I for one, as a reader, am interested to hear how Climbing Magazine treats their contributors. Since this appears to be wide spread problem I have decided not to renew my subscription. It was marginally worth it in the first place and to see that the actual authors are treated so poorly pushed me over the edge.

It's worth noting there is no fundamental law of physics requiring the existance of a climbing magazine. We are lucky (as a community) that a few masochists have taken it upon themselves to document the history and evolution of our sport.

Sure, the mags have their shortfalls, but if you think of them more as co-ops of climbers volunteering time and effort to provide a community service, they do a pretty damn good job for little pay and even less gratitude.

Yes, but usually working in the bookkeeping section isn't...and any business that consistently works with a slow-to-pay model as a way to regulate or maximize cash flow, has nothing to do with "things besides money."

I agree with Mistuh Mono. Just cause we're in an economic and intellectual recession (see Reg's comments as an example) doesn't mean that it isn't nice to have at least the illusion that groundbreaking climbing will be documented somehow as it happens.

I'm going to subscribe to the trouser snake of a mag, so that Fat Cat Dougald MacDonald can get his G5 and dance like Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder. Or, because, like the Andersens and everyone else reading this, I need some distraction while playing Battleshits, and there's worse ways to spend the time in between "hits".

One late paycheck does not the Seventh Reich make, methinks.