The future of the forum

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 41 - 60 of total 341 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
coldclimb

climber
Wasilla, Alaska
Aug 27, 2005 - 10:34pm PT
Chris: Seperation of Climbing and State would be a good thing. I vote for two forums. :) The only really downright sucky thing about these forums is the crap you have to wade through to get to the climbing.
climberweenie

Trad climber
San Jose, CA
Aug 27, 2005 - 11:44pm PT
Having discussions about things other than climbing on this forum directly lead to me meeting several great climbing partners and having awesome climbing experiences in Yosemite. This would not have happened for me in a carefully moderated forum. Suggest implementing a voting system to give feedback and automatically suspend the lame-4sses, but don't separate into "climbing" and "other stuff" forums. And make it so the search features are more effective (I often come up empty searching for what I remember from threads past).

Yes I want climbing information. But I also want to connect with people who share one of my passions. If you fragment the site, I probably wouldn't come very often for a dry climbing discussion and I wouldn't waste my time with lame-ass political, spiritual, and philosophical discussions. But stick 'em together and I get suckered into wasting my time!

Part of what draws me to this online community is how it reflects a random distribution of people, drawn together by a passion for climbing. As stated in some threads a few months back, it really is like a virtual campfire sitting around camp 4 (except that actually being in Camp4 is much less interesting these days in my weekend warrior experience this year).

During a time when my wife and kids were visiting relatives in another country for several months, it filled part of the void for my social needs (since I don't drink or do drugs or do ho's I need something!). And, it was a channel for my personal growth, to practice sharing my real non-work thoughts and practice dealing with differences of opinion in a benign setting. Maybe a selfish use of a resource not intended for the purpose, but I'm guessing we all have our selfish reasons for being here.
'Pass the Pitons' Pete

Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
Aug 28, 2005 - 12:17am PT
Yes Juan, you really do. Immediately. Go fast. I'll pay if you need financial assistance.

"2) if that doesnt work, we will get two forums. one for climbing related stuff and one for non-climbing related stuff. if anyone tries to hijack climbing related threads, we will just ban them. we don't have time to weed out the threads, so we will just be deleting the users."

Two forums is a great idea! Climbing Stuff and Non-Climbing Stuff. How much more do you need?
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Aug 28, 2005 - 03:11am PT
At the risk of yet another sound trundling I say split'em up...
smokin_nolens

Social climber
California Valley, California
Aug 28, 2005 - 06:41am PT
Chris does exactly what Chris wants to do. Damn the consequences.
mellpat

Big Wall climber
Sweden
Aug 28, 2005 - 08:56am PT
SuperTopo Climber’s Forum: the best forum on the planet because of the folks writing here. Any major changes (two compartments) means a different crowd. Compartments and creativity don't match.

As to the offensive stuff - folks from the old countries can at least learn some interesting american language and "culture". LOL
ricardo

Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
Aug 28, 2005 - 11:42am PT
i love the whack-a-mole (tm) feature of this site
maculated

Trad climber
San Luis Obispo, CA
Aug 28, 2005 - 11:57am PT
Climberweenie exhoes my sentiments here - I'm a regular on RC.com, too, but mainly because I know a lot of the other regulars in person, and because it's rewarding to me on a few levels.

But ST has a flair that has me loyal to it - the quality of the posts, the insights, the self policing, the general respect afforded. A lot less signal-to-noise ratio.

Splitting off the forums is going to take moderation work on your part, Chris. People are going to screw it up. I think your whack-a-mole/banning approach is working just fine. The forum is fun, educational, and attracts a high caliber of individuals. Kudos.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Aug 28, 2005 - 12:42pm PT
Two forums, more of WCG's pics, especially the hot babes barely dressed, less gore, in fact, a LOT less gore, keep the climbing posts in the climbing forum, the rest in the other forum, and,

DO NOT BAN OUCH! He's the court jester.

Please don't ban the sexy pics of waterchossguy, sometimes they are the best thing in the forum.

The saga of Bear 46 as told by Ouch! should be on the front page.

It should be obvious that the women who come here can take care of themselves. We don't need no stinking Politically Korrect BS, but real gender based nastiness seems to get a beating from just about everyone anyway.

Long live the whack-a-mole theory of message board justice!
LEB

climber
Glen Gardner
Aug 28, 2005 - 01:38pm PT
Chris,

Here is an idea - maybe feasible, maybe not - only you would know. Is it possible for the posts to become color-coded via clicking one of two check boxes - e.g. climbing checkbox vs non-climbing checkbox. The person introducting the thread would check the appropriate box (assuming such is possible technologically) and the thread would appear in eithr blue or some other color (say dark maroon or something else easy on the eye). People could see at a glance which topics were in which category and avoid one or the other if such was his (her) preference.

What would be esp interesting about that system is that it would show at a glance exactly what percentage of the threads for a given 35 current threads are of one class or another. I think many people would find that fact interesting.

Again, I want to reiterate (spelling?) the point that as people get to know one another, the normal course of human interaction is to expand and broaden their topics of conversation. When we first meet new people, we strictly (spelling)stick to topics related to the context in which we met them. Initially, we are very guarded in our comments with new people and/or new places. As we get to know the various people in our lives better, we begin to share more with them particularly as it concerns other aspects of our lives and/or other potential topics of interest.

I am not entirely certain that you want to interrupt this process. People bond with others based on this very phenonmenon. This process is also why it becomes so painful when we lose close friend or a family member. We are losing a whole part of our past history which we have vested in that person or to put it another way we are no longer able to tap into that which we held in common with a particular individual or individuals.

I can appreciate your role in wanting to keep the environment integritous (spelling?) for that which you have created and, as such, you are to be commended. I admire your attempts to squelch personal attacks and I do very much support you in this endeavor. This makes you a very upstanding and decent person, at least in my book.

I do believe, however, that you are overlooking a fundamental process which is in operation here namely that while women bond by consensus building, men classically bond by one-upmanship. It is neither good nor bad but, rather, it is just what is. Much of the rhetoric which goes back and forth in this regard while seemingly extraordinarily hostile is, in actuality, little more than classic one upmanship i.e. who caught the biggest fish and/or who can fire the best salvo at the other side.

Often the “salvos” translates into who can come up with the best retort to the other side’s comments. I agree that it is not necessarily a goal to strive for and certainly we want to elevate discourse but, frankly, what you are witnessing is not much different from the interest in the scantily clad attractive women. It is all not so much a matter of good, bad or otherwise but rather more an issue of hard-wiring. We like to delude ourselves into thinking that we are very highly evolved from the animals over which we master but in reality we are not so different as our egos would like to imagine.
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Aug 28, 2005 - 04:17pm PT
Hey I'm not far from an animal and I like it that way.

Leave the hot chicks wearing almost or completely nothing alone!


TR, you twerp kid, stay off this site at work if you can't handle the heat!

I guess you don't want pics if the Sistine Chapel ceiling either, there's nudes there too!

YOu want some intellectual climbing related content?

Here:

F = ma. Discuss.
Largo

Sport climber
Venice, Ca
Aug 28, 2005 - 04:47pm PT
Probably a good idea to have two forums. Most climbers have a comfort zone with other climbers and can talk freely about other things besides climbing without personalizing all the guff and backtalk that are part of what's basically a Tevoed Chat Line.

RC.com seems to bring out the worst in me, so I'm better off over here by far.

JL
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Aug 28, 2005 - 05:15pm PT
If I were Chris, I wouldn't want to start down a path that requres more forum maintenance. Just whach moles for awhile and see what happens.

The difference between climbing and politics/sex/religion gets blurred fast and things go back and forth. For example, Leeper just stopped selling anything to the military. (Besides bolt hangers and pins, he also sells electromagnetic detection gear of some sort) Climbing, Politics, both?

I have dail up myself but don't have any problem choosing what threads to view or not and close the ones that don't interest me. Part of the problem is that, despite so many folks that say they want to read about climbing, there is less posting enthusiasm for the climbing threads, particularly if they aren't spiced up with some almost off topic extra gossip or such.

Want climbing? Post climbing!

Peace

karl
LEB

climber
Glen Gardner
Aug 28, 2005 - 05:43pm PT
Dirtintheeye,

Is it necessary to abuse T*R like that because you have a difference of opinion with her? She is young but I would not call her a twerp kid. I happen to agree with you about the soft porn but it makes quite a bully of you to attack her like that. She is actually very sweet and I think she offers a youthful perspective and enthusiasm which tends to fade as one ages. It is nice that she is here and brings that perspective to the group.

I think it would be very appropriate if you would apologize to her for your temper. You could strongly disagree with her and make all of the exact same points without stomping all over her like that. Just because you have a normal sex drive does not mean you have to beat up on T*R. Many women believe that men who view porn are disgusting pigs and/or perverts. You did nothing to disabuse anyone of that notion. If you are a decent person, I really believe you owe her an apology.
pud

climber
Sportbikeville
Aug 28, 2005 - 06:21pm PT
if we can have a "name that forum" contest to allow for seperate forums, i'm all for it.

dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Aug 28, 2005 - 06:50pm PT
A bluenose with a stick up her rear wrote:

"Dirtintheeye,

Is it necessary to abuse T*R like that because you have a difference of opinion with her? She is young but I would not call her a twerp kid. I happen to agree with you about the soft porn but it makes quite a bully of you to attack her like that. She is actually very sweet and I think she offers a youthful perspective and enthusiasm which tends to fade as one ages. It is nice that she is here and brings that perspective to the group.

I think it would be very appropriate if you would apologize to her for your temper. You could strongly disagree with her and make all of the exact same points without stomping all over her like that. Just because you have a normal sex drive does not mean you have to beat up on T*R. Many women believe that men who view porn are disgusting pigs and/or perverts. You did nothing to disabuse anyone of that notion. If you are a decent person, I really believe you owe her an apology."

Hey you psychobabbling old biddy, you can BITE ME.

To answer your condescending question, YES, it is absolutely necessary.

TR seeks to censor this site so that it conforms to her notion of what is comfortably viewable at work. That is so fecking stupid as to defy description. As for her youthful perspective, what a load of hogwash. Youthful perspective is historically and mindnumbingly the same since biblical times, and worth exactly nothing in nearly every case. God spare me from 'youthful perspective', or ignorant, self-righteous, wet-behind-the-ears frippery, as it might more aptly be put.

Then you proceed to call me a bully and an abuser???? Get over yourself!! Have you ever been outside your ivory tower? Perhaps someone will buy you a clue one day. Hello, this is the internet.

I'm so happy to see that you feel comfortable enough to discuss my sex drive, how's yours by the way? Getting any these days?

You talk about twerpolumne rainbow as if you know her in person, is that so? Maybe you two can get together and talk about how awful men are sometime.

Just one more point: All men ARE pigs and perverts, by choice! We don't need porn of any sort to help us along that chosen and much preferred path-- preferred to becoming what women, given their druthers would make us into, god forbid.

Please, take your touchy-feely circa 1973 women's group therapy-speak and put it where the sun does not shine.

IF you can't stand the heat, I hope there is a microwave in your kitchen, and you may leave your shoes at the door.

Thank you for showing your true colors by trying to manipulate and berate me into making an undeserved and unecessary apology. If you were a decent person with a sense of humor you would have seen the joke, but women of your ilk have no sense of humor, as you very nicely demonstrated.

But don't feel too bad, (and I know you won't) women have been doing men dirty since Eve. We're used to it.

Ahhh, feel the heat, I love it.

dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Aug 28, 2005 - 06:53pm PT
Viagra Lardo wrote:

"RC.com seems to bring out the worst in me, so I'm better off over here by far.

JL"

From what I can see, Crimpergirl brings out the worst in you, in either forum, and from what she tells me, she gets a real laugh out of doing so.

Loom

climber
167 stinking feet above sea level : (
Aug 28, 2005 - 06:56pm PT
Chris built this virtual deli. Most people come sit at the tables, get drunk, chat, argue, and occasionally buy one of his sandwiches.

Some people come to the deli just for the world-famous sandwiches, but they get really peeved that so many tables are filled with people that yak endlessly about things other than sandwiches. Even though there is an endless supply of tables, even though they don't have to sit and listen to the others, and even though they are free to talk about sandwiches as much as they want--with only the occasional and minor interruption--to them it just doesn't seem right. They say things like, "how dare they, this place is about sandwiches, dammit!" and "this is a travesty, there oughta be law". They desperately desire that the guy at the other table, who used to be a master sandwich maker, would confide in them all the mysterious sandwich making arcana they so desperately crave, but alas it is not to be, he only speaks of fishsticks, fudgesickles and the Atkin's diet.

Meanwhile, Chris who says things like, "I just want to give back to the sanwich eatin' comminunitty, because ya know, gee whiz, aw shucks, sanwich eatin' has given so much to me," is out as much as possible eating, eating, eating the sandwiches of the world, research he calls it, while at the same time buying property like crazy in the red hot Tahoe market, when of a sudden he gets a call from the deli manager. It turns out the suggestion box has had a few impassioned complaints about people who wilfully refuse to talk about sandwiches.

Chris must make an appearance, because these are the dorks who buy three sandwiches: one to eat now, one to eat later, and one to be kept cryogenically frozen at home and displayed with reverence to all who visit.

But Chris must proceed carefully if he is to continue his research and maintain his portentous property portfolio; on the one hand he must calm the minority dweebs, but on the other hand he cannot be too vociferous lest he drive off the masses that, while definitely less sandwichcentric, actually do buy more sandwiches, all tolled, than their bumbly brethren.

As usual Chris manages, with his endearing Richie Cunninghamesque charm to bring peace to the deli, and one and all proclaim that C-Mac is our "Sandwich Hero".
dirtineye

Trad climber
the south
Aug 28, 2005 - 07:04pm PT
Twerpolumne rainbow wrote:

"i don't care if people look at porn- soft core or not, it doesn't belong on this forum because some people view it in public places- chris mac says its lame too, in his first post, is he a twerp? is not having WCG post those going to keep you from finding such images on your own? you're not capable of finding them yourself?"

First, walk down a street in NYC, you'll see worse posted as advertising than what WCG posts here. Especially in Chelsea, where the boys are prettier than the girls.

Second, walk down a street in europe, you'll see ads for ice cream with bare breasted girls as the draw.

Note that these are public places too. Guess you'll have to start walking aroudn with a blindfold, huh?

Third, yes, Chris Mac is a twerp if he is going to delete WCG's tame but nice images of women, which are never demeaning, gory, or violent, or even truly sexual. But it's his site. And his right to be a twerp, just as it is your right to be a twerp. There is no law against being a twerp. Yet.

FOurth, as for me finding my own soft core porn, yes, I am incapable of finding it myself, and if WCG is prevented from posting the occasional pic to bust up ( hehe, I love puns) a stupid thread every once in a while, then it will cause me undue hard ship, and much mental misery, and I may not be able to get up in the morning and do what must be done. Even if I have a lifetime supply of Powdermilk Biscuits-- heavens, they're tasty!

Kodos would be proud.
LEB

climber
Glen Gardner
Aug 28, 2005 - 07:10pm PT
Dirtinthe eye,

You do nothing but prove my point far better than I could ever have done. She is not attempting to censor anything - she is expressing an opinion and she has every right to do so just as you have a right to disagree with her. As for me, I am not sharing psychobabble - I am inviting you to be descent to her.

So long as you are so out of control of yourself and your temper no one will ever take you seriously and nothing you say will be of any consequence. You'll just be an angry man piping off uncontrollably whenever someone pushes your buttons - and push they will.

You do own T*R and apology and now you owe me one, as well but I certainly won't be holding my breath waiting for you. I do hope that someday you manage to get a grip on yourself. In the meanwhile, if you ever want to speak with me again, you had better apologize. Barring that you do not exist for me anymore and that is your loss. Raging out-of-control is no way to go through the world. I hope someday you find a better path but for now, you can be very sure of one thing - our paths will not cross again - you can rage on quite by yourself.

Lois
Messages 41 - 60 of total 341 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews