KaskadskyjKozak

Exactly. Either agree with Raindawg and Pope, or STFU, because you are "unqualified" to participate in the "discussion" (what a misnomer). As I said before, these fanatics can not comprehend how they can clearly be so RIGHT in such a clear-cut position as theirs - one for which there is no other possible valid position to have. So, STFU, everyone, listen to what Dawg and Pope have to say (yet again), kow-tow, kiss their feet (and ass) and agree with them absolutely. That's your choice. Allah akbar! Exactly.

did you lick your lips? Dung beetles don't have lips shit-for-brains. you seem angry

Excellent. I like glaciers.

10,000 years from now. that would be some ice age!

bolts are not OK if you are a higher end face climber needing protection on a unprotectable area with runout they are OK if you are a 5.9 sporto doing 3-star routes in a guidebook. rich.

You thought? I don't think so.

Seahawks? Is that you?

Inside your skull! that would imply there was something there to begin with

did you lick your lips?

After seeing these photos, this statement takes on a new dimension. Fellow travelers, Fairweather? Should be right up your alley Prole: Workers of the World Unite!

enough with the homoerotic stuff, guys!

Is this another SpecForOp?

this homoerotic talk is really offputting to AKA have some consideration and include him in the banter...

this homoerotic talk is really offputting to AKA have some consideration

maybe, if the gods bless us, you'll catch bubonic plague from that rat of yours... wishful thinking. Tvash's odor is so horrific he repels fleas

I thought - as per the Unidawg manifesto - you must either do the route "as is", top-rope it, or "leave it alone" - not add a bolt. Really had nothing to do with ethics - it had to do with a really bad guide book rating suckering people onto one of the few 5.9s at Beacon. Again, it's about the only place at Beacon you could get suckered in that way and deck. The bolt was about folks crossing over from sport not being able to claim a route is obviously and irresponsibly dangerous compared to it's recommendation in Olson's guide in the event of an accident. No other route is so accessible, highly rated, and poorly protected [and mediocre]. Wait, so there is no uniform, inflexible position on this? Wow, I wonder what Unidawg has to say about this...

I just ran into this guy that said he'd like cc.com, but that guy Bug is just too hostile Were you kicking his ass at the time? nah, I just gave him a sip from my hip flask and we joked about cc.comers who take themselves too seriously

Kind of like a dung beetle, ne c'est pas?

I thought - as per the Unidawg manifesto - you must either do the route "as is", top-rope it, or "leave it alone" - not add a bolt.

sounds like the average sprayer... yourself included although, in your case, you're also drunk on pinks.cum

sounds like the average sprayer... yourself included

I just ran into this guy that said he'd like cc.com, but that guy Bug is just too hostile

next time take a year instead of an hour, OK? Well said! Post of the day!

didn't Alky-teke just whine about how good the "old days" were - when Unidawg and Pope were treated better and there was less "homoerotic" postings?

I climbed Adams (S side) over labor day 2003. to elaborate on what Bishopp66 warns about: 1) snow level somewhere around 8500 feet(?) 2) snow on route until about 11,000 - then 600 feet of scree up to Piker's 3) snow on the flat between Piker's and the summit 4) 600+ feet of scree up to the summit. The scree is like this: step up a foot, lose 11.5 inches. good times!