|
abock33
Mar 22, 2004, 5:59 AM
Post #1 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 131
|
What happened to the forum about the guys that were taking lead falls on keychain carabiners. I've searched and searched and I can't find it. can anyone help
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 12:12 PM
Post #2 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
We have people who are very new to climbing here, and it is not prudent to allow posts that describe very dangerous and unsafe actions up... It is not worth someone's life, so it was deleted. I am also moving this to the Suggestions & Questions Forum.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 12:13 PM
Post #3 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
rrrADAM moved this thread from General to Suggestions & Questions.
|
|
|
|
|
kunzie
Mar 22, 2004, 12:30 PM
Post #4 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2001
Posts: 388
|
True, it wouldn't be exactly prudent, but somehow appealing in a darwinian sort of way... :P
|
|
|
|
|
iltripp
Mar 22, 2004, 1:48 PM
Post #5 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1607
|
Taking a lead fall on a keychain carabiner is certainly dumb, but I can think of dumber things I've read on this site (some of them given as real advice too). I don't see why it has to be deleted... I'd like to see the results of these "tests". Let's bring the forum back out of oblivion and leave it there for all to read.
|
|
|
|
|
abock33
Mar 22, 2004, 2:01 PM
Post #6 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 131
|
I was infact impressed with the test results and wanted to know more about the actual equiptment that was used. It's strictly for informational purposes only. There is no way or any reason that Anyone should actually think that they could be used as a piece of pro. I just found it entertaining and wanted to know more. If it is to be deleted then who was the author of the thread. I will just ask him. That way anyone who actually thinks that using them might ahve been a good idea, won't know all the details
|
|
|
|
|
mesomorf
Mar 22, 2004, 3:04 PM
Post #7 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2002
Posts: 397
|
In reply to: ...it is not prudent to allow posts that describe very dangerous and unsafe actions up... It is not worth someone's life, so it was deleted. So where do you draw the line? E.g. - use of tiblock to "protect" the leader while simulclimbing (known to shred ropes) - simul-rappelling - solo climbing with self belay - solo climbing without belay - climbing, period! By censoring "unsafe" posts, aren't you implying that, if the post remains uncensored, it's guaranteed by rc.com management to be advocating a safe technique?
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Mar 22, 2004, 3:05 PM
Post #8 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
What about Free soloing?
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Mar 22, 2004, 3:29 PM
Post #9 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
In reply to: By censoring "unsafe" posts, aren't you implying that, if the post remains uncensored, it's guaranteed by rc.com management to be advocating a safe technique? This is an excellent point!!! I remember when I was in college, my outdoor group decided to put a (real) bulliten board up on our campus for people to look for partners to do stuff, sell equipment, etc. We were told by the university's attorneys that the baord needed to be unmonitored. In other words, if we were pulling any posts that we felt were unsafe, we were creating a legal situation that we have implied that everything left up was safe. If someone got injured through something from the board, they would have grounds to sue. Therefore we were seriously told that we could not monitor the board for safety concerns. I'd bet the same arguement could be made for online bulliten boards...
|
|
|
|
|
usaclimbing
Mar 22, 2004, 3:35 PM
Post #10 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2004
Posts: 28
|
OMFG... that is so stupid... "there are new climbers here and we dont want them to think that is safe" thats about the lamest thing i've read on this chuffer site. they all say: "not for climbing" or "not load bearing" if someone is still stupid enough to ACTUALLY use them for climbing then they deserve what happens to them. on a legal note (and i'm not laywer)... it seems like a bad idea to censor "unsafe" information. you then become required, it would seem, to censor ALL "unsafe" information (something that is very subjective and I doubt any of you are experts on) as if something is left up, and someone does it they could potentally turn around and sue: "i read it on the forum and it was left up so i figured it must not be dangerous" just my thoughts though
|
|
|
|
|
j-tha-b
Deleted
Mar 22, 2004, 3:41 PM
Post #11 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
yeah what everyone else said. GOD i am so infuriated by all of this nonsense. you all should be put in time out.
|
|
|
|
|
iltripp
Mar 22, 2004, 4:40 PM
Post #12 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1607
|
Bring back the thread!!!!!! Censoring this kind of thing as unsafe is completely ridiculous given the mountain of controversial and unsafe (mis)information on this site. I think the readers here are intelligent enough not to use biners marked (not for climbing), not to mention the fact that the stupidity of taking lead falls on keychain biners is probably repeated throughout the thread, giving more than sufficient warning. I can think of numerous threads here that should be deleted for similar reasons, so why one that is so obviously unsafe.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 4:44 PM
Post #13 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Find something else to bitch about people... I'm not gonna leave a post up that infers that cfalling on key chains is safe. Get over it. Look for something else to whine about, like maybe some of the bolting bans, access issues, or the new camping fees in JTree. You really could put your bitching to much better use, than bitch about the deletion of a thread that implies that climbing on key chains is safe. Sheesh. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
mesomorf
Mar 22, 2004, 5:05 PM
Post #14 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2002
Posts: 397
|
The question is no longer "why did you delete thread X?" The question is "by saying THIS post may remain, while THAT post may not, are you not endorsing techniques in THIS post?" And are you not making yourself liable by doing so? Though I also think it's fair to ask, what criteria do you use in deciding THIS post is OK while THAT one is not?
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Mar 22, 2004, 5:25 PM
Post #15 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
In reply to: The question is no longer "why did you delete thread X?" The question is "by saying THIS post may remain, while THAT post may not, are you not endorsing techniques in THIS post?" And are you not making yourself liable by doing so? Though I also think it's fair to ask, what criteria do you use in deciding THIS post is OK while THAT one is not? I agree!! And, Adam, I would like to see this issue addressed by the moderators of this site. You may think that you're doing a good thing by censoring unsafe material, but you have just created a situation where you are acting as an "authority" on climbing safety techniques. The results of someone getting injured using a technique that you have approved simply by not censoring ( because now you have established a precident of censoring unsafe techniques) may be very costly.
|
|
|
|
|
aarong
Mar 22, 2004, 5:25 PM
Post #16 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 180
|
Shit....you can't say bitch on this board?
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #17 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
As the TOS states... "...if you feel you have been unfairly moderated, please contact a member of the Staff via Private Message..." Like I said, the author had no issue with it being removed and understood. I will post a link to this thread in the Moderators & Editors Forum for discussion, and if they agree by majority that it should not have been removed it will come back. Fair enough ???
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 7:03 PM
Post #18 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Currently the votes are: 2 for stay deleted 2 for bring it back
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Mar 22, 2004, 7:13 PM
Post #19 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
rrrAdam-- I don't understand why you don't understand!!! I'm not talking about a keychain here, I'm talking about the legal issues of censoring safety information, and I think that you're walking a very fine line! That's why I started a new thread because what I want to discuss is much larger than "What happened to the Lead falls on carabiners forum", the topic of this thread. I'm sorry, but I was not aware that I am not allowed to start a different but related thread. That never happens on rc.com!!! I don't particularly care how monitors vote either. Personally I feel that safety issues should not be censored, both to keep you folks out of legal trouble and to freely share information including the stupid and controversial. You have yet to discuss the specifics of any of my posts and instead make to false assumption that I really just want to read about boneheads falling on keychains. I don't. You have inadvertantly established yourself as a source for safe climbing information, and I don't really think that your precious TOS will save your ass. So now I do feel I've been unfairly moderated! Who do I send that PM to exactly???
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 7:21 PM
Post #20 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Phil (philbox), Amber (amber_chk), and/or Kate (katydid) since I'm sure you don't want to send one to me. You are looking for a black and white rule, and there is none... Big difference bewteen "mark the middle of your rope with a knife" and "key chain biners held many lead falls as per my physical experiments". If I delete a post about killing the prez, it does not "establish me as part of the Secret Service." I deleted what I viewed as a thread that could be misconstrued by a n00b how may hurt himself if he tried it. I am human, and I may be outvoted in regards to it... So be it. You are asking me to quantify something that is in a gray area. I'm not gonna get into splitting hairs with "what if's".
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Mar 22, 2004, 7:27 PM
Post #21 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
No, rrrAdam, once again you're incorrect. I'm not looking for an edict handed down from on high. I'm looking for a discussion about a topic that is reflected in the title of the thread. You seem for some reason unwilling to allow me to have that discussion and unwilling to contribute. Why will you not share your thoughts on the multiple posts from different users shareing the same sentiments as me? Why will you not recognize that I am interested in something bigger than carabiner keychains? Why will you not let me explore other people's opinions concerning an unfortunate quark of our legal system that, like it or not, applies to this site? It seems like a relevant and interesting topic to me!!
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 7:29 PM
Post #22 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Fair enough... I'll unlock it then. It's just not worth going back and forth.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Mar 22, 2004, 7:35 PM
Post #23 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Now I gotta reply in two seperate threads about the same thing, right ??? OK.... Also of note... There is no law that would hold us liable for safety of another climber, as there are disclaimers on the site. It is however ETHICAL and MORAL to remove items that are posted that encourage unsafe behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
dorkmaster
Mar 22, 2004, 8:30 PM
Post #24 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 19, 2004
Posts: 268
|
Technically....you are correct, however, with our wacked legal system, people sue for the littlist things (the mic-e-d's coffee incident...), and since you are censoring unsafe posts...you are setting a precedent that you will any material left un-censored is infact safe. Therefore, should someone become injured, they could make a case and sue. I certainly HOPE no climber would do this, but they could. In reply to: And our last bit of legal ... Rockclimbing.com is not responsible for messages posted on the Rockclimbing.com Forums or the content therein. Unless expressly stated otherwise, this includes messages posted by Rockclimbing.com personnel, representatives, moderators, administrators, and their agents by proxy. You use the site and the information contained within it at your own risk. Climbing is a sport where you can be killed, maimed, or crippled even if you do everything right. Proper technique and experience may limit the risks involved, and you are advised to seek professional instruction prior to attempting the activities depicted and discussed on the site. You must accept these risks of your own volition, and we make no warranty that anything on the site is fit for the purpose of instruction, guidance, or consumption. Everything on this site could be completely, dangerously wrong. We cannot accept liability for your actions should you choose to rely on the information which users have contributed to the site. Caveat lector. In your TOS you state that people may be injured or killed using the information, I understand that morrally you would be appalled if anyone was hurt by doing something dumb that was posted, but honestly, because the TOS makes sure you are un-responsable for any injury occured, why remove it? I also realize that the TOS says,
In reply to: These are publicly visible forums; please act as you would in a public place. What precisely is 'questionable' enough to be removed is left to the discretion of the individual moderators, but may include any material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, misleading, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, pornographic, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, illegal, or overtly destructive. In a nutshell... If it couldn't go on a public library's community bulletin board, then it shouldn't go here Please, leave it to the other users to call the person a certifiable moron (the poster of false info). I urge you not to create the precedence for a lawsuit, because if you continue to edit info that could be fatal (IE Clipping keychain biners) and someone gets hurt using another method that was not taken out, they can and very well might sue, they might not win, but they can sue. Another solution might be to update the TOS by adding in "Mods may remove some posts that could prove fatal to people reading them that use the information, however, they may not remove other dangerous posts, so use your descretion."...or something like that. I hope you take the time to read this and think about what we the community is trying to tell you.
|
|
|
|
|
mattdog
Mar 22, 2004, 8:32 PM
Post #25 of 47
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2003
Posts: 1523
|
Adam, Do you ever feel like you're playing daddy to a bunch of kids? Its like sitting in the front yard, whatching your kids play near the street. Every second they get closer and closer until finally you yell at them to get out before they get hit by a car. Then they get mad at you, and start asking questions like, "Well, how close is too close? Can I play near the sidewalk? What if my ball goes out in the street? Can I go get it? I'm 6 years old, I can look both ways before crossing. Mommy said we could go out there yesterday...." Next thing you know, they're back out in the street. So then you say that they're not allowed to play in the front yard anymore, just to keep em safe and sound. And they, for the life of them, can't remember why you're such a jerk of a dad that you won't let your own kids play in the front yard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|