Avalon- Poached Routes
|
Jimbo wrote:He's baaaack.I take it you don't disagree with any of the points I've made. |
|
Dan Cohen wrote:Perhaps most telling is the contrast between Geir's statements (one from above, and one from this route ): "For everyone else, please respect the second pitch as a project until it has been completed. You can continue to the top via The Shmotem Pole or rap the route."I'm curious about the outcome of this route. Originally posted Mar 21, 2010, latest comment Dec 8, 2010 and it still wasn't done. So, at least 9 months, and then no more news that I can see. The first pitch is 11-, and the 2nd pitch is "expected to be 12-". It sounds to me like maybe the people putting up the routes just aren't (or weren't) strong enough to put up the second pitch. Personally, I think 9 months is WAY too long to "claim" a route. Really, I don't think anything more than a few weeks should be expected. If you're going to put something up, do it. If you can't do it, live with that fact and let others give it a try. I also really find it interesting how the attitudes towards putting up new sport routes is more about "claiming it" and less about whoever just does it first. You think you can walk up to the base of a new trad-protectable climb and put your name on it? Hell no...if somebody has a rack and they want to do it, they'll hop on. FA goes to the first people that can climb it, plain and simple.) |
|
Does it bother anyone that Avalon is inside the wilderness and everyone is using power drills against forest service policy? |
|
1) I don't agree with Jim's general attitude of "it wouldn't have bothered me so it shouldn't bother you". It shows lack of empathy (in this particular situation, not as a general character trait). |
|
Wow!!! I think everyone should get a life and stop freaking out over two 30 foot sport routes. |
|
Wow! And I thought Boulder people were bickering tards. You guys are ridiculous. If you see a possible route, put it up or shut up. If someone gets to it first, tough Shit. |
|
Like I said, in the end you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. The fact that I tried is good enough for me. And apparently Geir's apology was good enough for Steve. So there's nothing left to do. |
|
Greg D wrote: If you kiss a girl on the cheek and someone boinks her a week later do you piss and moan on the internet that she was yours'.No but that doesn't stop me from continually fanaticizing of what could have been. I mean, she could have been the one! Christian wrote: So there's nothing left to do. .Except to keep bitching. |
|
Only Dan Ayers-Cohen could have the incredible, deluded arrogance to assume he knows the thoughts and motivations of people he's hardly (if ever) met. |
|
I started to type up a reply, but ended up heading into essay territory. |
|
For goodness sake. I thought climbing was about having fun and pushing your own limits. I guess it's become a bitch fest and "I put up this route before you did" competition. Are you really complaining about who drilled holes into a rock first? |
|
Jon Zucco wrote:... this is a very complicated issue.I disagree. Jon Zucco wrote:... Respect and communication. Two words that resonate in all aspects of what we do... Let's not forget to practice both regularly.I wholeheartedly agree. |
|
It seems easiest to let inflammatory comments from DC (or anyone) just fade into digital memory. While I respect his right to his opinion, when an agenda is at hand the conversation has been hijacked. |
|
Geir wrote:For the record, I do not care what DAC thinks, nor do I bother to read his endless verbal diarrhea and comply with his demands that I read and respond to his essay-length hate emails.Please produce the multiple hate emails that you claim exist, as well as my demands that you read them. Being that none of these exist, your claim amounts to defamation. Let's stick to facts, okay? Geir wrote:I apologized to Steve online and via phone call for foregoing the courtesy call prior to installing those routes. I openly took responsibility for this omission, and though I don't feel Steve had claim to these routes by placing an anchor on one of them, I was genuinely sorry that I upset him. What purpose would calling Steve to tell him you are taking his routes serve? According to your current position (however different than your previous position), that an anchor as a claim on a route is illegitimate, you would have nothing to apologize for. Being that Steve was upset by you and Jim taking his routes, a phone call to tell him your plans would only serve to rub salt in the wound. This sort of two-faced behavior is precisely the political gamesmanship I referred to in my initial post. Geir wrote:Ian, since you asked, as far as I know High Man on the Shmotem Pole is an open project. I am pretty sure Jon and Mike stopped working it and are not planning to return, but obviously you could confirm that by contacting them. They are both on MP.This final paragraph is the most stunning of all. Two paragraphs before, you wrote that an anchor is not a legitimate claim to a route. In a complete reversal, you then suggested that Ian contact Jon and Mike to find out if the route is an open project, thereby reverting to your previous position that an anchor is a legitimate claim. That must be a record for contradictory statements in one post! |
|
Jim, Jimbo wrote:The argument about lots of other rock to develop works both ways. Steve could go do some of that as easily as I could. Its available to both of us. Your argument doesn't make sense. Steve went to an area that wasn't being developed; you didn't. He was working on new routes; you were aware of this and you poached them anyway. Had you been working on the routes first, and he took them, he would have stolen them. Understanding how this concept works requires under It's called common courtesy, as several people on this thread have referred to. Considering how times that has been referenced on this thread, and it hasn't resonated with any of your writing, I think it is safe to say that you have no reverence for it. The excuse that "this isn't important" doesn't hold water either. The importance of rock climbing is personal and completely subjective. Simply because you don't care about the pastime you have spent the last 30 years pursuing doesn't mean others don't. It's a cheap cop out. Any climber who isn't in your circle has to be worried that you and Geir will sniff out their projects and poach them. The only people giving you a pass on this thread are those who are in your circle, who do not have to worry about having a route stolen. It is important to know that Steve didn't abandon the routes. He couldn't drill them because his battery was being rebuilt. Are there any special allowances extenuating circumstances for those outside your circle of acquaintances? If someone is in the middle of creating a route that takes more than a day (imagine that!), and a family member dies, is it acceptable to take their route? |
|
David Arthur Sampson wrote:It seems easiest to let inflammatory comments from DC (or anyone) just fade into digital memory. While I respect his right to his opinion, when an agenda is at hand the conversation has been hijacked.David Arthur Sampson, I understand you have a personal connection to Geir, and perhaps do not like the idea of accountability. I am unwilling to sweep this under the rug. I find it rather dubious that Jim and Geir resort to grade school level name-calling, and yet you see my comments as inflammatory. Please, what inflammatory comments are you referring to? What agenda of mine do you see beyond calling out route-poaching? This thread is exactly on topic. The title is "Avalon - Poached Routes." That is precisely what I am talking about. Simply because Steve does want to involve himself in this conflict, as most do not, does not mean Jim and Geir are absolved of any wrongdoing. The fact is neither of them have given a legitimate apology. Both have given a fake apology, which is more insulting than no apology at all. |
|
So Dan, what do you think about the Gunks? |
|
I don't frequent Mountain Project often, as the discourse tends to be rather uncivil. I haven't followed the Gunks thread so I can't comment on it. |
|
Avalon was where Excalibur was forged. Beyond that, I have no opinion. It seems to me the issue was resolved long before you started posting. |
|
NC Rock Climber wrote:Avalon was where Excalibur was forged. Beyond that, I have no opinion. It seems to me the issue was resolved long before you started posting.I can see how it appears that the issue was resolved based on Steven's post. I spoke to Steve (the gentleman who had his routes poached) this weekend in person, and it was quite apparent that there was no resolution. I think his response was an effort to avoid conflict instead of achieve resolution. Geir and Jim's posturing, faulty logic and fake apologies are quite evident that they remain unapologetic. It is clear that Jim and Geir have no qualms about poaching routes. I certainly understand Steve's desire to avoid conflict, but this sort of episode is bound to repeat if they are not held accountable for their actions. |