[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.