knelson

I'm guessing liability insurance is one of those reasons? If one has to pay for services, then it seems like you have to be worried about malpractice issues. Granted, someone can sue you no matter what, but if you're in effect charging for the service, well...

Maestro, The comment wasn't pointed towards you, or anyone in particular. I was just getting bad vibes of a thread drift starting to happen, that didn't seem appropriate. Peace be with you, and all that feel the affects of this accident.

Yes and no. You're right - the freeze/thaw stress cycles occur more frequently and would tend to self-trundle the obvious exterior flakes. But minor faulting in the rock combined with the water flow through it can't be neglected either. Think of a glacier - you've got water systems "communicating" with each other under that ice. If you have a disruption to that system, or something in that system changes, then you might see a result of that on the surface. Glacial outbursts or massive releases of water are an example. Rock is really no different - it just doesn't move quite as fast. So in theory, you CAN have a greater possibility of rockfall after high water inflow - but how MUCH greater is probably not even measurable. And WHEN that greater probability may occur is also not predictable... unless you have the faults and groundwater system mapped to the n-th degree. (I'm not a geotech guy - but my work puts me in close proximity to a bunch of those folks and their reports. Ack.) To me, the type of rockfall mentioned in the first post here isn't something to even concern yourself about. But that's just me. Feel free to go have a beer whenever the need arises! -kurt PS - Without searching for the exact date, it seems like that huge rockslide on the N.Cascades Hwy a couple years ago, just past Newhalem, occured at the end of summer - right after a big rainstorm after a long dry spell. Seems like that was a slab that came down, and not a washout.

Go ahead and tell me where to take it if you want, but it seems that these side conversations should be taken to a different thread. While I didn't know these folks, out of respect it seems fitting to try and keep it spray-free and on topic. -kurt

Where they WHAT? Hey... don't leave us hanging like that!

Wow! Dating has changed since I was last participating.

Why? See "ladder theory" link, previously posted a few pages back in this thread. Explains it quite well.

no, that would have helped! i always wonder why people don't use them all the time. i mean, it's not like they weigh that much or get in the way when you don't need them. is it just that people don't even buy them in the first place? i guess that's sort of a rhetorical line of questioning ... I wonder why people don't just take the stinkin' things off when they don't need them! Whenever I've been on the Emmons, if the snow if balling up coming down, you won't need them anymore. Period. Granted... if we're talking a short stretch of clingy snow, followed by something you'd want them for, then by all means just deal with it. But it seems like there's always groups that come staggering into Schurman, still with their crampons on, with 47 lbs of snow stuck to them. Why make it more dangerous for yourself? Just take them off. -kurt

Don't they normally put in a fixed line there? Never done the DC, but I thought I heard comments and saw photos of a fixed line. Maybe that was just late season.

Plark42, Good point made here. Make sure that this is something you cover under realistic conditions, and not just everyone standing around watching you build an anchor. People need to be face planted in the snow, trying to do this. Depending on ones setup and conditions, this could be the hardest part. -kurt

It honestly sounds like you've got a good system figured out already. Doing it in steps, maybe a week apart, will allow a person to retain more, I think. Only thing I'd add is to go over z-pulley, or whatever rope/pulley system you're going to teach, at each session. Just doing it once doesn't really make it "stick." When you do the ascending the rope thing at home - layout the z-pulley setup on the floor and talk through why each piece goes where it does. The more times the folks see it before they do it themselves, the more sense it'll make. The goal is not really to have the people just memorize the picture of what it's supposed to look like - but to understand WHY they're doing what they're doing so they can set it up by thinking it through. -kurt

Nah... I'm a sensitive, considerate guy. But not sensitive enough to get subtle hints. But sensitive enough to at least get a couple pushes in before I fall asleep.

What's so funny? I push the guy button and yeah... that's funny and all. But after the guy thing is done, I push the girl button, but after a couple clicks I fall asleep. Am I missing something? -kurt

Isn't that this one...

Whew, clears that right up. Wanna climb?

OK - maybe I'm just too idealistic, but let's try this on for size... TA: You want to go to dinner? YOU: Is this a date? TA: Uhh... um... yeah - I guess so. YOU: Oh. I would love to go out to dinner, but I'm not really interested in dating you right now. TA: Oh. Umm. Well I guess we're not going out to dinner then, huh? ...at which point it becomes his issue to deal with how he handles rejection. Not your problem. OR... TA: You want to go to dinner? YOU: Is this a date? TA: Uhh... um... no. YOU: Great! Where we going? ... proper notice given. He's not gettin any. Nothin. Nadda. Zilch. While we are simple creatures, this would be considered a 2x4 statement in my book. And as noted previously, asking climbers about relationship issues is like asking a cannibal how they like their eggplant cooked. Please use with caution.

Same thing I tell my female coworkers... we're really not that complicated. When you ask us "what are you thinking about" when we have that far off look in our eyes, and we respond with "nothing" - really... we're not really thinking about anything. Honestly. We can do that. It's pretty cool.

Ivan, Well put. I'm not actually arguing with you - just questioning the appropriateness of the original TR... whether true or not. I would've been surprised if you HADN'T been contacted by some higher ups. And to be pissed off and calling folks that are just actually doing their jobs (whether they agree with it or not) Nazis, seems kinda odd. But hey - as you noted - we are still living in somewhat of a free country. And by the way - it WAS a great trip report. Great weather, great pics, overall great outing. -kurt

In a rambling sort of way, I guess that was kinda the point I was trying to make. Most folks aren't looking for a mate when they're dating - but they might find one anyway. I honestly was NOT looking for a long term relationship when I met my wife, but hey... it's the timing thing again. You never know what's around that next corner. Granted - there ARE people out there whose sole purpose for dating is to find a permanent partner NOW. And good for them. But it seems like when you unnaturally push along something that should take time to develop, the results are going to be compromised somewhat. Honesty. No head games. Say what you mean. These all seem to be good things - dating or not. If someone is offended at the "is this a date" question, then you're right... they're in a different place than you are. Next person please. -kurt

And THIS isn't a self-righteous attitude??? Seems to me, "sensible boundaries" also include not publically documenting behavior that obviously would get a federal employee in deep shit from his supervisors. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have gotten your medicine if said employee knew it was going to be documented for everyone to see! (Well... maybe a couple of them wouldn't give a shit, but still...)

OK... turning smartassedness off... NOW. Isn't dating just a way to pass time and take people out for a test run while you're waiting for the right person to come along at the right time with the right attitude? Seems to me that finding the "right person" is always just a matter of timing. Mr/Mrs Right can be right in front of you, but if the timing isn't right for both of you, it isn't going happen. You're a different person now than you were two years ago, and you'll be a different person in two years than you are now. And the same jerk/bitch that you encounter now may be a decent human in two years. (Yes... there are permanent jerk/bitches - but those seem fairly apparent... like Marie's date.) It just depends on how people change from their experiences, doesn't it? It kind of reminds me of a question on a compatability test my wife and I took during pre-marriage sessions at the church we got married at. Contrary to the hell it may sound like, it was actually quite well done. The question was "Do you think there is someone else out there that you could be just as happy with as the person you're going to marry." I answered yes. The wife-to-be answered no. Can you picture the glare-of-death I received from the wife-to-be when the pastor read our answers out loud? However, the pastor was a great mediator and let me get my reasoning out before I was clawed to nothingness. There are lots of people in the world - LOTS. Seems silly to think that after dating for some years, I would stumble on the absolute perfect, can't get any better, Mother Teresa of wives right here where I live. So yeah... I'm sure that somewhere out there, there is someone that I'd get the same feelings for. Did I want to find that person? No. Did I feel like I was settling? No. Did I want to spend the rest of my life with my wife-to-be, without looking back. Yes. (My wife-to-be originally answered yes, but changed to no because she thought that by answering yes, that implied that you had doubts about the relationship.) This question was a good discussion point about expectations that one puts on a relationship. The "correct" answer to the question was 'yes' - for the reasons I mentioned. Answering 'no' was a warning flag that one half of the relationship may have impossible expectations on the other half and that this should be brought out in the open. The other good discussion point about this question was the issue of timing. If I'd met my wife a year earlier, would I have wanted to marry her? Not sure - I was in a different place, maturity-wise, and so was she. A year later? Who knows. I guess my rambling point is that dating is just a phase of life where you're waiting for all the pieces to click into place at the right time for everyone. While being "rejected" IS a personal thing, it really shouldn't be. YOU are the only one that can make it a personal thing. It's just two people that aren't meant to be, at that time. What's it really matter if it's a date or not? If things are clicking and the feelings are mutual, you're gonna know it. Just go with it and see where it ends up. [smartassedness ON] -kurt

May I nominate this for the best Freudian muffism?

creamy or chunky? Creamy!! Not a big fan of nutty chunks. Ahhh... I believe we're getting somewhere now with your dating issues.

creamy or chunky?

Same person? Did the "date" involve another person? What if you suffer from a split personality? At least you have a split. Work it, baby. This is going to revert back into a discussion about cloven animals again, isn't it.