[JohnBoy]

Jeezus Effin Christ - I can't believe it. I read this today just before I left work
<rant>
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=316051

Mick 'the chip' and Alan 'Harry Potter' James representing UK climbing at No 10. Nick we sat under a shelter in Chamonix in
the seventies. Some damn fine climbers,you Ruth and the rest of us. You were something else. The Colton- McIntyre, your route
with Tim in Alaska. You had balls and now what - you invite AJ and MR on a jolly to No 10 to represent climbers. I mean don't
you see the similarities between the UKC and the New Labour Project, the control, the targets the treating of human beings as
units of economic utility. Don't you see the historical problems with climbers  toadying up with politicians(Heckmaier/Harrer
and Hitler).

Didn't you start climbing for the same reasons I did, the being apart from society, the anarchistic ethos, the lack of rules and
control by the state, the individualism.

Shame on you Nick and shame on the BMC.

Regards

-John

</rant -I'll be on the phone next week for a refund!>

[GCW]

BMC news

I'd have thought Mr Ryan was more like Pol Pot.

[JohnBoy]

No, no GCW

You've got it all wrong, I've had it all explained to me. They are GOOD people, they will do GOOD things for our sport, nothing but GOOD will come from this meeting. RockFUX will extend it's influence to all sports, for it is the only way. Chairman James and Ryan are GOOD people. Pol Pot was a GOOD man!

Eat my underpants you mofos. You won't take me alive!

-John

[GCW]

I'm so sorry.  I can only apologise.
In my ignorance I though Mick Ryan was the equivalent of a fascist dicatator, one level above Josef Mengele, torturing innocent souls in his own domain of UKC.  Power gone to the head, etc.

But the truth is now revealed! Praise Mick and all his deeds. The fools that suffer under his heel are none but they that deserve eternal pain.

Long rule Herr Ryan!!!!

[andy_e]

Oh, herro JohnBoy. You've been a very naughty boy!

[Norton Sharley]

The Life Of Ryan - what the fuck have the BMC ever done for us?

[slackline]

the treating of human beings as units of economic utility.

Nail & hammer == direct hit on the head.

[martin k]

Dear Mrs Norton Sharley,

That's a terribly tired old cliche. You really must try harder when attempting to wind someone up.

Love from
Martin

[Fiend]

Transparently untrustworthy insidious spin-doctoring politician.....























.....accompanies Alan James to meet Gordon Brown.

I bet they'll get on like a house on fire :S.



Martin they should have invited you instead. You could have taken plenty of cake along.

[martin k]

Dear Mr Fiend,

"They" have!

Love from,
Martin

[Fiend]

Silly me! Not sure why I didn't assume that automatically, sorry.

P.S. Good luck, hope it goes well.

P.P.S. I do think that at least one representative of UKC and Rockfax should be there, for obvious reasons. They should invite someone prominent from UKB too. I vote for....hmmm I guess Dave, as long as he's in character.

[Johnny Brown]

Didn't you start climbing for the same reasons I did, the being apart from society, the anarchistic ethos, the lack of rules and control by the state, the individualism.

Shame on you Nick and shame on the BMC.

What a load of knee-jerk, ill-thought out, simplistic drivel. You were climbing with Nick in Cham over thirty years ago? And yet still haven't grown up?

Why do you think you are able to exercise your 'anarchistic ethos' and 'individualism' on the crags? Because the BMC have been able to ensure there is a 'lack of rules'.

In this modern society it takes more effort to prevent rules being foisted on us than to create them. The BMC and Nick work hard to ensure this, unfortunately it means talking to politicians from time to time. What colour they are matters not, unfortunately they make the rules and if you don't have a voice they won't be in your favour.

If you don't like the way things are run, get involved.

Fiend, I know of at least two regular UKB posters with invites, no doubt there are more.

[tomtom]

Scary reading the UKC comments on this thread.
IMHO Moderation = Dictatorship
ie decisions are made by one or two (poss more) people rather than the community itself.
Whilst the moderators on UKC have not committed genocide or other dispicable acts (that I know of) the comparisom with dictators, regarding power and control has many merits.

I like this BB because it is (from what i can tell) un-moderated. Long may it reign.
I would post this on UKC as well, but I dont like UKC, and I think it would stand a good chance of being 'moderated'...

Now enough serious bollocks, I'm going to look at the fit birds climbing thread 

[martin k]

The OP is riven with misinformation and immaturity. There may well be anecdotal stories about the nihilism in climbing and mountaineering 30 years ago, but that's hardly the case today, and even if true, they're not relevant now.

It doesn't take more than one look at the OP to see that what JohnBoy really objects to is Messrs James and Ryan going to No10 at all. An obvious personal grudge is all very well, but it shouldn't give anyone the right to misrepresent the truth and make bizarre connections between Hitler and (at the time) some barely known mountaineers 65 years ago, and a celebration of British Mountaineering at No 10 in 2008!

What is most depressing about this post is that it shows no grasp of the reality of today's power bases. If climbers have no voice, and no access to the power bases then they loose out. 65,000 members might make up the BMC, but the RSPB has over 1 million and a much bigger voice than us. It is through the hard work of Nick and others at the BMC that things are as simple for British climbers as they are. Natural England, the MoD, National Parks, the Countryside Commission for Wales, the National Trust and half a dozen other bodies I could mention are more than capable of shutting down climbing in large swathes of the UK, but the BMC has built very good relations with all these bodies and they don't. What do you propose? That we thumb our noses at the government...what could possibly go wrong? It's noticeable that your post contains no positive suggestions.

In any case, Alan and Mick (sorry about the first name terms) are not there because they "represent British climbing", they are there because they are part of the UK climbing media. If you read the BMC news item it's unfortunate that you missed that bit.

Love from,
Martin

[GCW]

Martin, I can not speak for JohnBoy, but I'm sure you are aware of the longstanding Mick Ryan campaign against UKB, along with slanderous comments about UKB and its members.
The Ryan internet persona is not one I can tolerate, although I'm told (by Jim Holmes in particular) that Mick is a lovely guy in real life.  Fair enough, but I still strongly dislike the web Ryan and his petty, bitchy, digging, twisted twattiness.
That is aside from any BMC work etc.  Mick can go to No 10, I really couldn't care less.  But my opinion is that his internet behaviour is a disgrace to British climbing/ mountaineering.

[Jim]

fully agreed with gcw

[Jaspersharpe]

Me also. And why can't anyone spell lose?

[JohnBoy]

There's nothing quite like spitting out some venomous bile to make you feel better. Having done that, yep the OP was ill thought out, simplistic and poorly focused, as has been picked up by various people.

The crux of this issue to me is Ryan's frequent claim to have a constituency

"100,000 registered users, more clicks that Google.... blah blah, broad church, blah blah".

Setting aside the fact that they're all called 'fluffypinkgrapefruit' or 'rockmonkey92'. He runs a web community where he is the final arbiter on all matters, there is little room for dissent before you are asked to leave. "UKC is the voice of UK climbing" as they say.

Well for me, no they aren't. Although not perfect the BMC is the the voice of UK climbing and the people I want to represent me. I think they have made a poor decision inviting him, as it adds credence to his claims. It will embolden him to be more vexatious and mischievous. You don't reward bad behaviour - ever.

Anyway I hope they enjoy their 'Celebration of Mountaineering' and I hope they've counted the cutlery, and I can't help but think this is just a softener before the government tell them there's no money because of the Olympics!

-John

PS - I hope my spelling is OK

[Bonjoy]

 I can't see what the big fuss is. Alan and Mick represent the most influential media in British climbing and are obvious candidates for a meeting like this. It would be ludicrous not to invite them IMO. Ultimately it's a publicity jolly , so who better to bring along then media heads? Do people really think they will be going along with the intent of pushing some agenda which will be harmful to the climbers of this country?

[Johnny Brown]

Although not perfect the BMC is the the voice of UK climbing and the people I want to represent me. I think they have made a poor decision inviting him, as it adds credence to his claims.

I don't think anyone has a problem with you jibing Mick, just remember there will be another hundred or so folk there who have nothing to do with UKC. Only they aren't shouting about it on the web. I daresay Mick's voice will be considerably quieter at the do.

But your sign-off:

Shame on you Nick and shame on the BMC.

was well out of order and needs an apology. Nick works fucking hard on a load of very worthwhile fronts.

[nik at work]

I agree with GCW, Jim and Jasper.

[Sloper]

For me the question must be what is the purpose of the invite?

If its to improve the profile of the BMC and obtain more influence in government circles the BMC might have been better advised to go for tea and cake with Nick Clegg or get David Cameron over for a spot of celbrity bouldering, I'm sure Dave would really get a kick out of a session on Pisa Wall.  I can't see how meeting Gordon Brown in hiw twilight years with only a vestige of political power remaining will serve the interests of climbers, moutaineers or hill walkers.

The issues that the BMC need to address, eg getting more resources for RAF S&R (instead of the redeployment to Afghanistan) reform of CROW, dealing with 4x4 and funding of the national parks are I suggest unlikely to be addressed when Gordon Brown is staring at a raging malignancy in his own party and defeat in the neighbouring constituency in Scotland.

Politics is the art of the possible and while I don't take issue with the BMC accepting an invite to No 10 I  would suggest that careful consideration should be given to those that are invited and perhaps more importantly that serious and concerted efforts are made to woo waht we all know is the next government waiting in the wings.

Perhaps what efforts are being made in this direction should be the focus of peoples' energy.

[Norton Sharley]

Dear Mrs Norton Sharley,

That's a terribly tired old cliche. You really must try harder when attempting to wind someone up.

Love from
Martin

... apparently not 

[Nick Colton]

Hi John

I usually don’t get involved with forum discussions but you seem to have stirred up a lively debate with this one and a few people have pointed your post out to me.

For my part, it’s important to remember that the BMC exists to protect the freedoms and promote the interests of climbers, hill walkers and mountaineers whatever their favoured facets of these activities  - and amongst these I include boulderers, sport and trad climbers, DWS, competition climbers, wall users, ice-climbers, mountaineers, hillwalkers etc.  One way the BMC can do this is by having the ear of those in power. Hence the reception for the BMC at No 10.

Mick in a strong supporter of the BMC and is also heavily involved in the new web-based media.  Hence his invite.

Let the debate continue.  It’s a healthy sign.

Hope the climbing’s going well

All the best, nick

[Sloper]

Nick since you've joined the fray so to speak, has the BMC any plans to turn up at the Conservative party conference?  After all they'll be the ear that you're trying to catch in 18 months time or so.

[philo]

give it a rest slope

[fatdoc]

Hi John

I usually don’t get involved with forum discussions but you seem to have stirred up a lively debate with this one and a few people have pointed your post out to me.

For my part, it’s important to remember that the BMC exists to protect the freedoms and promote the interests of climbers, hill walkers and mountaineers whatever their favoured facets of these activities  - and amongst these I include boulderers, sport and trad climbers, DWS, competition climbers, wall users, ice-climbers, mountaineers, hillwalkers etc.  One way the BMC can do this is by having the ear of those in power. Hence the reception for the BMC at No 10.

Mick in a strong supporter of the BMC and is also heavily involved in the new web-based media.  Hence his invite.

Let the debate continue.  It’s a healthy sign.




Hope the climbing’s going well

All the best, nick

is thus biased, viewing to line his own pocket, and NOT an element to be trusted with the monies of the BMC or HMG...

I mean for God's sake Mr Colton... he's actually got banned off a non profit making bouldering forum than normally regulates itself!!! and you then get him entwined with the future relationships of the whole sport / pastime at the highest level with government?

Good choice, not.

[Sloper]

give it a rest slope

Give what a rest?

[SA Chris]

Your continuous tory boy waffle. It's fucking tedious.

[Norton Sharley]

Putting aside all prejudices and cynicism regarding the benefit or not of any climbers attending number 10, I can think of a whole load of people who I would rather not represent British climbing in any way than Alan James and Mick Ryan.  Some of them post on this forum.  Quite recently in fact.

Whilst Mick Ryan would definately not be my first choice of representative he is preferable to some of the other people who will no doubt be there or who have 'represented' 'us' in the past, e.g. Chris Bonnington.

imho the BMC do a better job of representation than some other qusi-independant British sporting bodies, e.g. BASI, CTC

What do you think is going to come out of the  meeting anyway?  Sweet FA, political pontification, or massive grants to retro bolt all British rock.  hmmmm..... 

[Baron]

Is the proposed list of people to be invited available anywhere? I would like to see it on the BMC website, out of curiosity really.

[Sloper]

Whether people like my politics or not the reality of the current situation is that there's only one show in town and anyone seeking to garner political influence or impact on public policy needs to be in the front row of the show and not sitting in an empty theatre watching a tired old hack dying a death while some tumble weed blows by. 

I would have said the same about the Labour party in the years 1992 - 2001, its not about party politics its about political reality and if the BMC misses the opportunity now to get a seat at the table then that's a golden opportunity missed.

[Moo]

I've just read through this whole thread and frankly i think it's quite embarrassing. People are throwing opinions about regarding mick ryans involvement with little or no background knowledge other than that which they can gleam from faceless interenet forums. Ok mick can play the wind up merchant no one can deny that but comparing him to hitler and the anti christ is out of order and completely unnecesary. 

Punter away but I'll stand by what I've said

[GCW]

Moo, you're probably right, and I ain't going to punter you for an opinion.

Like I said before, I personally dislike Mick's web persona.  It hasn't helped that he sent me offensive e-mails after I complained (on the UKC complaints page) about his personal attack on Bubba in a UKC thread.  That to me is low, very unsporting.
I have never met Mick in person, but from what I have heard he's a nice guy.  So why does he stir the shit?  Why does he give abuse to UKB and its members?

I'm sorry that I form an opinion based on an internet persona.

However, UKC is a commercial site.  Mick posts his often vehement opinions there, using a UKC log in.  Does this mean UKC fully supports his views at all times? 

Personally, if I was part of a company representing climbing I would make an effort to avoid slander and generally underhand tactics.  If I worked for Halifax and posted on the official Halifax website under my official Halifax name saying "Alliance and Leicester are a bunch of thieving cunts" I'd expect a P45 in the next post.  So why not on UKC.

I can only assume it's because UKC supports ALL of Mick's comments.

In which case UKC is a poor representation of UK climbing/mountaineering too.

Or is my logic flawed?

[Sloper]

The phot opportunity Brown etc will be seeking is with the likes of Andy Cave, Joe Simpson and the like as they're the ones that the pr people can attach a strap line to.  I'd lay good money against MR actually meeting anyone more important than the waiter.

[Moo]

obviously i can't answer those questions for mick and I would agree that there is a certain amount of ambiguity attached to micks postings when it comes to whether or not he has UKC backing. I would say however that UKC does generally state its opinions clearly often on the news page and otherwise i just treat posts by the moderators as being from members of the forum.

[GCW]

I'm sorry Moo, but I disagree there. My opinion is thus: If you post on a UKC, BMC etc log in you are representing that consortium.  If you post offensive comments on a UKC/BMC log in, you reflect badly on UKC/BMC.

It's a matter of integrity.  And certain people have failed that test 

[Moo]

we'll have to agree to disagree in that case if jack gerald posts on a thread as far as i'm concerned its coming from him unless stated otherwise.

[granticus]

Just read the BMCs press release and from what I can gather it is simply a tea party with the PM to celebrate 'mountaineering'.  There won't be any debate, it will all be very pleasant and isn't mountaineering great etc...

As soon as everyone's gone Gordon will be saying thank f*** that's over, what a bunch of smelly beardy Ron Hill wearing weirdos.  Mick will get to shake his hand once in a 'lineup' and the conversation will be this:
'How do you do' - 'How do you do'.

Gordon will forget who everyone was and everything that has been said.  The BMC will do a press release saying something like 'PM thinks mountaineering is great.'... 'it's so healthy, it's good for the local economy and great for kids etc..'

All in all it will be a wonderful day for climbing and as a result Gordon will personally ensure that Vixen Tor will once again be open to the public.

Let them go and have their moment.  I suspect it's not as bigger deal as it's being made out to be.  All the political work, representation and happens elsewhere, not at a tea party with the PM. It is what it is.....

According to                              Sloper... it's all a waste of time anyway because the wrong lot are being approached... get yerself to the Tory party conference where all kinds of influence can be swayed.

[nik at work]

I agree with GCW on this again.

If Jack/Alan/Mick want to post their personal opinions then they should have non-affiliated personas. If when you post the heading is:
Mick Ryan - UKC
then the posting is seen as coming from UKC. GCW's Halifax analogy is a good one. UKC is Mick at work so he should behave professionaly, sadly he often doesn't.

I often hear that Mick is a great bloke, I don't doubt that he could be, and I certainly don't know him to comment.

[Sloper]

Just read the BMCs press release and from what I can gather it is simply a tea party with the PM to celebrate 'mountaineering'.  There won't be any debate, it will all be very pleasant and isn't mountaineering great etc...

As soon as everyone's gone Gordon will be saying thank f*** that's over, what a bunch of smelly beardy Ron Hill wearing weirdos.  Mick will get to shake his hand once in a 'lineup' and the conversation will be this:
'How do you do' - 'How do you do'.

Gordon will forget who everyone was and everything that has been said.  The BMC will do a press release saying something like 'PM thinks mountaineering is great.'... 'it's so healthy, it's good for the local economy and great for kids etc..'

All in all it will be a wonderful day for climbing and as a result Gordon will personally ensure that Vixen Tor will once again be open to the public.

Let them go and have their moment.  I suspect it's not as bigger deal as it's being made out to be.  All the political work, representation and happens elsewhere, not at a tea party with the PM. It is what it is.....

According to                              Sloper... it's all a waste of time anyway because the wrong lot are being approached... get yerself to the Tory party conference where all kinds of influence can be swayed.

So why do you Companies and other organisations seeking to lobby government host drinks receptions at party conferences, errrr, please enlighten us with your wisdom.

From memory The BMC has hosted drinks receptions (or something similar) at Labour Party conferences and while Labour were in power (rather than merely being in office) I had no issue with this, however its time for the BMC, as virtually everyone else has, to recognise that things have changed and its time to move on.

This isn't about party politics its about politics in short act like a parasite and attach yourself to a nice healthy host rather than a dessicated old husk.

For all the wit and liberal application of yawning symbols this merely indicates a lack of knowledge about lobbying, politics etc, sorry to be blunt but the BMC should be beyond politics and seek to act with the government to secure our interests regardless of the political stance / party of the government.

Of course the BMC should go along and put on a good show. but lets not labour under any illusion, the real work will be done in the Autumn at party conferences.

[jern]

maybe the BMC sees lobbying the Tories as flogging a dead horse. The core tory vote would love to be able close off its land to disgusting proles like ourselves (and have the right to shoot  those who transgress)

[slackline]

maybe the BMC sees lobbying the Tories as flogging a dead horse. The core tory vote would love to be able close off its land to disgusting proles like ourselves (and have the right to shoot  those who transgress)

When did an invitation become lobbying?   

[jern]

replying to Sloper's comments above

[Sloper]

I do hope the BMC takes a slightly more mature view.

[AndyR]

For all the wit and liberal application of yawning symbols this merely indicates a lack of knowledge about lobbying, politics etc, sorry to be blunt but the BMC should be beyond politics and seek to act with the government to secure our interests regardless of the political stance / party of the government.

Let's be honest, if you ever want to *really* see something change, then you'd be much better getting the ear of the senior civil servants - Yes Minister is even truer now than it was 20 years ago......

[JohnBoy]

Hi Nick

No question regarding your first point, the BMC represent climbers and interface with government and other bodies to protect and promote our interests, as such the No 10 gig seems OK with me. Please disregard my ill thought out snipe about climbers and politicians.

'Mick is involved in the new web-based media'. This is where it's starting to sound alarm bells, how does his support of the BMC sit with his commercial side of generating advertising revenue for the UKC, is it a commercial convenience or a genuine support ?

If he was a gear manufacturer or just a guide book writer I don't think I would feel the same. Think back over the last  year or so and look at some of the legislation that has come about by the media whipping up a frenzy and the government being caught on the back foot and reacting with ill thought out and poor legislation. The media tail wagging the policy making dog, it's not funny and it's not democratic. Your invitation will be open to his own interpretation, it will add to his authority.

Ninety percent of the people I climb with don't do forums, a large majority of them are BMC members either via clubs or individual membership. They're not radical dude's, they get out at weekends and evenings, climb in their holidays and  have done so all their life.

How do the BMC weigh up representation issues between a largely silent but conservative(with a small c) majority compared to a small, vocal, media led minority.

What I'm saying Nick is that from my perspective this doesn't look great, I would hate to see the BMC being slam dunked  into ill advised action by a UKC led frenzy. I get the feeling the magazines are afraid of the UKC, I'd hate to think the  BMC were going in the same direction. I'd like to see some clear water between the BMC and 'the new web-based media'.

It is a debate and on UKB, it's not moderated - that's healthy.

Cheers
John

PS Climbing is still good, never enough time tho'.

[GCW]

Mick,
Thanks for the interesting e-mails.
Please specify which of my comments is a lie and I'll be happy to apologise here.
Regards.

[nik at work]

Let's be honest, if you ever want to *really* see something change, then you'd be much better making a shit load of cash in business while developing a media profile then demanding change at the same time as "requesting" your knighthood in the standard fashion (envelope full of fifties is the norm I believe)

[AndyR]

Let's be honest, if you ever want to *really* see something change, then you'd be much better making a shit load of cash in business while developing a media profile then demanding change at the same time as "requesting" your knighthood in the standard fashion (envelope full of fifties is the norm I believe)

I believe that approach works as well!

[a dense loner]

what the fuck are you guys on about? it just looks like you're talking absolute nonsense when all it boils down to is that some of you just can't stand mick

[GCW]

Please specify which of my comments is a lie and I'll be happy to apologise here.

Thanks for your further correspondence.

I'm sorry you have toaken these comments seriously:

I'd have thought Mr Ryan was more like Pol Pot.

I'm so sorry.  I can only apologise.
In my ignorance I though Mick Ryan was the equivalent of a fascist dicatator, one level above Josef Mengele, torturing innocent souls in his own domain of UKC.  Power gone to the head, etc.

But the truth is now revealed! Praise Mick and all his deeds. The fools that suffer under his heel are none but they that deserve eternal pain.

Long rule Herr Ryan!!!!

They were not intended seriously, I had hoped the writing style woud make that clear.  I apologise that you were bothered by them, I certainly don't hold you on a par with creators of genocide.

I still stand by my serious opinions in this thread.


Dense:  You are as wise as ever. However, "can't stand Mick" isn't accurate as I said in my previous posts.

[Norton Sharley]

what the fuck are you guys on about? it just looks like you're talking absolute nonsense when all it boils down to is that some of you just can't stand mick

The BMC, Mick Ryan, and some other folk are off to tea at No. 10.  Bet they don't have Yorkshire tea and the tea will be made with that crappy southern scummy water.  Yuk.  Think I'll stop at home instead and write a letter to the civil servants in charge of climbing, whoever that may be? 

[Jim]

must agree, the water down south is indeed disgusting. We're lucky to have some of the best water in the uk in the mighty MCR

[Somebody's Fool]

Not to mention some of the best white water in the UK in the mighty CHSTR. Eh Jim?

[SA Chris]

We're lucky to have some of the best water in the uk england in the mighty MCR

Why else do you much of the good whisky gets made up here? It's all about the water.

[Jim]

Going by the fact that whisky tastes like shit, I presumed the water also did 

[slackline]

Why else do you much of the good whisky gets made up here? It's all about the water.

And the peat, oak casks, wine/port thats been in the casks....but the base is still H₂O