Taking swipes in Alaska Forum

[mattp]

What's your take on that Carbon Neutral McKinley thread by Zoran?

 

I know we like to be all rogue and "spirited" on cc.com, but do we want anybody who doesn't fit our narrow mold in the style department to be hounded by the mad dogs who belong in Spray?

 

Whether your gig is "carbon offsets" or "climb for Christ," "light and fast" or "dirtbag and debauchery," aren't we all excited about climbing? Sure, any one of us can find something about somebody else to slam on cascade climbers, but should we always take that shot?

[chucK]

No superiority from this camp Mattp; rather, just a humble statement that: a) the emperor has no clothes; and, b) better to climb for the sake of pure self satisfaction/pleasure as opposed to some sort of "special" cause - whether it be Christ, global warming, blind, no legged, over 70 etc.

[...]

 

What is humble and non-superior about making a negative judgment about someone else's motives for climbing?

 

[archenemy]

Good call.

[Dechristo]

He bowed in a contrite crouch while typing it

[Fairweather]

No superiority from this camp Mattp; rather, just a humble statement that: a) the emperor has no clothes; and, b) better to climb for the sake of pure self satisfaction/pleasure as opposed to some sort of "special" cause - whether it be Christ, global warming, blind, no legged, over 70 etc.

[...]

 

What is humble and non-superior about making a negative judgment about someone else's motives for climbing?

 

No one was really bashing on the guy. It just seems ironic and strange that he touts his climb as "carbon neutral", then posts an itinerary that lists; "day one - fly in". I don't really care why the guy is climbing McKinley - and I hope he has a good time. But an otherwise great climb fueled by guilt seems kind of like fucking the neighbor's wife. Better to just not do it.

 

And please spare everyone the indignation, Matt. Your post is nothing more than a weak try at somehow showing everyone you are 'above the fray'. As evidenced by past posts--you're not.

[mattp]

Your post is nothing more than a weak try at somehow showing everyone you are 'above the fray'.

 

I have never made THAT claim Fairweather. If I did, I wouldn't waste my time rolling in the mud with you.

[billcoe]

......an otherwise great climb fueled by guilt seems kind of like fucking the neighbor's wife. Better to just not do it.

 

I'm keeping that in mind for next time:-)

[Hugh Conway]

big sponsored eco expeditions are amusing sidenotes in the modern world given you can go pretty much anywhere with public transportation and your own two feet

[KaskadskyjKozak]

What's your take on that Carbon Neutral McKinley thread by Zoran?

 

I know we like to be all rogue and "spirited" on cc.com, but do we want anybody who doesn't fit our narrow mold in the style department to be hounded by the mad dogs who belong in Spray?

 

Whether your gig is "carbon offsets" or "climb for Christ," "light and fast" or "dirtbag and debauchery," aren't we all excited about climbing? Sure, any one of us can find something about somebody else to slam on cascade climbers, but should we always take that shot?

 

more selective indignation - you were so outraged when the dude who posted for climbing for Christ was hammered.

[Hugh Conway]

more selective indignation - you were so outraged when the dude who posted for climbing for Christ was hammered.

 

yeah, he should have been crucified

[chucK]

What's your point?

 

I don't recall Matt hammering on the guy in the Christ thread.

 

Are you saying that because Matt does not jump into every fray voicing his opposition to needless bashing of posters, that he is precluded from voicing his opinion on this one?

 

 

[mattp]

Yup. I pretty much thought that dog pile on the Climbers for Christ sucked and I believe I said so at the time. I didn't much care for the way some of our regular posters treated the family members in that Mt. Hood thread, either, or dozens of other times when somebody seemed to just want to post about climbing and others took a chance to jump on their own personal soap box or show how superior they are.

 

I'm not saying that anybody's point about the carbon neutral concept or Jesus or whatever is invalid, but it does seem to me that the way we get used to bashing each other in Spray all day long impacts how we post to other parts of the board in a way that makes cc.com less interesting from my point of view.

 

Zoran may not have been offended and hell: he may have even posted in hopes of stirring the little pot here. But cc.com would be more interesting if you didn't have to fit the cc.com style mold in order to post trip reports or requests for partners without being criticized.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

more selective indignation - you were so outraged when the dude who posted for climbing for Christ was hammered.

 

yeah, he should have been crucified

 

it's times like these when I think the Inquisition was not such a bad idea - for people like *you*.

 

[Bug]

Isha Yoga is a science.

[Raindawg]

Yup. I pretty much thought that dog pile on the Climbers for Christ sucked and I believe I said so at the time. I didn't much care for the way some of our regular posters treated the family members in that Mt. Hood thread, either, or dozens of other times when somebody seemed to just want to post about climbing and others took a chance to jump on their own personal soap box or show how superior they are.

 

Behold! The wit and wisdom of mattp!:

 

Vertical Hiker should not have expected a solidly warm reception on this bulletin board and he's going to have to expect some people to be quite hostile if he introduces himself to other climbers on Mt. McKinley by saying "Hi. I"m here for a Cristian climb..."

 

Don't take it too badly, gforce. Bashing on Christians around here is kind of like bashing on the Mountaineers: some of us have real reasons for criticizing those groups but as much as anything else it is just sport and when it comes to a good old cc.com bait-and-bash, he who posts the most offensive jab is the one having the most fun. Buried in all of that have been some decent points, though.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Yup. I pretty much thought that dog pile on the Climbers for Christ sucked and I believe I said so at the time. I didn't much care for the way some of our regular posters treated the family members in that Mt. Hood thread, either, or dozens of other times when somebody seemed to just want to post about climbing and others took a chance to jump on their own personal soap box or show how superior they are.

 

Behold! The wit and wisdom of mattp!:

 

Vertical Hiker should not have expected a solidly warm reception on this bulletin board and he's going to have to expect some people to be quite hostile if he introduces himself to other climbers on Mt. McKinley by saying "Hi. I"m here for a Cristian climb..."

 

Don't take it too badly, gforce. Bashing on Christians around here is kind of like bashing on the Mountaineers: some of us have real reasons for criticizing those groups but as much as anything else it is just sport and when it comes to a good old cc.com bait-and-bash, he who posts the most offensive jab is the one having the most fun. Buried in all of that have been some decent points, though.

 

Wisdom? I call it pure, unadulterated hypocrisy. Par for the course.

 

[hafilax]

It's not just this board. I've seen the same thing on RC.com and tetongravity. Climbers for Christ posted looking for instructors and the first 10 posts were pedophile jokes.

 

I didn't even look at the Carbon Neutral Denali thread until now but putting up a nonsensical intro post doesn't help. Carbon Offset credits are very controversial so I'm not surprised by the vitriol.

[mattp]

Raindawg, thanks for trying to "keep me honest," but you ought to try to be honest about it yourself if that is in fact your goal here. You have misrepresented my position in that thread.

 

My first entry, on about page 6, was a very clear criticism of those who had felt the need to rant and rave about Christianity in response to Vertical Hiker's original post. Check it out. page 6

 

And my next post in that thread, on page 12 or so and the first of two that you quote here? You carefully or not so carefully leave out where I once again state that I am critical of those who are bashing on the notion of a Christian climb. page 13

 

I recognized then that boys will be boys and cascadeclimbers is what it is, but I took the same position I am taking here. And if the Carbon Neutral thread morphs into twenty pages of spray just as the Vertical Hiker's request for partners, I may well participate in a discussion of whether one can truly climb McKinley in a "carbon neutral" fasion. But that is not my point.

 

 

 

 

[mattp]

I call it pure, unadulterated hypocrisy. Par for the course.

 

Look back at the thread.

 

Then, apart from attacking me, I wonder if you have a comment on THIS thread. Do you think somebody who wants to advertise a "carbon neutral" climb should be slammed for promoting a carbon credit idea? If one wants to make a "Christian" climb, should they be slammed for being Christian? If you want to make a climb in celebration of the life of Charlton Heston and put a mention that he is your hero in your summit register entry on Gunsite Peak, should we slam you for that?

 

Assuming you like to call people names all day long and you see nothing wrong with this, are there any limits?

 

Are all forums and all posts to cc.com "fair game" if you think you can take a good shot at somebody?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I call it pure, unadulterated hypocrisy. Par for the course.

 

Look back at the thread.

 

Let's just edit your comments a bit:

 

Zoran should not have expected a solidly warm reception on this bulletin board and he's going to have to expect some people to be quite hostile if he introduces himself to other climbers on Mt. McKinley by saying "Hi. I"m here doing a Carbon Neutral climb..."

 

Don't take it too badly, Zoran. Bashing on Carbon-neutral climbers around here is kind of like bashing on the Mountaineers: some of us have real reasons for criticizing those groups but as much as anything else it is just sport and when it comes to a good old cc.com bait-and-bash, he who posts the most offensive jab is the one having the most fun. Buried in all of that have been some decent points, though.

[Hugh Conway]

Wisdom? I call it pure, unadulterated hypocrisy. Par for the course.

 

look - its the one note skinflutist!

[mattp]

I know we like to be all rogue and "spirited" on cc.com, but do we want anybody who doesn't fit our narrow mold in the style department to be hounded by the mad dogs who belong in Spray?

 

Whether your gig is "carbon offsets" or "climb for Christ," "light and fast" or "dirtbag and debauchery," aren't we all excited about climbing? Sure, any one of us can find something about somebody else to slam on cascade climbers, but should we always take that shot?

[archenemy]

Only if it is a face shot.

[Bug]

Do you mean muff diving or powder?

[ericb]

Matt - here's my thoughts....what's the difference between the CFC thread and the Alaska thread. It was obvious to me (and all of us I think) what VH's purpose for posting was - looking for like minded partners on the site. On the other hand, Zoran's post??? "Please visit our site".....team's full, somebody bought our gear, not a TR.....sounds like he was inviting feedback to me......"This expedition site is the proof that you can achive a lot even on the intermediate route as WB" In other words, I just wanted to take this opportunity to demonstate my team's superior ethic relative to all you eco-terrorists....

 

 

Edited April 9, 2008 by ericb