[AndiT]

I realise that you put a NOTE regarding keeping Grinah Stones undocumented, the same has always applied to the First Cloud too where you've claimed Cloud Nein etc. Is nothing sacred?

[Bonjoy]

I'm much more inclined to go along with the Grinah thing (hence asking for opinions and not having written anything up to date). The Clouds one on the other hand seems a lot more unjustifiable and pointless. What exactly is the rationale? My guess was that it was mostly about the slabby buttress left of the low roof. Which has some nice easier bits on it and a very cool project which ought to be recorded when it gets done.

[Bonjoy]

PS I'm not bothered about the roofs being credited to me, or having the names I suggested. I just think they're decent and worth recording.

[AndiT]

So because you think it's "unjustifiable and pointless" then you'll just go ahead with it? Good to see that the echo chamber of UKB is still alive an well.

[Fiend]

I don't think anyone is actually echoing Bonjoy yet. But my faint reverberation is that Grinah is an entire area miles from any other documented venues and it's location fits an exploratory wilderness experience, whilst First Cloud is a few minutes from the most well-used venue in Staffordshire and right next to buttresses that are fully documented.

But don't take it lying down (unless there's a lying down start?!), I'm sure there's a good counter-case to be made.

[BAndy]

Nice one! You find the crucial knee placement?

I assume so, but I'm not much of a kneebar-er so may just have lucked my way through. I had to use two different right knee positions, one for going up the arete from the starting holds and one for getting the crucial (for me anyway) dimple for my right hand. My little legs didn't fit the first kneebar very well so I had the kneepad almost on my knee. This made the move to the top harder as I couldn't bend my right leg enough to get my right foot up!

[Bonjoy]

So because you think it's "unjustifiable and pointless" then you'll just go ahead with it? Good to see that the echo chamber of UKB is still alive an well.

I didn't consult UKB. Didn't feel it was needed, any more than asking permission off anyone else.

[AndiT]

Nothing has ever been recorded or documented on the first cloud. It's nice to know that some places aren't categorised, labelled and recorded like some fossil collection. For at least forty years this had been the case, quite nice I always thought, there was this piece of rock which you could just go to and just enjoy for the sake without some predetermined line or claim. We could've put it in the last guidebook, but thought continuing the tradition was a good and positive thing. The same applied to the rocks between Roach End and the Skyline.  There's some really great stuff up there, only five minutes from the road, but it's always been left out. 

I just don't understand why you thought that you should just change that?

[Bonjoy]

I like fossil collections, I'm a fossil collector.
All undocumented problems have a long history of being undocumented. It's not a good enough reason to stay that way.
It might annoy the odd local but a few more people will enjoy that bit of rock and I'm unconvinced that these problems will degrade anyone else's day at the crag in the process. I think there should be a very good reason before we try to impose arbitrary gatekeeper decisions on others and in this case I'm sufficiently unimpressed with the reasons behind them to ignore.
I have climbed on the rocks beyond very far skyline. I never recorded anything, except for Ursa Major which is virtually roadside.

[AndiT]

Ok, so you've made a decision based on your own decision. Whereas you could've just left those two problems out (along with their sarcastic names), and climbers could've still just as easily gone and enjoyed discovering those problems for themselves. You'd still have your hoard of other problems and we'd still have a little place that remains seemingly untainted. I'm sorry Jon, but you are completely wrong in this case and entirely selfish; yet proposing that you've actually done something for the enjoyment of others. I

Instead of adding something for climbers to enjoy, you've actually taken something away.

[Bonjoy]

A decision based on my own judgement as opposed to what someone (you?) told me to do in a book, is a fairer description. Apologies for the names. That was my way of acknowledging that I was aware of the embargo but didn't feel bound by it.  A bit childish perhaps, sorry.
Is the mud slinging necessary? I think you'd make a better case for your point of view by sticking to reasoned arguments for why people/I should do what you want.
Believe it or not I do a lot of things that I don't write up, including various things on the areas you've referred to. I don't write things up when there's a good reason not to. I didn't and don't see any reason here.

[AndiT]

Firstly, it wasn't a decision made by me, but it was one I supported in this special case. You might notice that I've not been on UKB for years, the reason I'm on it now is because this was raised with me, so don't think it's just me, it's a case which has been highlighted.

Secondly, the problems have been climbed before. But obviously it's a catch 22 for anyone to come forward. But, ultimately it has been somewhere which people have climbed on for decades but have all managed to keep our egos in check when coming to "claim" things.

Had I happened to be walking past when you were climbing there, I would've happily joined in. I think people should climb there, it's an ok piece of rock, I just don't see the need for every last buttress and boulder to be named, graded and rated.

If the only reason people go to climb on the First Cloud is because you've named some problems then surely the same argument could be applied that the only reason some people go and climb on the First Cloud is because there aren't any named problems on it.

Just think, there are other people out there who, just like you, get a great satisfaction from feeling they're the first to do something.

[Teaboy]

I don’t understand the argument here. Who are these people? Obviously not you or your mystery informant as you know exactly what has and hasn’t been climbed. So are we talking about people who happen to stumble upon the place and then get told subsequently that anything they climbed has been done before. Or is the expectation that people will know the rules and go along to kid themselves they are the first to climb the clean and brushed problems they find? 

[Bonjoy]

Look, ultimately if this is a big thing for you I can delete these from the update. Or is it too late for that, let me know. If it bothers you, that bothers me. You could have achieved this end with a PM and without the digs at my character and motivation by the way.
It's fairly irrelevant to me whether these have been done before. I'd assumed they would have been done in some form, though both required eliminate rules to work IMO, which is part of why documenting makes sense as not all climbers are good at reading stuff like that. They are nice and worth doing, by people other than 'in the know' locals. Your barbs about 'ego' and 'claim' would be valid for other lines, but not in this instance. These are two pleasant eliminates I documented because that's what I do (I could write a long post about why there's more to this than ego, maybe another time). They aren't important bits of my 'hoard', I would not feel diminished by their absence, I just think less people (lets face it, whatever happens they will always be obscure) will enjoy them without documentation.

PS - If I ever climb the central hanging slab on the block to the left I will definitely claim that. That really would feed my ego and be a jewelled crown in the hoard. Sadly I think it might be too bold for me.

[Bonjoy]

Just think, there are other people out there who, just like you, get a great satisfaction from feeling they're the first to do something.

There are absolutely loads of unclimbed lines in the Peak, especially in Staffs. There really is no need to simulate the feeling of doing something new in this way. Learn to find the gaps and go and do something actually new  .

[AndiT]

Or is the expectation that people will know the rules and go along to kid themselves they are the first to climb the clean and brushed problems they find?

I think the expectation is that people may find this piece of rock, enjoy climbing on it (or not) and then just move on, without recourse to registering their movements. Perhaps it's stupid suggesting that just one piece of rock could potentially be left for exploration? Granted there are other bits of rock knocking around, but I can't think of another example on an established crag.

I suppose the other stand to the discussion is that Jon clearly knew of the tradition and stuck two fingers up to it in his naming of the problems. Something which could have easily been cleared up with a direct message, hey Jon?

[Bonjoy]

I intended to document them despite the embargo, hence the names. I already made clear it was to some extent a statement about the ban and the idea that bits of crag should be treated differently based on the random diktat of guide writers. In that context why would I ask permission? It would completely undermine the point about knowledge being free and not owned and controlled by gatekeepers.
That said I've made the point and I don't wish to cause upset, so will remove the descriptions if requested.

[Johnny Brown]

Andi I know you don't always feel one of the 'in' crowd at UKB but you really don't help yourself wading in all guns blazing. The context here is that in response to Jon's original post we've recently had a very long and involved debate about whether Grinah should remain undocumented. You might like to give that a read before dismissing this as an echo chamber. Suffice to say there are a range of opinions and issues at stake, and all discussed without the same heated insults. FWIW my emotional response is often aligned with yours but I don't think blindly following tradition is ever a strong argument, particularly when the tradition is just the opinion of the local 'in' crowd thirty years previous.

I like to think I know the Roaches pretty well but I must admit I don't recall hearing about this before for the First Cloud. First thing I did was check my guides and, yes, it's all there in black or white. But I don't generally carry a guide to the Roaches and haven't for years. Such traditions are far from the norm in climbing, in fact they are a very rare reaction to them. With the increasing pressure on the boulders and the decreasing ability of boulderers to explore I think there is a debate to be had about whether some form of documentation might be better than none, whether it is done via egos being buttered or not. I agree claiming problems of a difficulty which means they are highly unlikely to be new probably isn't the way to go about it.

Good line on the fossil collecting though, oof!

[AndiT]

There's a lot of talk of "bans" and "banning" here. Nothing is banned, it's just nice to leave some places undocumented.

I developed an entire crag this year (last year). It was amazing to do that, but, perhaps decades ago the climbs I did had been done before. I've no intention of recording it or documenting it. I don't get why everything has to become part of the "circuit"? Even GG managed to withhold.

The First Cloud, for as long as guidebooks have been mentioning it, has been that place where "there are a few good problems to be had" (albeit they're not that great and it's actually a bit disappointing after wading up through the bracken). I'm certainly not gatekeeping, no more than Jon is gatecrashing anyway.

As for all guns blazing and heated insults? I don't think I went that far. I think "fossil hunter" was about as insulting as I got 

[shark]

You called him selfish too

[AndiT]

Apologies, I didn't mean "selfish" as a heated insult. I simply meant it as acting in one's own self interests and disregarding the interests of others (regardless of whether they are a minority or not).   

[Bradders]

I developed an entire crag this year....I've no intention of recording it or documenting it.

Sorry to wade in, but this is a strange statement. If you don't document the climbs then you haven't developed the venue at all! Sounds to me like you just went climbing at a new venue and then gave nothing back to the community by sharing the place; now who's selfish?! 

Seriously, I've a lot of respect for people like Jon, given the vast majority of my time climbing is based on their sharing the knowledge on where to go, and what to do. If we didn't have that climbing would be rather inaccessible to most people, and so if in his judgement these problems are worth sharing I trust him that it's the right thing to do.

[SA Chris]

I think he should stick to fossicking

[BID]

I'm getting flashbacks to the Grinah Stones thread. And not good ones.

It's good to have the debate I suppose.

Well done everyone.

For what it's worth I agree with Bonjoy here.

[Jacqusie]

With the increasing pressure on the boulders and the decreasing ability of boulderers to explore I think there is a debate to be had about whether some form of documentation might be better than none, whether it is done via egos being buttered or not.

I think the healthy part of all this is that our generation still has new lines in the Peak to explore and these kind of debates have been going on ever since guidebooks were first scribed. 30 odd years ago I remember certain factions of a certain guide team who would sniff and throw derisory comments about new lines on Grit, that they would claim as 'eliminate and not worth documenting along with some pretty sizable crags that were dismissed (Then they'd go and nick all the lines and write them up for themselves!) There were debates on putting boulder problems in the guides back then and we were told 'It's not proper climbing' and not to waste time trying to document so many decent finds. Times and trends change, as does the sharing of information.

Dave Gregory who was pretty good at the new routing lark, always told us to keep exploring and extoled the virtues of sharing the information of new developments with climbers. Which I suppose is at the individuals personal choice. If you go and spend ages cleaning a load of new lines, climb them and decide not to publish any of it, that's fine. But someone else most likely will eventually. It's also fine if you want to share your hard work with others on Insta and spread the footfall and word to keep them in climbable nick. I've no doubt that loads of stuff I've been cleaning and climbing has been done before 'back in the day' - but it's good to see areas like Bamford going through a bouldering renaissance and people enjoying the climbing.

I think we are going through a really decent spell for new lines and it's quite exciting that an area such as the Peak has so many secrets and plumb lines left which are steadily getting done.

I'd be intersted to hear of your new Crag Andi, but then I am a guidebook nerd