|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Apr 24, 2008, 1:40 PM
Post #76 of 160
(2618 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: jmeizis wrote: I think they have just as much moral right as any other group. I think that was my point which might not have been clear. Institutional groups have the same moral and legal rights to access climbs as non-institutional groups. All groups have a ethical responsibility to not crowd classics, adhere to LNT principles, etc. Most institutional groups do so. Some don't. Institutional groups are only as courteous as those in charge of them. Same for non-institutional groups. Rumney's just kind of a shitty area to guide. Most of the best places to guide at are where all the big groups and newbs hang out anyways, Meadows, Parking Lot Wall, etc. Getting to the more remote crags requires quite a bit of effort as well as some dangerous terrain relative to the skill levels of those travelling it. Rumney's just not a good place to guide. That's just my opinion though, and I've never guided there. When did putting up a couple of top ropes for a class of beginners become "guiding"? Jay
Although I agree with where you are coming from, Jay, most if not all respectable and qualified guiding organizations will provide what the clients want. Which includes the lowly toproping groups all the way to Everest.
Now I teach a summer camp, instruct lead classes, and anchor-building classes, but even I know that if i use the word "guide", it is used very loosely. I know plenty of real "guides", and I am not one of them.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Apr 24, 2008, 1:54 PM
Post #77 of 160
(2615 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
[quote "nika
Dude, all I was doing was comparing X-number of people all in one big group to X-number of people divided into X/2 smaller groups. I don't quite get your response.
Let Daddy intrepret (always have to explain these harvrda kids to the rest of the world). Typically in the group situation every member of the group (say 10) has to climb every rope set up (say 5) before any outsiders get to hop in. At any point in time all 5 of the ropes are in use by one of the 10 group members (because the group has a good leader who keeps things going). In that case (if your timing was perfectly awful) you would have to wait for at least 10 climber/pitches to be complete before you got to hop on a route. Now in the 5x2 independent parties scenerio you would only have to wait for 2 climber/piches to be complete before you could hop on. If you could implement a single queue multiple server model (which would be over the head of most climbers) then you could hop on as soon as the first group of 2 is done.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Apr 24, 2008, 1:57 PM
Post #78 of 160
(2615 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
edge wrote: jmeizis wrote: When they paid you for it. When you had to get permits and insurance and all kinds of silly certifications. When you alone were responsible for risk management, time management, and equipment management. When the purpose of the trip was to put the people on as many climbs as possible and make sure they have fun as opposed to some sort of educational purpose. Personally, I had to solo five routes today to set up those topropes for those beginners. Nothing hard, but I still guided them to the climbs, guided them up the climbs, and made sure they stayed safe and happy the whole time. Wow, dude, how terribly short sighted of you. I am not sure who gave you the ultimate authority to guide the routes that you are guiding, but I bet no official entity did. Did any Park Service, Forest Service, Land Owners Association, or anyone else give you the right to use these lands for your own personal gain? (Yes, if you charge people for your services, then it is your personal gain.) It doesn't matter if you carried the clients there on your back and wiped their a$$es after a crap, you are taking advantage of public lands for your own benefit, and that most definitively does not give you the right to monopolize anything from the parking lot to the finishing chains. Tons of people get certifications without being really qualified; dispute this all you want but the proof is overwealming. You got insurance for your own self, but was it from the land owner, or even with their knowledge? If by your own admission the certifications were "silly", then why do you do it? No one gives a rat's hiney if you soloed the Rostrum and made your clients happy setting up a top rope. If you did it at the expense of someone who was counting on a fun day of climbing, then you have robbed a fellow climber of their experience, and that is just not right.
I don't think he's saying that he has a right to monopolize. I think he's saying that people have a right regardless of access point (pay a guide vs go on your own). And yes, if it's public lands, unless specifically noted otherwise, then folks have access either to enjoy the beauty freely or to profit from them.
I grew up in a national park (Acadia) and have never been offended by the tour buses that take folks out to see the park. Do they hog the roads? Yea, sometimes. Are they annoying when traffic is tight? Certainly. Do I want to strip these folks of their livelihood just because they add to traffic or profit off the park? Absolutely not.
I think your comment is short-sighted. People have a right to earn a living off public lands in this country (again, unless specifically noted othewise - e.g. - forestry regulations, access to historical sites, etc). There's no difference between a climbing guide, a tour bus operator, a fishing guide, a hiking guide, a bird-watching guide, a botanist tour guide, etc. They all get paid to take people on to public lands, and they all take up space from those who don't pay these people. What, are we going to ban these folks just because their profit-searching desires impede our personal access? It's a ridiculous assumption.
I guess by your point I should go out and picket the bird-watcher tour groups, because I want to go to the nesting sites and not have to deal with people who paid. Because I know that tourist group who has no clue where the nesting sights are is going to find the best viewing spot and take that away from me, just because she paid and a tour guide told her where to stand. I should be irate!
I personally don't hire guides when on vacation (climbing or otherwise), but that's my personal preference. Just because I don't want someone showing me around, doesn't mean others shouldn't have that kind of access. And personal profitability off public lands is absolutely not a new concept, not exclusive to climbing, or something we should frown upon. I think people who make their living doing what they love should be applauded.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Apr 24, 2008, 2:11 PM
Post #79 of 160
(2604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
jt512 wrote: In his undoubtedly hopelessly out-of-date profile, jmeizis wrote: I'm trying to get more comfortable leading trad...
Guides can lead climb. If I were a guide, I'd be pretty upset about n00bs like you who have the hubris to call yourself "guides."
Jay
Jmeizis posts = 150
Jay posts = 13,355
One of these two spends less time worrying about updating his profile so that the whole world knows what he's accomplished.
Come on dude! Get real. Not every cares so much about that stuff. I would never assume that a person's profile on-line is the end-point for all anyone needs to know about a person.
I know Jmeizis, and he's a good guy who wants to become a climbing guide. He's young, he's smart, he's learning, and he's pursuing his goals. He absolutely can lead climb, he just hasn't had great e-mail access the past couple of years (or phone access either - I know because it was a bitch to get in touch with him for a long period of time). Instead of sitting in a cubicle all day where he can post (as I do), he actually spent weeks in the woods in the 'Dacks with troubled teenagers until his recent move to Colorado (where he was hired as a guide). Now, tell me, how is one going to update his profile then? Lay off.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 3:32 PM
Post #80 of 160
(2565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: jt512 wrote: In his undoubtedly hopelessly out-of-date profile, jmeizis wrote: I'm trying to get more comfortable leading trad...
Guides can lead climb. If I were a guide, I'd be pretty upset about n00bs like you who have the hubris to call yourself "guides."
JayJmeizis posts = 150 Jay posts = 13,355 One of these two spends less time worrying about updating his profile so that the whole world knows what he's accomplished. Come on dude! Get real. Not every cares so much about that stuff. I would never assume that a person's profile on-line is the end-point for all anyone needs to know about a person.
I knew everything I needed to know about him from his claim that setting up top ropes on a few sport climbs is "guiding."
In reply to: I know Jmeizis, and he's a good guy who wants to become a climbing guide.
Out of respect for people who have actually earned that title, he ought to wait unitl he has become one to use it himself.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Apr 24, 2008, 4:17 PM
Post #81 of 160
(2527 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: Jmeizis posts = 150 Jay posts = 13,355
Now for the normalization:
jmeizis join date: April 25, 2006
jt512 join date: April 11, 2001
jmeizis hardest recorded lead: 5.10d
jt512 hardest recorded lead: 5.12d
I've been frequenting this site for a long time. I've seen Jay be wrong maybe twice since 2002. And he's right, to call yourself a guide, you've got to have your shit together. You have to be so solid that you can literally drag your clients up to where you're supposed to descend from, and then solid enough to get them all down again. Otherwise, you're that jackass who's spouting all kinds of useless or wrong info and then justifying by saying "I'm a guide". You may be guiding, but you're not a guide.
/is getting increasingly drawn into the world of outdoor instruction
//has a REALLY long way to go before claiming the title "guide"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Apr 24, 2008, 4:58 PM
Post #84 of 160
(2493 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I am a former bike racer, climbing grades are similar in a lot of ways.
Recreational Rider = Mostly slop, crowds, people can't ride in a straight line, neon windbreakers, and smelly old men.
Cat 5 = Faster more skilled riders, still just learning, lots of wrecks happening while learning. More refined but mostly slop
Cat 4 = Successful Cat 5.
Same speed as a 5 but able to hold a straight line, dodge an obstacle, and sprint. Will probably still cause a wreck.
Cat 3 = only the top 10% or so of the 4's.
Comfortable shoulder to shoulder at high speeds, anticipate everything, strong fast and focused.
Cat 2 = Same as 3 but even faster and riding even closer together. Seldom wreck.
Cat 1 = Professional level, usually paid to race by several companies.
Pro = Cat 1 with drugs.
Climbing is no different, you want to avoid the slop, get better. If you don't like the slop as you're improving, get over yourself, you're not special.
Crowds are part of learning in this game, they do go away if you climb long enough.
|
|
|
|
|
WVUCLMBR
Apr 24, 2008, 5:55 PM
Post #85 of 160
(2448 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2007
Posts: 668
|
Who gets to decide what category you are? Isn't this subjective....like say....climbing grades? As far as "guide" goes, it looks like paper in pocket from reputable organization = guide? I understand how registered/certified guides would get upset in a non-certified guide calling themselves a guide, just like a doctor would get pissed by a orderly giving out medical advice. Just because you work in a hospital doesn't mean I want you doing my liver transplant (damn you tequila!!!).
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Apr 24, 2008, 6:23 PM
Post #86 of 160
(2421 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
I think Jay is wrong
Dictionary:
guide
(gīd) pronunciation
n.
1.
1. One who shows the way by leading, directing, or advising.
2. One who serves as a model for others, as in a course of conduct.
2. A person employed to conduct others, as through a museum, and give information about points of interest encountered.
You might want guides to be certified or have a certain amount of professional experience or competence, but that is not the minimum requirement for someone to call themselves a 'guide'.
Which is why anyone using a guide service should beware.
Groups at the crag? Whatever, the only thing that would annoy me would be if a rope was not being used and the leader said 'no' if I asked to pull it and put it back when I was done - and that has never happened to me.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 6:30 PM
Post #87 of 160
(2413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
limeydave wrote: I think Jay is wrong Dictionary: guide (gīd) pronunciation n. 1. 1. One who shows the way by leading, directing, or advising. 2. One who serves as a model for others, as in a course of conduct. 2. A person employed to conduct others, as through a museum, and give information about points of interest encountered.
"Guide" in a climbing context means "climbing guide," which has a specific meaning you won't find in a general dictionary. You cannot "guide" a top rope ascent; you cannot "guide" a sport climb. The very idea is nonsensical.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Apr 24, 2008, 6:45 PM
Post #88 of 160
(2392 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
jt512 wrote: limeydave wrote: I think Jay is wrong Dictionary: guide (gīd) pronunciation n. 1. 1. One who shows the way by leading, directing, or advising. 2. One who serves as a model for others, as in a course of conduct. 2. A person employed to conduct others, as through a museum, and give information about points of interest encountered. "Guide" in a climbing context means "climbing guide," which has a specific meaning you won't find in a general dictionary. You cannot "guide" a top rope ascent; you cannot "guide" a sport climb. The very idea is nonsensical. Jay
Oh, I hear ya.
I just think your personalizing the definition.
If you get paid to guide someone to the crag, guide them up and down it, and guide them out, you are a guide.
You might be dangerous.
You might not be a professional even.
You may not even be certified, but I think you are imposing standards that don't really exist on 'guiding'.
If we were talking about AMGA Guides, or adding the title of any professional body, you need to conform to their standards, but in Climbing especially, standards are actually often contrary to the culture.
Maybe you're not really wrong, but you should at least admit that it's not up to you to draw the line of what comprises a 'proper' guide, as it's an action, not a qualification.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 6:50 PM
Post #89 of 160
(2382 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
limeydave wrote: jt512 wrote: limeydave wrote: I think Jay is wrong Dictionary: guide (gīd) pronunciation n. 1. 1. One who shows the way by leading, directing, or advising. 2. One who serves as a model for others, as in a course of conduct. 2. A person employed to conduct others, as through a museum, and give information about points of interest encountered. "Guide" in a climbing context means "climbing guide," which has a specific meaning you won't find in a general dictionary. You cannot "guide" a top rope ascent; you cannot "guide" a sport climb. The very idea is nonsensical. Jay Oh, I hear ya. I just think your personalizing the definition. If you get paid to guide someone to the crag, guide them up and down it, and guide them out, you are a guide.
Even if you take that as the bare minimum to constitute guiding, then you still can't "guide" a sport route or a toprope. Getting paid to give beta is not guiding.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
WVUCLMBR
Apr 24, 2008, 6:57 PM
Post #90 of 160
(2372 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2007
Posts: 668
|
Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next?
|
|
|
|
|
jdefazio
Apr 24, 2008, 6:59 PM
Post #91 of 160
(2396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 29, 2007
Posts: 228
|
Does this qualify? It does, after all, say "guide" in the title.
|
|
Attachments:
|
guide.jpg
(16.4 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 7:07 PM
Post #92 of 160
(2382 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
WVUCLMBR wrote: Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next?
This isn't trivial. This is how people think nowadays: that it is perfectly legitimate for anyone to call themselves a "climbing guide," no matter how undeveloped their climbing skills may be. International standards for rock climbing guide certification are something on the order of being able to guide at the level of 5.10c/Grade V. Not just be able to climb at that level, but to climb at that level with complete ease.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Apr 24, 2008, 7:33 PM
Post #94 of 160
(2355 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
jt512 wrote: WVUCLMBR wrote: Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next? This isn't trivial. This is how people think nowadays: that it is perfectly legitimate for anyone to call themselves a "climbing guide," no matter how undeveloped their climbing skills may be. International standards for rock climbing guide certification are something on the order of being able to guide at the level of 5.10c/Grade V. Not just be able to climb at that level, but to climb at that level with complete ease. Jay
I someone else had written this - you'd be picking it apart mercilessly - You start with a generalization about 'people' move on to vague 'international' standards without referencing any - even private standards - you use 'something of the order' because you don't actually know and you use the term 'complete ease' which is totally subjective.
So again, it's really just your opinion.
You do this to people's arguments frequently - how about living by your own 'standards'...?
Now the point you made about top roping, I can buy.
The act of guiding implies that you lead (from the front, side or behind) people through the whole process.
Walking around the top to set up a rope would be a dis qualifier.
Leading the route would be integral in the guiding process, otherwise you become a coach.
More popcorn anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 24, 2008, 8:00 PM
Post #95 of 160
(2332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
The point of that link isn't to say that you need official certification to be a "guide." It's to provide some degree of legitimacy to what is an otherwise entirely subjective word. Read the above link and it's obvious that, in the context of ROCK climbing, if you're working on grade-I routes, you're an "instructor." Grade II and above, you can call yourself a "guide." If you routinely work on grade-II and above routes, but find yourself one dreary day pulling belay duty at the gym, you are most likely a "sucker."
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Apr 24, 2008, 8:04 PM
Post #96 of 160
(2328 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: Getting paid to give beta is not guiding. Jay
I don't know why, but I find this statement extremely funny. 
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 8:04 PM
Post #97 of 160
(2325 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
limeydave wrote: jt512 wrote: WVUCLMBR wrote: Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next? This isn't trivial. This is how people think nowadays: that it is perfectly legitimate for anyone to call themselves a "climbing guide," no matter how undeveloped their climbing skills may be. International standards for rock climbing guide certification are something on the order of being able to guide at the level of 5.10c/Grade V. Not just be able to climb at that level, but to climb at that level with complete ease. Jay I someone else had written this - you'd be picking it apart mercilessly -
If someone else had written it, I'd have agreed with it completely, which kinda stands to reason doesn't it -- since I wrote it.
In reply to: You start with a generalization about 'people'
Yes, it's a generalization. Not every person believes that a n00b should be considered a climbing guide. For example, I don't believe it. I don't think edge or petsfed do either. But more and more people do. A decade ago if someone had implied that setting up top ropes for beginners at a sport crag was being a "guide" they'd have been universally ridiculed. Today, the majority of "people," judging by the responses to this thread and others on the subject, seem to think that such a claim is completely reasonable.
In reply to: ...move on to vague 'international' standards without referencing any...
Without referencing any? What does that mean. I stated the standard. It's the one AMGA goes by, and their standards are in accord with whoever sets the international standards -- IMGA? If you're interested in the details of the organization, you can look them yourself.
In reply to: - even private standards -
I have no idea what that means.
In reply to: ....you use 'something of the order' because you don't actually know...
I use on the order of because I don't recall the exact rating. It's on the order of 10c. Maybe it's 10b, or 10d. I don't recall exactly.
In reply to: ...and you use the term 'complete ease' which is totally subjective.
So what? If you have the capability to think about it, it's pretty clear what it means in the context of taking responsibility for a climbing party in a hazardous environment.
In reply to: So again, it's really just your opinion.
Of course it's my opinion. I wrote it.
In reply to: You do this to people's arguments frequently - how about living by your own 'standards'...?
How about you not tell me what I frequently do, since you obviously have no fucking comprehension what I do.
In reply to: Now the point you made about top roping, I can buy.
Hallelujah.
In reply to: The act of guiding implies that you lead (from the front, side or behind) people through the whole process.
No shit.
In reply to: Walking around the top to set up a rope would be a dis qualifier.
Duh.
In reply to: Leading the route would be integral in the guiding process, otherwise you become a coach.
So what the fuck are you arguing with me for.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Apr 24, 2008, 8:10 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 8:09 PM
Post #98 of 160
(2324 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: Getting paid to give beta is not guiding. Jay I don't know why, but I find this statement extremely funny.
Yet that's the claim he made. He said he got paid, and he said he guided them up the routes. What were the routes? Top-roped sport routes. So what can his statement mean other than he gave them beta.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Apr 24, 2008, 8:28 PM
Post #99 of 160
(2304 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
jt512 wrote: limeydave wrote: jt512 wrote: WVUCLMBR wrote: Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next? This isn't trivial. This is how people think nowadays: that it is perfectly legitimate for anyone to call themselves a "climbing guide," no matter how undeveloped their climbing skills may be. International standards for rock climbing guide certification are something on the order of being able to guide at the level of 5.10c/Grade V. Not just be able to climb at that level, but to climb at that level with complete ease. Jay I someone else had written this - you'd be picking it apart mercilessly - If someone else had written it, I'd have agreed with it completely, which kinda stands to reason doesn't it -- since I wrote it. In reply to: You start with a generalization about 'people' Yes, it's a generalization. Not every person believes that a n00b should be considered a climbing guide. For example, I don't believe it. I don't think edge or petsfed do either. But more and more people do. A decade ago if someone had implied that setting up top ropes for beginners at a sport crag was being a "guide" they'd have been universally ridiculed. Today, the majority of "people," judging by the responses to this thread and others on the subject, seem to think that such a claim is completely reasonable. In reply to: ...move on to vague 'international' standards without referencing any... Without referencing any? What does that mean. I stated the standard. It's the one AMGA goes by, and their standards are in accord with whoever sets the international standards -- IMGA? If you're interested in the details of the organization, you can look them yourself. In reply to: - even private standards - I have no idea what that means. In reply to: ....you use 'something of the order' because you don't actually know... I use on the order of because I don't recall the exact rating. It's on the order of 10c. Maybe it's 10b, or 10d. I don't recall exactly. In reply to: ...and you use the term 'complete ease' which is totally subjective. So what? If you have the capability to think about it, it's pretty clear what it means in the context of taking responsibility for a climbing party in a hazardous environment. In reply to: So again, it's really just your opinion. Of course it's my opinion. I wrote it. In reply to: You do this to people's arguments frequently - how about living by your own 'standards'...? How about you not tell me what I frequently do, since you obviously have no fucking comprehension what I do. In reply to: Now the point you made about top roping, I can buy. Hallelujah. In reply to: The act of guiding implies that you lead (from the front, side or behind) people through the whole process. No shit. In reply to: Walking around the top to set up a rope would be a dis qualifier. Duh. In reply to: Leading the route would be integral in the guiding process, otherwise you become a coach. So what the fuck are you arguing with me for. Jay
The thing is Jay, I don't actually care very much.
Just thought you should be on the receiving end of a pedantic self-righteous pointless argument for a change.
PS You're wrong
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 24, 2008, 8:37 PM
Post #100 of 160
(2285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
limeydave wrote: jt512 wrote: limeydave wrote: jt512 wrote: WVUCLMBR wrote: Dueling definitions going on here.......can we do "auto-locking" next? This isn't trivial. This is how people think nowadays: that it is perfectly legitimate for anyone to call themselves a "climbing guide," no matter how undeveloped their climbing skills may be. International standards for rock climbing guide certification are something on the order of being able to guide at the level of 5.10c/Grade V. Not just be able to climb at that level, but to climb at that level with complete ease. Jay I someone else had written this - you'd be picking it apart mercilessly - If someone else had written it, I'd have agreed with it completely, which kinda stands to reason doesn't it -- since I wrote it. In reply to: You start with a generalization about 'people' Yes, it's a generalization. Not every person believes that a n00b should be considered a climbing guide. For example, I don't believe it. I don't think edge or petsfed do either. But more and more people do. A decade ago if someone had implied that setting up top ropes for beginners at a sport crag was being a "guide" they'd have been universally ridiculed. Today, the majority of "people," judging by the responses to this thread and others on the subject, seem to think that such a claim is completely reasonable. In reply to: ...move on to vague 'international' standards without referencing any... Without referencing any? What does that mean. I stated the standard. It's the one AMGA goes by, and their standards are in accord with whoever sets the international standards -- IMGA? If you're interested in the details of the organization, you can look them yourself. In reply to: - even private standards - I have no idea what that means. In reply to: ....you use 'something of the order' because you don't actually know... I use on the order of because I don't recall the exact rating. It's on the order of 10c. Maybe it's 10b, or 10d. I don't recall exactly. In reply to: ...and you use the term 'complete ease' which is totally subjective. So what? If you have the capability to think about it, it's pretty clear what it means in the context of taking responsibility for a climbing party in a hazardous environment. In reply to: So again, it's really just your opinion. Of course it's my opinion. I wrote it. In reply to: You do this to people's arguments frequently - how about living by your own 'standards'...? How about you not tell me what I frequently do, since you obviously have no fucking comprehension what I do. In reply to: Now the point you made about top roping, I can buy. Hallelujah. In reply to: The act of guiding implies that you lead (from the front, side or behind) people through the whole process. No shit. In reply to: Walking around the top to set up a rope would be a dis qualifier. Duh. In reply to: Leading the route would be integral in the guiding process, otherwise you become a coach. So what the fuck are you arguing with me for. Jay The thing is Jay, I don't actually care very much. Just thought you should be on the receiving end of a pedantic self-righteous pointless argument for a change. PS You're wrong
Fair enough. I mistakenly thought you had a somewhat intelligent opinion on something, and I replied to you. That's a mistake I won't repeat.
*plonk*
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
