bacon art

[stevetimetravlr]

Ok Kevbone, you have my permission, sounds good. Tell Bob I'm sorry I didn't ask him to touch the route. I'm glad we have cleared this up.

[JosephH]

I disagree on the authority. It is almost a universal rule to ask the FAA/FA/route establisher permission to touch there route. I asked Bob Mcgowen if I could fix Stone Rodeo, since he first bolted and climbed it. He said no problem and there were witnesses. It does need fixing. If it were rebolted, and the pins removed then maybe more folks would get on it. As it stands now...it is a total waste of rock IMO.

Well, as part of the FFA party my vote is no new bolts. Again, it doesn't need pussifying just so old guys can get on it without jeopardizing their parenting skils. How about four bolts on Blood, Sweat and Smears? It would see a lot more ascents if it were 'upgraded' too. And two bolts at the start of Free For Sum? That would sure allow for more than the handful of folks who lead it now.

[stevetimetravlr]

I don't think you can retroactively claim first free ascent years later. Recollections dim, statue of limitations and all that. I guess if you're already listed in the guidebook as such I can't argue with that however.

[JosephH]

I don't think you can retroactively claim first free ascent years later. Recollections dim, statue of limitations and all that. I guess if you're already listed in the guidebook as such I can't argue with that however.

Unless of course, the date of your ascent predates the date in the book. But god knows how fast reality fades with time out there.

[kevbone]

I disagree on the authority. It is almost a universal rule to ask the FAA/FA/route establisher permission to touch there route. I asked Bob Mcgowen if I could fix Stone Rodeo, since he first bolted and climbed it. He said no problem and there were witnesses. It does need fixing. If it were rebolted, and the pins removed then maybe more folks would get on it. As it stands now...it is a total waste of rock IMO.

Well, as part of the FFA party my vote is no new bolts. Again, it doesn't need pussifying just so old guys can get on it without jeopardizing their parenting skils. How about four bolts on Blood, Sweat and Smears? It would see a lot more ascents if it were 'upgraded' too. And two bolts at the start of Free For Sum? That would sure allow for more than the handful of folks who lead it now.

 

 

It all comes down to who established the climb. If Bob established the climb and said yes to my request then your opinion is irrelevant. If Jim said I could add a bolt to the second pitch to YW then it does not matter what the community thinks.

 

If the FFA team to BBS wanted to retro there own route then they could. I think this logic is clear and simple.

 

[kevbone]

I don't think you can retroactively claim first free ascent years later.

 

 

Totally agree.

 

 

[JosephH]

If Jim said I could add a bolt to the second pitch to YW then it does not matter what the community thinks...

True enough except it would get pulled in a heartbeat.

 

I don't think you can retroactively claim first free ascent years later.

Totally agree.

Well, unless Olson and the 1987 calendar are lying - and regardless of how powerful the Beacon Reality-Distortion Field is these days - facts are facts. Bummer, I know.

[stevetimetravlr]

Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe. You can't pull bolts that the established climbing community agrees are acceptable, that is vandalism. Are you a Vandal? Waht college did you go to?

Furthermore don't you agree that you can only place bolts at Beacon that the established climbing protocol agrees are acceptable? You yourself have been a progenitor of such proceedings and goings-on, how can you deny the laws you live by?

[kevbone]

If Jim said I could add a bolt to the second pitch to YW then it does not matter what the community thinks...

True enough except it would get pulled in a heartbeat.

 

 

 

Are you saying you would go against 40 years of tradition? I guess you are considering Jim told you not to touch his route and you did it anyway. If Jim ever ok's me to add a bolt to YW, I would not hesitate and I would not care what you thought. ITS NOT YOUR ROUTE AND YOU DONT OWN BEACON ROCK. I know you act like you do but I guess the Beacon Reality-Distortion Field is strong with you.

[JosephH]

If you think I'm the only one that would chop a bolt added to YW you are delusional; there are any number of people who would. And have you climbed YW this year? Did replacing those bad bolts change any aspect of the climb for you? So far I haven't heard a single person claim any aspect of the experience of climbing YW has changed.

[kevbone]

If you think I'm the only one that would chop a bolt added to YW you are delusional there are any number of people who would.

 

So a number of people would go against Jim? That is unbelievable.

 

 

And have you climbed YW this year? Did replacing those bad bolts change any aspect of the climb for you?

 

Totally irrelevant and you know it. Jim asked you not to touch it, and you did it anyway. Talk about a slap in the face. PERIOD, END OF STORY. You can justify it all you like but at the end of the day we all see through you and see what kind of a person you are. Now if Jim had given him your blessing, we would be having a totally different conversation.

 

[JosephH]

Totally irrelevant and you know it. Jim asked you not to touch it, and you did it anyway. Talk about a slap in the face. PERIOD, END OF STORY. You can justify it all you like but at the end of the day we all see through you and see what kind of a person you are. Now if Jim had given him your blessing, we would be having a totally different conversation.

The conversation we're having is that I replaced bad bolts on YW. I did check with Jim who responded that the bolts were good and that they couldn't be replaced even if they were bad because they were in the perfect spot. He was then agreed to go with me, but then his knee gave out. Are you agreeing with him that the bolts were good and even if they weren't they couldn't be replaced?

 

Where's the angst over the person who retro'd the LoLP rap anchor against Jim's explict wishes. Why the angst over Jim wanting to replace the anchor below the tree on Dods?

[kevbone]

Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe. You can't pull bolts that the established climbing community agrees are acceptable, that is vandalism.

 

For the most part I agree with all you posts but this one is wrong. If the FFA/FA/establisher of a route tells Joe to pull or add a bolt on a climb that is established and the community loves....then go ahead and do it. It is not up the the community. We would never get anything done if you "put it out to the community" to make a decision on bolts. What I learned from putting up multiple routes is you cant please everyone. Putting up routes is like painting a picture. It is art. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[kevbone]

 

Where's the angst over the person who retro'd the LoLP rap anchor against Jim's explict wishes. Why the angst over Jim wanting to replace the anchor below the tree on Dods?

 

Are you talking about rapping "into" the ledge?

[JosephH]

yep

[stevetimetravlr]

It is up to the climbing community as they have established the rules that you speak of. Thats what I mean when I speak of "community", the established rules of climbing.

[kevbone]

It is up to the climbing community as they have established the rules that you speak of. Thats what I mean when I speak of "community", the established rules of climbing.

 

got ya

[JosephH]

You yourself have been a progenitor of such proceedings and goings-on, how can you deny the laws you live by?

Replacing bad bolts has nothing whatsoever to do with ethics or 'laws', whereas retrobolting established routes does. And when you are talking about adding bolts to long established climbs then you are just asking for trouble regardless of what the FA thinks because at that point your 'community' is vested in the climb.

[stevetimetravlr]

You yourself have been a progenitor of such proceedings and goings-on, how can you deny the laws you live by?

Replacing bad bolts has nothing whatsoever to do with ethics or 'laws', whereas retrobolting established routes does. And when you are talking about adding bolts to long established climbs then you are just asking for trouble regardless of what the FA thinks because at that point your 'community' is vested in the climb.

No, that is incorrect. Established climbing protocol and procedural rules take precedence over any personal preference.

[ivan]

WWTDD?

what would tyler durden do?

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCD14IrOcIs

[JosephH]

You yourself have been a progenitor of such proceedings and goings-on, how can you deny the laws you live by?

Replacing bad bolts has nothing whatsoever to do with ethics or 'laws', whereas retrobolting established routes does. And when you are talking about adding bolts to long established climbs then you are just asking for trouble regardless of what the FA thinks because at that point your 'community' is vested in the climb.

No, that is incorrect. Established climbing protocol and procedural rules take precedence over any personal preference.

What exactly does that mean? And in regard to which of the above?

[eldiente]

Killing time at work here... Joe might have you on this one Kevin. Say in 100 years when we are all dead, should we never replace any bolts because the FA didn't want the bolts replaced? What happens when the bolts literally fall out of wall, can we still not replace them because the FA asked us not to? I'm too lazy to replace bolts, so I give high-fives to everyone who does. Shame on people that add more bolts to established routes, weak. (Although side note, I enjoy the retro-bolted climbs at Smith, lets punters like me get up routes that are way above my pay grade. Still weak though)

 

-Nate

 

[pink]

You yourself have been a progenitor of such proceedings and goings-on, how can you deny the laws you live by?

Replacing bad bolts has nothing whatsoever to do with ethics or 'laws', whereas retrobolting established routes does. And when you are talking about adding bolts to long established climbs then you are just asking for trouble regardless of what the FA thinks because at that point your 'community' is vested in the climb.

 

we all make and break our own rules, i find that's it's best not to make the rules in the first place. i like what JH has done out at beacon, except for the anchors on Dastardly, Summer Daze, Dod's (which have been removed) and RR (which have been removed) cause i don't believe in retro bolting cause ur kicking the guy who put the route up square in the NUT SAC. i don't really like the way he has done it but it was a good thing, but JOSEPH is part of the ruling class so what does one expect.

Ruling Class

 

 

 

[pink]

WWTDD?

what would tyler durden do?

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCD14IrOcIs

 

 

he'd probably beat the holy crap out of you cause you talk too much

[JosephH]

i like what JH has done out at beacon, except for the anchors on Dastardly, Summer Daze, Dod's (which have been removed) and RR (which have been removed) cause i don't believe in retro bolting cause ur kicking the guy who put the route up square in the NUT SAC. i don't really like the way he has done it but it was a good thing, but JOSEPH is part of the ruling class so what does one expect.

Not sure what you mean in regard to Dastardly. I put hangers on Andrew's studs at the top and removed Ben's long studs down below, can't think of anything else. Summer Daze was the WSP wanted the anchor off the tree, I don't care if you want to pull it so there is no anchor there, but I just replaced what was there. Restoring the Dods anchor was Jim's idea. RR was only because of the star rating conflict with the runout. As you point out, both of the latter two were removed within days.