i thought 50 percent was a nice, equable proportion. i stopped subscribing to climbing and rock & ice years ago because a lot of issues were near 100 percent lame.
ST offers something no magazine, not even one with a big budget for fancy photography and professional writing, will ever offer, and that's the opportunity to participate and interact on a daily basis. with a magazine, you have a 1/10th percent chance of getting your letter to the editor published, and that'll be two months after you send it in.
this new magazine, california climber, has one thing going for it--i might actually be able to afford the gas for a trip to one of the featured places. but, being a writer myself, i never spend much time looking at pictures, and i gravitate to controversy. controversy is like a good boulder problem--quite satisfying if it can be (re)solved.
i think dr. F ought to consider one thing. his current threads are not original threads. one was sort of a phoenix to the old "why do so many people believe in god? (serious question)" by our sadly departed juan de fuca, the other was a second swatch of republican bashing, both of those orchestrated by himself. when threads get "reincarnated", they don't attract the same people in the same way. i had a pretty good time in the old god thread, but the new one got opaque for me rather quickly. i suggest that he nuke them more frequently and try to redefine the issues in new threads. different cowpies draw different flies.
couchmaster is indeed an entity to be feared. however locker was recently dubbed "the chairman of the bored" and may now be the one on the top of the dogpile. i don't think locker would demur posting anything anywhere anytime. when he gets tired of sitting at the computer, he goes outside and puts more posts around his sheep corral.
hiya, go-B--wanna go climbing sometime? i know a new, secret area, almost as close as stoney point, certified choss-free. if i say more, someone will shoot me.