Jump to content

Mountaineers in Leavenworth - April 22 & 23


DirtyHarry

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Whether Harry wants to debate the meaning of a "club" or not, there is a definite affiliation thing going at cc.com. Half of my climbing partners stay away from this site, or perhaps lurk but don't post. They are not cc.com'ers. The other half of my partners appear here on a regular basis. They are. Harry is one of the club's elder statesmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether Harry wants to debate the meaning of a "club" or not, there is a definite affiliation thing going at cc.com. Half of my climbing partners stay away from this site, or perhaps lurk but don't post. They are not cc.com'ers. The other half of my partners appear here on a regular basis. They are. Harry is one of the club's elder statesmen.

Well, I guess you can either be right or have friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the quesion remains: are people who waste lots of time on cc.com more prone to having climbing accidents than the mountaineers?

 

I think climbers that post on cc.com are more diverse as far as ability and preferred types of climbing than Mountaineers. "[P]eople who waste time on cc.com" are such a cross-section of the climbing community, that I don't see any real relevance to such a question. I guess that's what Dru was trying to point out when he said that cc.com posters includes Mountaineers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think climbers that post on cc.com are more diverse as far as ability and preferred types of climbing than Mountaineers. "[P]eople who waste time on cc.com" are such a cross-section of the climbing community, that I don't see any real relevance to such a question. I guess that's what Dru was trying to point out when he said that cc.com posters includes Mountaineers.

 

Comeone harry, of course there's relevance in comparing people who desire a structured methodical climbing community that requires $ and time to a ragtag website that requires 15 seconds to register. rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think climbers that post on cc.com are more diverse as far as ability and preferred types of climbing than Mountaineers. "[P]eople who waste time on cc.com" are such a cross-section of the climbing community, that I don't see any real relevance to such a question. I guess that's what Dru was trying to point out when he said that cc.com posters includes Mountaineers.

 

Comeone harry, of course there's relevance in comparing people who desire a structured methodical climbing community that requires $ and time to a ragtag website that requires 15 seconds to register. rolleyes.gif

 

Perhaps a better comparison, then, would be between the climbing community as a whole and the Mountaineers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it’s a club or not is missing the point. The perception is that people who are identified as posters cc.com have an inordinately high accident rate. Given the very small number of consistent cc.com posters the accident rate does seem very high to me. Compare the thousands of Mounties to the handfull of regular cc.com posters involved in accidents and come to your own conclusion about how the rates compare.

 

The Mountianeers are not some monolithic group. There are varied interests and abilities as in every large group. I very rarely run into Mountaineers while climbing. When I do it seems to be the same few Mounties (always small groups – two or three people) time after time. We seem to share some of the same interests. Posts wanking on how Mounties were clogging the routes and trampling the enviroment seem to indicate to me that there is great overlap of interests between significant numbers of cc.comers and Mounties.

 

I guess I should note that "I am not and have never been a Mountaineer."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it’s a club or not is missing the point. The perception is that people who are identified as posters cc.com have an inordinately high accident rate. Given the very small number of consistent cc.com posters the accident rate does seem very high to me. Compare the thousands of Mounties to the handfull of regular cc.com posters involved in accidents and come to your own conclusion about how the rates compare.

oh goody, it's another perception post. I knew you were a closet lefty pp. Cc.com has 10,000+ members. Perhaps you'd care to share your source for the statistics? Or why you chose to ignore the mountaineers climbing classes required to go on mounties classes? Or XYZ factors that change your data?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of 10493 registered posters, how many had accidents within the last month?

 

of xxxx PNW climbers who are NOT registered on cc.com, how many had accidents within the last month?

 

of the total membership of Mountiedom, how many had accidents within the last month?

 

Are these percentages statistically different or could it just be that when someone on cc.com has an accident you hear about it?

 

I can think of two accidents last weekend that involved non cc.com, non Mounties. Maybe it was just a bad weekend to be outside?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...