entrepreneurs? Will, you actually work for the federal government, don't you? Do you suffer any kind of libertarian angst over being a burden to society, a leach on the face of American ingenuity?

Christopher Hitchens defines himself as a contrarian, rather than a liberal. He left his long standing column at The Nation over his disgust that no one else at the magazine would agree with his unconditional support for going to war in Iraq. Hitchens, who I think is a fabulous and entertaining writer, once referred to Lady Diana and Mother Teresa as "a simpering Bambi narcissist and a thieving, fanatical Albanian dwarf." Hows that for spray? His graphic for his column in The Nation was a guy on a horse with a lance and a windmill in the background. Like any writer, he has his own bias and agenda, and he's not about to admit that attacking Iraq was anything less than the right thing to do. Besides, I think Hitchens starches his shirts, and I'm sure he finds Michael Moore's fashion sense repulsive. Anyway, my point is that Hitchens is not a recent convert turned off by Moore's film, but has been in the pro-Iraq war camp since the very beginning.

Yeah, this looks like no fun at all.

It sounds like you two have some unresolved communication issues in your relationship. Take him aside and have a gentle conversation, but make it clear that if he can't keep you abreast of major changes in his life, it just won't work and he'll have to move out.

I'm psyched, this is a pretty cool space mission. Check it out Fairweather, two things we agree on in as many months.

Post deleted by fern

That's a good thing, cuz I'm really hoping he's gonna need a new job soon.

You'll notice Distel is the subject, not the photographer? I like the heel hook at the lip turn, but then there you are dangling. Did you crank out the finish or run out of gas? I had a feeling that Flagstaff limestone would be just your cup of tea.

You get a loaf of cheap bread, a jar of peanut butter, and a pot of jam. Make the whole loaf into sandwiches, load them back into the bag, and apply compression until the stack height is reduced roughly 50%. They're going to get squished anyway, might as well be deliberate about it. Voila, with a sack of smushies you're good for a week, and need waste no time in selecting what you will have for your next meal.

You're so silly Rudy. Doesn't matter which piece of the climbing game turns your crank, everyone is concerned about access and user impact, and secret projects come in all sizes. As Kix mentions, it's quite the balancing game: you don't want a bunch of people making a mess of things, but without enough traffic the moss will win. That said, it's my guess you'll actually need to promote the area some to get the traffic you need to keep things clean, so work on your access issues pro-actively. Just what is the NW boulderer population these days? Even with more information access I doubt you'd see anything remotely like the onslaught Bishop has endured.

Dru is correct, it's not visible in the photo, though I think the upper part comes in on the skyline from the right. Here's a crappy photo that still doesn't quite show it, but it's closer. Dragonfly is over on the extreme right edge, mostly facing further right. The white rock up high on the right edge is part of Dragonfly.

I was at Colchuck late when Yoder and partner (McGowan? can't remember without the book) arrived in the dark after the FA. We got 'em stoned and sent them on down the trail, and they were foaming at the mouth about how good the route was. Windmilling pantomimes and bugged out eyes suggested the crux was pretty sporty. I've also done a route on the NE Butt between the Beckey route and the direct. I'm pretty sure the info in the guidebook about those other routes is wrong, but if you're contemplating Dragonfly you shouldn't have a hard time muddling through one line or another as a backup. The one we did was about 5.8. On the way in I sort of scanned around looking for the start of Dragonfly. I didn't scramble over to the base, but didn't look like it would be too hard to find. If you do it, take pictures and tell stories.

East of Seattle, eh? Kind of a tossup if you're closer going west, isnt' it?

Awww, you changed him! Rabbi Toughguy is cool. I figured the Lutherans had put that stuff behind them, but thanks for confirming it. It's good to know I can laugh at Garrison Keillior's jokes without guilt.

Somebody needs to buy Dick Cheney a book for his birthday.

Martin Luther? You mean that German augustian monk who wrote in his essay On Jews and Their Lies I was quite surprised to see his name linked to a polemic poised as if to come from the mouth of your combative Rabbi Toughguy. Coming back around to baby smashing, Father Luther preferred to see possessed children thrown into the river to drown or be cured. Martin Luther was a sick bastard.

Well, maybe not quite as funny as babysmashers...

Cute baby? I think Bat Boy has a little brother!

That's another form of population control, innit?

I think Jon broke her heart.

So my friend says to me, "My cousin has gone a little loopy, she's convinced she's a chicken. Cackles all day, scratches at the ground, and has a nice nest going." "Why don't you ship her off to the mental institution, she needs some help," I reply. "WHAT, are you nuts? We need the eggs." I dunno, its what came to mind, just thought I'd share.

Oh, I know the bible is a contradictory document, much translated and open to interpretation. It's marvelously malleable and useful, which contributes to both the longevity of the document and the multibranched religious mutations it has spawned. It's also likely my understanding of both the importance and content of the ten commandments owes more to Charlton Heston than anything remotely resembling biblical scholarship. Still, you gotta admit that "What part of "thou shalt not kill" didn't you understand?" makes a dandy soundbite.

I think Marty should be commended for debating here, most sport route developers wouldn't bother, and I very much appreciate the line both he and Dane draw between opinions and the person who holds them. Passions run high on the topic, and being able to argue in a civil manner calls for committment from all parties. to you all. Myself, I feel rather conflicted on the subject, and I like Lucky's case-by-case approach. On the one hand, the trad end of Dane's poll: No chipping, no holds added, no bolts next to natural protection, and no messing with someone else's creation have pretty much been ground rules since I started climbing in 1973, and I've always believed in them. The thing is that life is rather more gray, and I find I've engaged in some of these things. I own a crag, as in it's on my property, and legally I could grind it flat and show movies on it if I wanted. The rock is an old sandstone quarry, so it was man made, but it sure feels like you're climbing when you're on it. There is a route I bolted four artificial holds on. It provides access through a band of bad rock so you can get up to a pretty damn good route. It doesn't matter how much you scrub this bad section, shit just keeps coming off. Now, it's possible to scrabble through the crap in an unpleasant and sketchy manner, but after I pulled a briefcase size chunk off onto my leg, I decided it was just bullshit, and if I didn't do something different the route just wouldn't be worth the hassle. Consequently, I put the four holds on through the most solid section of rock, which did not otherwise offer access to the route. Sometimes I feel a little silly, because even with the holds it's still easy 5.10 to get onto the route, but given that the crux is middling 5.11, it's not inappropriate. It's not beautiful, but it does make the route worthwhile. So, am I in the wrong? Down at the far end of the crag there is a 5.9/10a fingertip lieback in a corner. It's the easiest and most straightforward route on the crag. I don't have a lot of confidence in the ability of the stone to hold small nuts and tiny cams and the position of the route makes the placements difficult to achieve and inspect, so I put four bolts on the face to protect the 50' long route. It would seem silly to me that the easiest route at the quarry would be the one most likely to kill you, and I really don't want any dead bodies on my property. I was the first to clean and climb the corner, so I am the FA as well as the legal owner. Am I in the wrong? There's another route, a great 5.10c outing, which also is one of the easier lines here. A significant flake that plays a big role in the climb was somewhat loose. If I pried it off, it would leave a scar, and make the route notably harder. Instead, partly from an agenda of wanting to have a few moderate routes here, I carefully used backer rod to create a dam and filled part of the back of the flake with construction epoxy. If you look closely, you can tell the hold has been reinforced, but it's neither obvious nor messy. If I had pried off the flake one of the few 5.10's at the quarry would be gone. Am I in the wrong? Now, I understand, this is a bizarre case given the ownership of the crag. It wouldn't occur to me to do these things at Leavenworth, Darrington, Tieton River, or even Vantage because I wouldn't feel empowered to make that decision. None of those places are "home" even in the sense that I climb there a whole bunch. But I can imagine the decision process that led me to my actions being applied by someone else at another crag, and so I feel conflicted by the whole thing. Does anyone know how you would fill in a chipped hold that wouldn't look worse than the original scar? I might have a few ideas, but they would be somewhat esoteric and require skills and materials not commonly accessible. I think chipping is even worse than bolting a hold on, since holes can be filled, but chipped edges don't disappear well. But even here there is a gray area. When does cleaning become chipping? In some of the FRAC (funky rock awesome climbing) areas that sport climbing has clasped to its bosom, the line can be a little blurry. Where one person thinks they're cleaning things up and making the route possible, others might think they're manufacturing holds. Even well meaning upgrades can be botched and leave a worse mess than they intended to fix. The Dike Route on Pywiak Dome in Tuoloumne is a good example. The route is one of the earliest bolt protected climbs done up there, and was very run out because the leader was simply too terrified and unable to stop and drill. I think later on a couple bolts were added, but the route has remained a run out affair that requires a certain amount of poise. Nonetheless, it has been very popular, and sees lots of traffic. The last time I did the route (which was years ago, things may have changed) someone had upgraded the rusty 1/4" bolts with modern 3/8" and heavy stainless steel hangers. When you're 50 or 60 feet out, that sort of thing is appreciated. The problem was that instead of removing the old bolts, they simply placed new ones nearby, and I think there was a botched hole or two as well. The net result, while safer and done with good intentions, was rather ghastly and ugly. Replacing unsafe bolts is widely lauded as a community service, and yet this was wrong. Can retrobolting be acceptable? I have a friend who put up stacks of scary routes in Tucson. He had an amazing ability to move slowly, securely, and slothlike over 5.10 face climbing with such confidence that protection wasn't that much of an issue. Drilling by hand is tedious and time consuming. Consequently, there are some great lines that see no traffic. My friend no longer lives down there, so he is generally unable to change things himself. He's open to the idea of making some of these routes safer for others, but the logistics involved in arranging for appropriate proxy retro-bolting coupled with the fact that others might be offended and chop the additions have kept anything from happening. If the FA party is willing to see things change, I think retro-bolting may be acceptable, but it does take effort and communication, and particularly when you throw in layers of different generations and folks who fade from the sport, it would take a determined effort to secure that approval. Anyway, after all that blather, you can see where I'm going. In theory, I believe in the rules, but in practice I can see blurry edges that make the application more of a process than a binary operation.