[andy moles]

I'm after enjoying an Instagram reel about a Significant First Ascent at Reiff called 'A Wright Grovel', E5 6a. Destined to be a future Reiff classic, apparently.

Turns out it's actually a one-star E2 that was climbed in 1989, called Excellence by Design, which is in the guidebook and everything. Still, don't let facts get in the way of a good reel, eh?

It has now been deleted 

[abarro81]

 

[Bonjoy]

Similar thing happened a few years back in Dovedale. Video of a hard new extreme, complete with full headpoint and tied down spotter. Turned out to be a VS from 1979.

[CapitalistPunter]

I'm after enjoying an Instagram reel about a Significant First Ascent at Reiff called 'A Wright Grovel', E5 6a. Destined to be a future Reiff classic, apparently.

Turns out it's actually a one-star E2 that was climbed in 1989, called Excellence by Design, which is in the guidebook and everything. Still, don't let facts get in the way of a good reel, eh?

It has now been deleted 

Mistakes happen. You say that as if he was posted the reel for ego rather than as his job

[andy moles]

Mistakes do happen, and sometimes they're funny.

Not sure where you get the ego interpretation from, the jokey sarcasm of 'dont let facts get in the way' makes just as much sense in reference to someone not doing their 'job' very well, i.e. not checking the guidebook for an obvious line at a well developed crag.

[CapitalistPunter]

Mistakes do happen, and sometimes they're funny.

Not sure where you get the ego interpretation from, the jokey sarcasm of 'dont let facts get in the way' makes just as much sense in reference to someone not doing their 'job' very well, i.e. not checking the guidebook for an obvious line at a well developed crag.

Yeh it is funny don't get me wrong, not sure how he missed it in the guide either...

I took the "at least it made a good reel" part to mean he was an egotistical social media influencer but I guess thats not what you meant.

[andy moles]

I was just being correct - it would normally be a good Story, but in Insta parlance you can't confuse a Story with a Post or a Reel 

[andy moles]

The author of the above is very angry with me for posting it here, accusing me of online bullying. To me bullying suggests something sustained and a character of 'punching down', whereas this is a single instance of poking fun and more like 'punching up', but it makes me realise there may be more going on here than I was aware of. I had no intention of 'ganging up' to direct online abuse at someone, I just thought the synthesis of ignorance and hubris in this situation was too sweetly ridiculous not to share.

If the moderators could remove my post and those following it that might be best.

[Will Hunt]

Is that Capitalist Punter who accused you of online bullying? The same guy who puntered me for "male pattern baldness" and called that bloke a prick for wombling up a widely-sprayed easy slab at Lawrencefield? 

[andy moles]

Sorry no, my bad for not being clear - I meant the author of the video, not CapitalistPunter.

[Bradders]

The author of the above is very angry with me for posting it here, accusing me of online bullying. To me bullying suggests something sustained and a character of 'punching down', whereas this is a single instance of poking fun and more like 'punching up', but it makes me realise there may be more going on here than I was aware of. I had no intention of 'ganging up' to direct online abuse at someone, I just thought the synthesis of ignorance and hubris in this situation was too sweetly ridiculous not to share.

If the moderators could remove my post and those following it that might be best.

Gosh, some people really can't take a joke huh? Try not to worry about it Andy, I really don't think you've done anything wrong at all and it's a shame for the other party (whom you didn't even actually name) to blow innocuous and innocent amusement out of all proportion.

[teestub]

The author of the above is very angry with me for posting it here, accusing me of online bullying. To me bullying suggests something sustained and a character of 'punching down', whereas this is a single instance of poking fun and more like 'punching up', but it makes me realise there may be more going on here than I was aware of. I had no intention of 'ganging up' to direct online abuse at someone, I just thought the synthesis of ignorance and hubris in this situation was too sweetly ridiculous not to share.

If the moderators could remove my post and those following it that might be best.

This is even funnier! How can it possibly be bullying when you don’t identify the climber? Our pitchforks and torches can hardly be directed against an unnamed victim.

[Moo]

Yeah screw that guy whoever he is.

[spidermonkey09]

Genuinely pathetic. There's some weird behaviour going round at the moment, must be the heat going to people's heads...

[CapitalistPunter]

Is that Capitalist Punter who accused you of online bullying? The same guy who puntered me for "male pattern baldness" and called that bloke a prick for wombling up a widely-sprayed easy slab at Lawrencefield? 

Stop cyber bullying me

[abarro81]

Am I harking back to "good old days" that never existed when I feel that once upon a time, a climber writing/saying/promoting something that turns out to be dumb would have fessed up/apologised and/or taken the flak/piss taking in good grace, or maybe even taken the piss out of themselves? Whereas now it's more like double down or ask for your post to come down? I blame Bojo and Trump. And Americans.

[Teaboy]

I think it’s the Streisand effect come to UKB

[Will Hunt]

Not particular to the climber in question here but a lot of climbers aren't people any more, they're brands - the perfect image that they sell to the world. If they're internet natives they've never experienced a time when people didn't present as the brand, when people had flaws.

Combine that with an environment where even very average climbers are asking companies for free stuff, and that brand becomes something that people are ultra-protective over. If that brand gets dented then you might not get your free annual chalk ball. Imagine!

All turbo-charged by the ever-present danger of falling victim to one of the hate mobs that patrol the internet looking for videos of people committing such atrocities as walking on the Almscliff wall so they can unleash their righteous fury. You can go to bed a "sponsored climber" and wake up with your life in tatters.

Again, nothing to do with the climber in this video, just my theory on why people are so desperately fragile these days. I mean, if making videos of yourself climbing and posting them online for likes and follows is a significant part of your enjoyment of rock climbing, getting laughed at on social media is probably a terrifying prospect.

[Hoseyb]

In many ways it's nice to see the climbing culture more liberal. When I was researching the slate guide by trawling through the Pete's eats books it was a very different story.
Loads of abuse and scrubbing of people's claims. I never asked Steve this but the book made it look like Nightmayer got renamed by the mob taking the piss.

Still it's a shame when perceived performance is more important than adventure. some of the coolest stories on here aren't the big grades but the narrow scrapes.

[Fiend]

The author of the above is very angry with me for posting it here, accusing me of online bullying. To me bullying suggests something sustained and a character of 'punching down', whereas this is a single instance of poking fun and more like 'punching up', but it makes me realise there may be more going on here than I was aware of. I had no intention of 'ganging up' to direct online abuse at someone, I just thought the synthesis of ignorance and hubris in this situation was too sweetly ridiculous not to share.

If the moderators could remove my post and those following it that might be best.

I ran your original post (a bit difficult without the deleted insta post but there being a "reel" , whatever the fuck that is, on insta implies a certain level of self-publicity) through my bully-o-meter from the Tickmarks thread, as thusly:

It just feels a lot like bullying to me.

Okay. I was thinking about this on one of my many tedious kneehab walks around the moors, and I hope I've remember my counterpoint accurately.

I think there are a few key defining features to bullying:

1. Specific individual targeted
- i.e. it's a person, or a group, targeting one particular individual constantly and relentlessly.

2. No justifiable reason
- i.e. although there might be something about the target that the bullies are picking on, it's not a issue which would generally be regarded as justifying any negative response.

3. Subject matter not promoted by target
- i.e. whatever issue the bullies are picking on / using for justification, whilst it might be something publicly known about the target, it's not something that the target actively seeks to promote nor publicise, they're not seeking to draw attention to it.


With regards to Tickmark Hall Of Shame / Bring Out Your Dabs:

1. Specific individual targeted??
No - it's never relentlessly targeting one person, it's about anyone and everyone who demonstrates the behaviour in question, big or small, famous or irrelevant, one-off or repeat offender. Generally the target isn't even named nor given any context, it's just "a climber who did this".

2. No justifiable reaon??
No - the reasons might be very small in the global scheme of things, but they are actual reasons in terms of negative behaviour (excessive marking of rock with chalk / falsely claiming success on a problem with assistance) that could warrant a negative response (even as gentle as "please brush that off" or "maybe try that without walking along the pads").

3. Subject matter not promoted by target??
No - the behaviour is clearly visible in images / videos that are readily available on public social media, with no attempt to keep them hidden for "friends and family", and often promoted by the poster (and the level of mockery on here is sometimes in direct correlation to how heavily they are promoted).


IF the situation was different....Say the following example: A climber with a particular sketchy style puts a series of unlisted videos of him climbing on youtube, and in most videos he's slapping un-necessarily. Someone digs hard, finds these videos, and each time posts about them, mocking that one individual - then THAT would be more like bullying. Targeting one individual, mocking something that isn't generally negative, and finding stuff that the target isn't trying to show off.


That's my 0:02. Sorry yes it was a long boring walk.

And it cane out as "Not Bullying", hth.

Also good post by Will about "the brand" rather than the climber.