Careless Talk - Navel Gazing or Looking Skywards [Apotheosis in climbing]

UKBouldering.com

Help Support UKBouldering.com:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, as much as he annoys me, I don't think the world is a better place with pile-ons.

The thing is for me, I'd love for him to post those thoughts somewhere more open, I dunno, substack? Then just wait for the ensuing evisceration.

I don't have the time, inclination or necessary philosophical background to actually engage in refuting the nonsense but I'm sure a second year philosophy student wouldn't have too much of a challenge...

To the log pile, once again!
 
That escalated quickly..

A quick point before I tap out.
civil discourse is the foundation of understanding even if you disagree. dismissing or attacking ideas is perfectly fine when done in a respectful way.
If a topic of discussion challenges your thoughts/opinions - or maybe you think it’s a load of bollocks - approach it with respect and curiosity regardless.
Alternatively, if a discussion feels unproductive or you cant hold your emotions in check, it’s perhaps best to refrain from saying anything.

That’s more than enough internet for me, I remember now why spending time in the real world with real people is a far better use of one’s time.
 
I agree with Ducko here on the whole. My frustration is that the arguments Dan puts forward feel totally impenetrable with lots of jargon. The Chat GPT bit actually did a good job of helping me understand what he is talking about and it's an interesting topic, with some potentially good insights. It just presented in a frustrating way and past interactions with Dan have felt like he's often trolling rather than entering into a good debate. He'd be a good regular addition to the forum if he avoided trying to just wind people up.
 
That escalated quickly..

A quick point before I tap out.
civil discourse is the foundation of understanding even if you disagree. dismissing or attacking ideas is perfectly fine when done in a respectful way.
If a topic of discussion challenges your thoughts/opinions - or maybe you think it’s a load of bollocks - approach it with respect and curiosity regardless.
Alternatively, if a discussion feels unproductive or you cant hold your emotions in check, it’s perhaps best to refrain from saying anything.

That’s more than enough internet for me, I remember now why spending time in the real world with real people is a far better use of one’s time.
The problem is Ducko, many people have tried, in good faith, to engage with Dan but it always goes the same way, he ducks, he dodges, he weasels, it sucks the joy and life out of the place, we start bitching about this, that and everything.

There is form, and everyone is fed up.

It's a shame, as there are obviously some good points intertwined in the nonsense.
 
C'mon lads, 70/100 isn't bad for a quick post on the subject, with a bit of effort I could get it up into the 90's for explanatory power of modern climbing culture. Definitely phd level without the constraints of academic ideological capture
 
What Jamie G an Fultonius said.

Concisely represented by the acronym: F.o.D.
 
I wonder if Dan believes anything he posts or is he having a bet with him self on how many posts before some one tells him to piss off.
 
It's a repeat pattern of behaviour of starting threads which descend into antagonistic arguing.

If it was a new user and just this thread I would agree, but this is the third or fourth time this has happened.
 
This seems over the top? What's he done to deserve banning (this incarnation). This thread was quite interesting imo, and certainly not offensive.


Yeah I agree, I guess there was the standing rule that he would be banned, but he was contained to this thread and not being antagonistic really.
 
Hauntologist has been banned so won't be able to respond further.

What’s the aim here? To create an ideological echo chamber void of diverse opinions or any meaningful exchange of ideas? Simply banning people you disagree with stifles discussion.

While I don’t know much about Dan’s history on the forum, I’ve yet to see anything in his recent posts that appears overly offensive or in violation of forum rules.

It’s frankly disappointing and embarrassing.
 
His posting history led to his banning twice before. He clearly can't have a UKB account without using it to be a massive pain in the arse that drags the community down so its fair that he's been banned again
 
What’s the aim here? To create an ideological echo chamber void of diverse opinions or any meaningful exchange of ideas? Simply banning people you disagree with stifles discussion.

While I don’t know much about Dan’s history on the forum, I’ve yet to see anything in his recent posts that appears overly offensive or in violation of forum rules.

It’s frankly disappointing and embarrassing.
On the face of it, you're right - there's nothing aggravating or "ban worthy" in this thread. If anything it's the baying crowds that have crossed this line this time.

The problem is that there is form, it starts like this and then it always descends. Maybe it was too trigger happy this time, but I'm not a moderator and it's a difficult call.

Maybe Dan should sign up to the Patreon and post his thoughts on the Careless Talk discord?

But to be clear - it's not about avoiding challenge and stifling debate. If said debates could be had in good faith it would be worthwhile. But Dan's just on out and out troll with no desire to debate in good faith.

Feel free to continue the line of discussion. No one is shouting anyone down that doesn't have prior.
 
Context, originally posted July 2024, but most of the details are still applicable:

To clarify, Dan has been banned not as a result of any request from posters. He has previously requested that his account be blocked, which was done with the agreement that he did not re-register under another name. He has repeatedly re-registered under different names and has consequently been blocked again.
 
Shame it escalated into the standard cod-philosophy as the actual basis of the original post was an interesting one. In short, is the search for a higher meaning, the search for a flow state, the quiet mind, the perfect execution of moves just a handy way of trying to justify us all having a really fun hobby that we want to do as much as possible?
Cynical, moi?
 
I would more sympathetic to towards Dan being banned if he actually offered anything constructive to forum. I.E. has offered advise on someone’s training issues, how to do moves, how to find somewhere or where to get cheap shoes.
 
I didn’t really know how to reply to Dan, I personally find his constant looking down on others a bit hypocritical… flow is just a state of being highly focused on the task you are doing aka being in the moment. To search for it has no downsides, it helps people to step away from being outcome oriented (which is probably what he doesn’t like about Lattice?). Seems climbers can do no right these days.

Maybe as a sponsored climber talking about zen is a bit funny, but we are all sell-outs to some degree or another. At least sponsored climbers do what they love for money.

My final thought is that To take aim at something like Mindfulness that helps people with their mental health is really rather sad…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top