[Loos3-tools]

Just out of interest do you think it’s ok to tell people not to climb x because y takes precedence( yeah I get no one is actually saying that, but that did seem to be the implication)

Hmm... I think it depends on the context.
99% of the time no, I don't think you should tell someone not to climb X because Y is better/more important/harder. E.g. if you're on rainshadow it doesn't mean you should get to queue-jump the people on raindogs, or that people should stop climbing raindogs to reduce the queues on rainshadow. But, we should all try to not screw each other over, e.g. you might agree that the person on rainshadow would go first, run up to the roof quickly, pull the rope through and then work on the roof while the other person then works the bottom of raindogs.

The only thing here is that doing the Sphinx might impact on people's ability to try Voyager in the future, not just in the present... In a hypothetical scenario where there was a 10% chance that each ascent of the Sphinx would irreversibly break Voyager and a 0% chance that climbing Voyager would break the the same hold, I think it would be fair enough to think/say that people "shouldn't" climb it. Obviously that's not how it really is, but I can definitely create scenarios where I think it's ok to say someone shouldn't climb X in order to preserve Y

Some sort of ticket machine would sort out the rain dogs issue, the rest is all reflective of rank mentality

[abarro81]

Some sort of ticket machine would sort out the rain dogs issue

It exists already, in the magical form of conversation, taking turns, and most people being quite reasonable. At most crags. Not that I'd go back to Ceuse in August!

the rest is all reflective of rank mentality

Please elaborate. (I think I know what you mean, and it's bollocks, but want to make sure I've not misunderstood before I call it bollocks. You bored me off the covid thread but you'll have a harder time on a climbing-related one)

[spidermonkey09]

It exists already, in the magical form of conversation, taking turns, and most people being quite reasonable.

This. The amount of climbers that moan about queues is ridiculous when normally all it takes is a friendly chat and all is fine. I suspect this is because a lot of climbers are socially inept/grumpy more than anything else, but it's silly- I can count the times I've had trouble getting on a route on one hand! A bit of faith in humanity wouldn't go amiss!

[Loos3-tools]

Some sort of ticket machine would sort out the rain dogs issue

It exists already, in the magical form of conversation, taking turns, and most people being quite reasonable. At most crags. Not that I'd go back to Ceuse in August!

the rest is all reflective of rank mentality

Please elaborate. (I think I know what you mean, and it's bollocks, but want to make sure I've not misunderstood before I call it bollocks. You bored me off the covid thread but you'll have a harder time on a climbing-related one)

This thread is an intellectualisation of social rank. Deciding what’s acceptable and who can do what based upon arbitrary meaning applied. One could argue that the whole structure of society and its sporting endeavours springs from the tendency to compare oneself with others. The rock or grade just becomes the symbol. The ticket machine cuts through that to some extent, so not a bad idea. No matter how many friendly chats take place there will always be someone feeling bad, angry, hard done by. Not that I’m a big fan of Wikipedia but here’s the theory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_rank_theory

[ali k]

Not that I'd go back to Ceuse in August!

What’s not to like about putting your rope bag in a queue of six at the bottom of a 40m route?!

[abarro81]

I don't really understand your point Dan. To clarify, I'm happy to reverse the grades and cachet of Voyager and the Sphinx in my hypothetical example without it changing my view. Does that still make it rank mentality? If so sign me up.
P.s. IMO all meaning is probably arbitrary unless you're religious, but that's one for another day.

[Stu Littlefair]

Dan, presumably the rank thing only applies if the meaning ascribed to boulder problems is indeed arbitrary?

Which is fair enough - ie who decides whether scarcity trumps accessibility, if not the kings of the internet (ie me and barrows)

[Loos3-tools]

The point is coming on here and saying if x = y then you can’t do z is reflective of a social order based upon individuals comparing themselves to other individuals trying to find their place in the group. For some people it’s ok, for others it sticks in their craw (maybe northern yob, but I doubt he’s want a pariah such as me speaking on his behalf). Anyway yeah it’s exactly the same as Airlie punching GME for calling her out on Headpointing masters edge with a big old mattress underneath (if that’s the story). Just it’s done with less character and much wider pecking order. As stu pointed out the lattice bros kick ass every time

[Oldmanmatt]

The point is coming on here and saying if x = y then you can’t do z is reflective of a social order based upon individuals comparing themselves to other individuals trying to find their place in the group. For some people it’s ok, for others it sticks in their craw (maybe northern yob, but I doubt he’s want a pariah such as me speaking on his behalf). Anyway yeah it’s exactly the same as Airlie punching GME for calling her out on Headpointing masters edge with a big old mattress underneath (if that’s the story). Just it’s done with less character and much wider pecking order. As stu pointed out the lattice bros kick ass every time

How does someone, who constantly claims moral superiority, a greater understanding of both humanity and the universe, along with a tendency to imagine malicious intent in anybody who doesn’t immediately agree with everything he says; have the rank hypocrisy to claim that everybody else is obsessed with rank and social status?

Edit.
Damn it. Got side tracked.
I get Will’s point, it’s not unreasonable, from the point of view of trying preserve something that has value, within the community. However, it’s just not realistic. People are not and I don’t think should be, bound by that sort of stricture.  How would such a thing be enforced? A team of elderly ladies, in deckchairs, with knitting, peering over reading glasses on chains around their necks, tutting loudly at people on the wrong route? A few bags of rotten tomatoes, to be hurled in extreme cases?

[abarro81]

The point is coming on here and saying if x = y then you can’t do z is reflective of a social order based upon individuals comparing themselves to other individuals trying to find their place in the group.

You'll have to convince me of this since it doesn't strike me as necessarily or even intuitively true.

[Will Hunt]

It exists already, in the magical form of conversation, taking turns, and most people being quite reasonable.

This. The amount of climbers that moan about queues is ridiculous when normally all it takes is a friendly chat and all is fine. I suspect this is because a lot of climbers are socially inept/grumpy more than anything else, but it's silly- I can count the times I've had trouble getting on a route on one hand! A bit of faith in humanity wouldn't go amiss!

You say this, and it might be that if someone asks to get on a route while I'm resting I'll say "go ahead", but I'll still despise them if they get on and then fuck about for ages trying to dog the easy moves bolt to bolt. Is it politic to ask "are you going to be complete shit" first?

I get Will’s point

I don't think I made a point but if I did I react it. I was just shitposting while bored trying to sort some IT issues.

[Loos3-tools]

The point is coming on here and saying if x = y then you can’t do z is reflective of a social order based upon individuals comparing themselves to other individuals trying to find their place in the group.

You'll have to convince me of this since it doesn't strike me as necessarily or even intuitively true.

A brief look around ukb with its system of point scoring, moderators / arbitrators, judges and main protagonists dishing out the law is evidence enough. What appears like morality to some is as NY quite rightly puts it, a desire not to be moralised at. I’m hoping he’s on my side cos he’s quite big and mean looking so probably handy in a scrap.

[Bonjoy]

  This thread seems to have degenerated from weighing up the merits of an idea, to frothing outrage at the very idea of discussing an idea on a discussion board.
I dare say this opinion is me stamping a jackbooted foot onto the face of climbing's untermensch, so I best leave at that.

[Loos3-tools]

This thread seems to have degenerated from weighing up the merits of an idea, to frothing outrage at the very idea of discussing an idea on a discussion board.
I dare say this opinion is me stamping a jackbooted foot onto the face of climbing's untermensch, so I best leave at that.

What was the idea? That we shouldn’t climb the Sphinx to preserve the crystals on voyager?

[Bonjoy]

Pretty much. Offered in a thinking aloud, what do others think sort of way.

I wonder how much if any of the damage is from people climbing Sphinx. Standing on crystally handholds is way worse then pulling on them for erosion. Bit of a weird one but it's perhaps worth people not climbing the Sphinx anymore.

Perhaps I should have added the shrug emoji to signpost the quizzical nature of the post more obviously.

[abarro81]

The point is coming on here and saying if x = y then you can’t do z is reflective of a social order based upon individuals comparing themselves to other individuals trying to find their place in the group.

You'll have to convince me of this since it doesn't strike me as necessarily or even intuitively true.

A brief look around ukb with its system of point scoring, moderators / arbitrators, judges and main protagonists dishing out the law is evidence enough.

Reread those quotes and tell me you really believe that makes sense as an argument to the point you originally made. It certainly doesn't to me, it reads like moving the goalposts.

NY -
3min 19 on this, bitch