A defining moment in the history of the website: perhaps you, or we, have come of age.
Today is a sad day indeed
Wild Country have now issued the following statement to UKC:"Earlier this year there was a forum thread on UKC which seemed to provide some evidence that disputed Rich Simpson's running claims - and alluded to problems with other claims Rich Simpson had made regarding his climbing. Wild Country, concerned about its reputation and also in consideration of concerns over the history of the sport, felt it prudent to ask Rich Simpson to provide evidence for some of his ascents in the shape of naming his belayers for several routes - routes which were reported and claims that were repeated on Wild Country's website as Rich Simpson was a Wild Country sponsored climber.However, Rich Simpson refused to supply any information that could verify his ascents, even when repeatedly asked directly by Wild Country, thus Wild Country decided to terminate his sponsorship and remove any information regarding Rich Simpson from its website until such time as evidence is provided."We have also received a statement from Scarpa:"When we saw the threads on various web sites raising doubts about Rich Simpson's ascents, we asked him to make a statement on UKC in order to protect his reputation and that of Scarpa and the Mountain Boot Company. Rich Simpson refused to make a statement and then, under his own instigation, immediately tended his resignation as a sponsored athlete. We accepted this resignation."
When rich became aware of the UKC thread two weeks ago he wrote to his sponsors telling them he was giving up his sponsorship. He had no intention to reply to the thread.
Quote from: Dylan on December 16, 2010, 11:51:16 amToday is a sad day indeedWhat changed today ?
Taking advantage of your mate's desire to stick up for you is a low trick.
It is a different sequence of events, but unless you know exactly what Doylo was told and whether it was possible to misinterpret it, I don't think points like this help. The chinese whisper effect, even in the law where we're all paid to communicate accurately, is huge.
What about the boxing claims, they sounded pretty unlikely too?Also, is he defiantly studying at Cambridge - people were casting doubt on that claim too.Has anyone, of note, in the climbing world come forward to support Rich?
I think the real question is who would win a fight Rich Simpson or Si O'Connor?(yes this is childish but I'm working on some tedious stuff and need a bit of light relief . . . fluffer!)
Ru, by 'history books' I mean it as a generalisation for all that is written on climbing ascents whether that be on the internet, in the history sections in guides, or in other publications. Of course it's up the guide writer but I personally don't think it's an irrelevency.
There's also his first ascents and the question of whether all of his ascents without evidence will be doubted now when written about.
The thing is though the written record is pretty unrelaible, anyone else remember OTE crediting Seb with the FA of Parthian Shot?
Quote from: shark on December 16, 2010, 12:01:57 pmQuote from: Dylan on December 16, 2010, 11:51:16 amToday is a sad day indeedWhat changed today ?UKC wrote another non-news article.
Quote from: Sloper on December 16, 2010, 02:42:33 pmThe thing is though the written record is pretty unrelaible, anyone else remember OTE crediting Seb with the FA of Parthian Shot?Wasn't that done on purpose by the writer of that article in very similar circumstances?
Exactly. I understand why people are getting upset by this, but I don't understand why UKC feel like they need to report this as a news item. I don't remember this happening with Si the Conner or Scott McSpanishspotter, so why they feel the need to single out Rich? UKC doesn't speak for all climbers so no need for the public service announcement.
