[Oldmanmatt]

Why fix something that isn't broke? Is there a need for mass appeal?

Good question.

If there are people who would get good value out of the forum, and make interesting/entertaining contributions, then surely they'd be worth having on board??

Especially if there is just some small issue that could be improved without changing the general entertainment value of the forum...

Bring back Sloper 

Yes, probably a good idea.

If there is one observation or criticism I'd like to make, it would be that I think there can be a tendency for the forum - the group, and it isn't a big one - to en masse, round on anyone who is suddenly not flavour of the month.

I think other people can probably pick up on this - the need to tread carefully, to avoid being excluded.

Where there is "bad behaviour", I think it can be handled in a better way, and "the group" tends not to look at their own behaviour, once someone has been ousted. With Slopes, I think things had become too personal, and I think this is the one area where some more thought is needed.

This.

And I think it's a recent thing, apparent in the thread that spawned this one.

I'm reluctant to voice an opinion on here anymore but in for a penny and all that.

There was some merit in the criticism of Marks' avatar, I felt much of the indignation had to be contrived, Dense was probably right in branding it a storm in a teacup and how the f@#& did anyone notice?

How many concurrent threads about the forum?

What does that say?

PS.
Fiend can you pm me the offinsive avatar? I missed it and I'm fascinated to see what was so bad.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jaspersharpe]

I just got bored with Fiend starting shit threads.

how did your project go?

the one where you were selling weapons grade vodka to ISIS

I've been looking forward to their Jackass style recruitment vids

Looks like he got sidelined winding Palace fans up on Twitter!

That is fun but also far too easy. When the average Palace tit on Twitter has the IQ of a potato, it's not really fair.

Lagers, you weren't supposed to talk about that. You were supposed to be keeping operations running smoothly here while I was out in the field. You've just jeopardised your 10% cut sunshine.

I don't really understand this thread so I'm only going to add nonsense to it.

[Jaspersharpe]

Whilst the rest of our sport continues to become ever more commercialised, please can this be the last grubby little edifice that remains?

Actually, I sort of get it now. Completely agree with this Mono.

Part of the reason I got bored with posting on here was that it seemed to be getting a bit tame and just regurgitating the same stuff over and over. So the idea that things should be in any way further sanitised to attract a different class of member is anathema to me.

Grubby is good. This is not UKC.

[Jaspersharpe]

There is to a certain extent a mass consciousness and common agreement, but i think Sloper initially (and second time around) liked to try and wind people up and play the Devil's Advocate, but then seemed to not be able to cope with the outfall of his actions.

He'll be back gain.

Yes, Sloper likes to play the troll but can't take it when people do the same to him. Hence two massive flounces when things weren't going his way. It's a shame because without anyone being a cunt, internet forums aren't nearly as much fun.

[Andy F V2.0]

Whilst the rest of our sport continues to become ever more commercialised, please can this be the last grubby little edifice that remains?

Mate, that may well be the single best (of many great) thing you have written on here.

I fully echo your sentiments. UKB is the Mr Hyde to UKCs Dr Jekyll. We all know which character had more fun and which one we'd rather be.

[lagerstarfish]

Lagers, you weren't supposed to talk about that. You were supposed to be keeping operations running smoothly here while I was out in the field. You've just jeopardised your 10% cut sunshine.

you drank the order, didn't you?

[battery]

I read UKB a lot but post only occasionally. The chat in here (as opposed to UKC) tends to be much more knowledge as well as much more entertaining and I don't post as I don't have the level of knowledge or quick wit to be able to contribute to a lot of stuff, I generally don't post on UKC as I can't be arsed!

The only thing that does slightly irritate are the lewd/leering comments, they don't happen too often but it would be nice to have a conversation about female climbers without someone basically saying phwoar. It just highlights the fact that this is a very male dominated environment.

[Bonjoy]

Why fix something that isn't broke? Is there a need for mass appeal?

Good question.

If there are people who would get good value out of the forum, and make interesting/entertaining contributions, then surely they'd be worth having on board??

Especially if there is just some small issue that could be improved without changing the general entertainment value of the forum...

Bring back Sloper 

Yes, probably a good idea.

If there is one observation or criticism I'd like to make, it would be that I think there can be a tendency for the forum - the group, and it isn't a big one - to en masse, round on anyone who is suddenly not flavour of the month.

I think other people can probably pick up on this - the need to tread carefully, to avoid being excluded.

Where there is "bad behaviour", I think it can be handled in a better way, and "the group" tends not to look at their own behaviour, once someone has been ousted. With Slopes, I think things had become too personal, and I think this is the one area where some more thought is needed.

Hmmm, that's a bit of revisionism Dave. The only personal bit I recall is the insults Tom was throwing around.

[Oldmanmatt]

Why fix something that isn't broke? Is there a need for mass appeal?

Good question.

If there are people who would get good value out of the forum, and make interesting/entertaining contributions, then surely they'd be worth having on board??

Especially if there is just some small issue that could be improved without changing the general entertainment value of the forum...

Bring back Sloper 

Yes, probably a good idea.

If there is one observation or criticism I'd like to make, it would be that I think there can be a tendency for the forum - the group, and it isn't a big one - to en masse, round on anyone who is suddenly not flavour of the month.

I think other people can probably pick up on this - the need to tread carefully, to avoid being excluded.

Where there is "bad behaviour", I think it can be handled in a better way, and "the group" tends not to look at their own behaviour, once someone has been ousted. With Slopes, I think things had become too personal, and I think this is the one area where some more thought is needed.

Hmmm, that's a bit of revisionism Dave. The only personal bit I recall is the insults Tom was throwing around.

He was also helpful and often almost nice in pm's.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Fiend]

If there is one observation or criticism I'd like to make, it would be that I think there can be a tendency for the forum - the group, and it isn't a big one - to en masse, round on anyone who is suddenly not flavour of the month.

The only thing that does slightly irritate are the lewd/leering comments, they don't happen too often but it would be nice to have a conversation about female climbers without someone basically saying phwoar. It just highlights the fact that this is a very male dominated environment.

Well that's two useful points.

Although I don't think the first necessarily applies to Sloper as he was deliberately provocative and everyone knows it. But I can see how ganging up on someone is off-putting because it's basically ignorant herd mentality. Especially when it's done towards essentially innocent people who might just happen to have slightly geeky side-hobbies and very very occasionally eat fast food and really don't deserve any aggro.

The more "subtle" sexism thing. Hmmmm. A good point. I must confess I do post appreciations of the female form especially in the IFSC thread but I post an equal amount of appreciation of their bouldering prowess. Is the former THAT off-putting?? It would be good to hear from more people about it.

It would also be good to get more confirmations of whether this stuff is offputting in general - I noticed Lund has seen this thread but not actually said what the many people he knows have been putt off by, surely that would be helpful??

[Fiend]

Whilst the rest of our sport continues to become ever more commercialised, please can this be the last grubby little edifice that remains?

Mate, that may well be the single best (of many great) thing you have written on here.

I fully echo your sentiments. UKB is the Mr Hyde to UKCs Dr Jekyll. We all know which character had more fun and which one we'd rather be.

I fully echo your sentiments. UKB is the Mr Hyde to UKCs Dr Jekyll. We all know which character had more fun and which one we'd rather be.

Well. Some people (again, the now-elusive Lund) imply there is an issue with putting people off. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, maybe this should be a haven for easily-mistaken-as-homophobic-if-you're-a-bloody-idiot avatars, tit-4-tat karma wars, dense's essential irreverency etc etc??

So I guess the questions are: Is there a problem? And if so, what is it?

[webbo]

Those missing DFGWGC should try bikeradar forum road cycling -the bottom bracket -the big girls thread.
Then you can marvel at how PC we all are on here.

[tomtom]

I'm struggling to understand why you don't understand Fiend.... You grasp why people might not appreciate the spunk comment - but not why faggot or gay are also offensive words to use?

[petejh]

Those missing DFGWGC should try bikeradar forum road cycling -the bottom bracket -the big girls thread.
Then you can marvel at how PC we all are on here.

For me it's not that I really miss or give much of a shit about taking part in a 'dead fit birds who go climbing' thread. It's more there's something vital about not taking away opportunities for people to make idiots of themselves - whether by showing their true colours as misogynists, racists, homophobes or run-of-the-mill bigots. Banning opportunities for free speech in topics some find offensive is not healthy, anymore than banning alcohol, cannabis and various other drugs. Better for vices to be out in the light so people can call bullshit on dubious views and point out inequalities. Hard to challenge or change much when it's undercover.


As for 'you faggot'.. If people routinely used 'you toy soldier painter' (Fiend); or 'you christian' (3.9.) as a pejorative term to mean 'you inferior being', then might you start to feel a bit marginalised after a few years of common usage?

[Duma]

good post pete

[Fiend]

The spunk comment, or the examples pete gave, or the example coops gave in his COD poster are all using those terms TO/ABOUT the people who might feel marginalised by them,

Mark s's avatar was *NOT* directed at people who might feel marginalised by that term (unless there is a group of homosexual crossfit fanatics on here whom he was deliberately insultng - in which case then I'd apologise for even supporting his freedom of avatars). That's the difference.

[i_a_coops]

Got to say - I didn't think I was trying to score cheap I'm-so-pc points. From my point of view, it felt more like I was arguing with people trying to score cheap I'm-so-un-pc-and-therefore-cooler-than-thou points.

More on topic for this thread: I totally agree with the point about avoiding over-sanitation/moderation - which means that anyone can say 'I don't like that and think you sound like a cock' when they think someone sounds like a cock. 

r.e. the above post Fiend: 'That's so gay', 'you faggot' etc. was considered really normal at my school - as was 'OMG that's so Jewish' or 'don't be such a Jew'. Most of the time it wasn't directed at anyone Jewish. Was that ok according to you? If so I think you sound like a right cock.

[dave]

Hang on, how the fuck can avatars be "directed at" anyone? They're out there for anyone to see. If you wouldn't be happy walking down the highstreet, or rocking up at the pub for a work social, or picking our kids up from school with your avatar printed 10x10" on the front of a tshirt for fear of being slapped then that's an indicator that it's probably an inappropriate avatar.

[Footwork]

Hang on, how the fuck can avatars be "directed at" anyone? They're out there for anyone to see. If you wouldn't be happy walking down the highstreet, or rocking up at the pub for a work social, or picking our kids up from school with your avatar printed 10x10" on the front of a tshirt for fear of being slapped then that's an indicator that it's probably an inappropriate avatar.

Yeah. And we all know how that ends up...



In fact, I'm pretty sure the cross fit one would have the same effect if you walked past a cross fit gym. Chris Webb Parsnips might have something to say

[i_a_coops]

The spunk comment, or the examples pete gave, or the example coops gave in his COD poster are all using those terms TO/ABOUT the people who might feel marginalised by them,

Uh, the examples pete gave were exactly the same. i.e. imagine if people routinely said 'oh you toy soldier painter' to mean 'you cunt' to people who had nothing to do with toy soldiers, and you might start getting fed up with it eventually. That COD poster wasn't aimed specifically at women either, was it? It was posted on internet message boards presumably to make the (presumably, predominantly male) audience laugh. Or possibly to score look-at-me-I'm-so-un-pc points. I'm not sure.

I love that you seem to be assuming that everyone on ukb is straight, while arguing that the kind of attitude that actually does put non-straight people off the forum is totally fine.

[andy popp]

Mark s's avatar was *NOT* directed at people who might feel marginalised by that term (unless there is a group of homosexual crossfit fanatics on here whom he was deliberately insultng - in which case then I'd apologise for even supporting his freedom of avatars). That's the difference.

FFS Fiend, are you being deliberately obtuse? I don't understand why you're so bent on defending this? When homophobic bullying is no longer widespread and common in our schools, for example, then maybe we can start treating the routine, unthinking use of terms of homophobic abuse - in whatever context - as "frivolous."

[Offwidth]

This place is so male and clubby its scheduled for a Grayson Perry show next series. Its full of laughter, learning and love but something is broken when half the population is largely missing.

[Sasquatch]

If there is one observation or criticism I'd like to make, it would be that I think there can be a tendency for the forum - the group, and it isn't a big one - to en masse, round on anyone who is suddenly not flavour of the month.

The only thing that does slightly irritate are the lewd/leering comments, they don't happen too often but it would be nice to have a conversation about female climbers without someone basically saying phwoar. It just highlights the fact that this is a very male dominated environment.

Well that's two useful points.

Although I don't think the first necessarily applies to Sloper as he was deliberately provocative and everyone knows it. But I can see how ganging up on someone is off-putting because it's basically ignorant herd mentality. Especially when it's done towards essentially innocent people who might just happen to have slightly geeky side-hobbies and very very occasionally eat fast food and really don't deserve any aggro.

I'm not going to get into the #2 point at the moment, but regarding point #1 I think there are two typical situations. 

The first situation is that you say something stupid and/or not well thought out, and people make fun of you for it.  There is almost always also someone who will point out both what you were wrong about and why you were wrong about it, although it may take a few posts before this pops up.  Therefore if you actually get through the responses with a relatively open mind, there is much to learn here.  This is a public forum and not a paid answering service.  For the quality of info you get with relative ease, I think this is a CHEAP price to pay.  I also think it makes those lessons sink in better.  People learn to think a bit more critically, search the forum for previous threads, and put in at least a small amount of effort before asking a question and expecting to be spoonfed the answer. 

The second situation is a bit trickier and tends to show up when there's an set difference in opinion and it starts to get personal and folks line up on one side or the other.  This is unfortunate, but the reality of life. 

[SA Chris]

Hang on, how the fuck can avatars be "directed at" anyone? They're out there for anyone to see. If you wouldn't be happy walking down the highstreet, or rocking up at the pub for a work social, or picking our kids up from school with your avatar printed 10x10" on the front of a tshirt for fear of being slapped then that's an indicator that it's probably an inappropriate avatar.

I still don;t know who or what your is supposed to be btw. Too small to read or recognise.

[slackline]

I still don;t know who or what your is supposed to be btw. Too small to read or recognise.

What boulder problem did Dave climb that a well known wad from Germany couldn't on the same day?