|
|
|
|
jumpingrock
May 27, 2005, 7:36 PM
Post #1 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 5692
|
Hey looks like your nifty underlined thing is being a bit outta control: from what would you have done ? Epic 1 It's kinda nasty to read...
In reply to: with a double rope, as long as you dont risk a factor 2, you can climb on a single line (of course, catching a fall on a 8ish millimeter line may be difficult to do....) so, the only caveat to leading on the single line is to not fall before protection. 'Clipping!' is a common call to indicate to the belayer that you are about to pull up rope to make a clip.">clipping the first protection.">leader falls. In roped technical climbing, one climber moves at a time, while the other belays. The belayer must be securely attached to the the rock by means of protection devices (cams, nuts, bolts, pitons), or tied to an immovable object like a boulder or sturdy tree. The attachments are called collectively the "anchor." An ideal anchor relies on at least three bombproof attachment points. (See also belay.) ">anchor in the rock installed individually as a protection device, or with other bolts or protection devices as an protection.">leader falls. In roped technical climbing, one climber moves at a time, while the other belays. The belayer must be securely attached to the the rock by means of protection devices (cams, nuts, bolts, pitons), or tied to an immovable object like a boulder or sturdy tree. The attachments are called collectively the "anchor." An ideal anchor relies on at least three bombproof attachment points. (See also belay.) ">anchor. The bolt is a metal shaft 1/4 inch, 3/8 inch or 5/16 inch in diameter (common sizes), driven into a hole drilled by the climber, and equipped with a hanger to attach a carabiner. Generally, no one installs 1/4 inch bolts anymore, and because most of them are more than 25 years old, they should not be used when found. Occasionally they can be pried out by hand, or break under body weight.">bolt off protection. 'Clipping!' is a common call to indicate to the belayer that you are about to pull up rope to make a clip.">clipping into protection points on the way up. ">lead climber, or taking in rope for a follower, while he/she climbs, and of preventing rope from being paid out if the climber falls. Belaying allows a climber to fall and live to try again. (2) n. - the place where a climber belays, and the protection.">leader falls. In roped technical climbing, one climber moves at a time, while the other belays. The belayer must be securely attached to the the rock by means of protection devices (cams, nuts, bolts, pitons), or tied to an immovable object like a boulder or sturdy tree. The attachments are called collectively the "anchor." An ideal anchor relies on at least three bombproof attachment points. (See also belay.) ">anchor is set up attaching the climber to the rock, normally at the beginning and end of each pitch. (See harness through which the rope is threaded for belaying. Its primary purpose is to create friction quickly in the event of a fall so the belayer can stop the rope, which stops the protection.">leader’s fall, simply by pulling against the device. The device creates a ‘hairpin’ turn in the rope at all times and allows the belayer to pay out or take in slack freely, and to stop or brake the rope in an instant. Common belay devices: ATC, GriGri, Sticht Plate">belay device. The place where a belayer sits, stands or hangs while belaying.">belay station.) Also, a session of belaying. ">belay. however, it sounds like you made it through safely, doing what you believed to be the best/safest option you had. good job.
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
May 27, 2005, 7:36 PM
Post #2 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
FYI In the Yosemite w/ a Down Bag thread there are certain words that are being underlined with a grey dotted line. Some are automatically changed to other words. Some have the original words at the end of the statement following a >. I don't know if it's occurring else where.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
May 27, 2005, 7:39 PM
Post #3 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Yep, and the term 'bivouac' is messed up too. Are these cute little definitions really necessary? I couldn't help but notice that you defined 'greasy' as slippery. Thanks, I was having trouble with that one.
|
|
|
|
|
ambler
May 27, 2005, 7:41 PM
Post #4 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 1690
|
Yup, it just happened to me several times on the MASS CLIMBERS thread, and I was unable to edit the new text out. Looks like it happened to several other folks as well. A new random-text feature?
|
|
|
|
|
ambler
May 27, 2005, 7:44 PM
Post #5 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 1690
|
This boat's going down.
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
May 27, 2005, 7:45 PM
Post #6 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
"hang" is odd, as well.
|
|
|
|
|
shnobe
May 27, 2005, 7:49 PM
Post #7 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2002
Posts: 85
|
OK good so it is not just me, that underline thing makes it very hard to read.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
May 27, 2005, 7:49 PM
Post #8 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
You defined 'move' as well. I'm going to have to give you a W-T-F for that one. Idea: Define all that internet lingo instead. WTF, YMMV, IMHO, FDA.
|
|
|
|
|
tchamber
May 27, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #9 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2004
Posts: 320
|
just get rid of that "feature" please
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
May 27, 2005, 7:54 PM
Post #10 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Terribly helpful isn't it? A climbing website that caters to people who don't climb.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
May 27, 2005, 8:14 PM
Post #11 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
It looks like it's trying to insert definitions badly. I checked out a few threads, and some posts were almost impossible to read. It really breaks the flow, and I don't think it's all that necessary. Maybe there could be a more obvious link to the rc.com dictionary instead? If management wants to insert definitions in the post, could they be provided at the bottom, or have a pop-up window if you scroll over the underlined sections? I don't think it's needed, but that would be less distracting. I haven't been logging in much of late, so I don't know when this started. I can't imagine logging in much until this is resolved, either. I don't want to log on just to be annoyed (at least by bugs rather than people).
|
|
|
|
|
drector
May 27, 2005, 8:21 PM
Post #12 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
It started today or yesterday. Some of the popup definitions work fine and the underline is the only thing that is new in the posts. In other posts, the definition is working incorrectly and the information is showing in the post instead of in a popup window. It certainly does make some threads impossible to read.
|
|
|
|
|
mother_sheep
May 27, 2005, 8:52 PM
Post #13 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Posts: 3984
|
This is a test. This is only a test. . . He grabbed a cam and stuck it into the deep, dark, crack. Fear was not an element as he could see her, um, er. . the jugs just 2 feet away, almost in reach.
|
|
|
|
|
mother_sheep
May 27, 2005, 8:53 PM
Post #14 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Posts: 3984
|
AHAHA! How lame. :lol: It's a bug alright. Nuts!
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
May 27, 2005, 8:55 PM
Post #15 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: AHAHA! How lame. :lol: It's a bug alright. Nuts! 'Nuts' does not seem to be defined. Nor 'righteous jugs,' err, I mean 'jugs.'
|
|
|
|
|
furbucket
May 27, 2005, 9:30 PM
Post #16 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2003
Posts: 50
|
In reply to: just get rid of that "feature" please I agree. At first I thought it was a cute thing that some savvy user figured out how to do... but now that I realize it is automatic, it is annoying. And not always accurate. For example, "hike" is not correct in most contexts. Not many people on this site have the nads to say they "hiked" something... and even if they did, it would be in the past tense and definition wouldn't work anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
May 27, 2005, 9:41 PM
Post #17 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
keee-rist. This is what happens when I take suggestions. There were a bunch of old definitions that someone suggested we import from the old climbing terms ''feature''. It wasn't until they were imported that I noticed a lot of them were idiotically obvious. As in, about 75%. I pruned out (by hand, which sucked) most of them. The point of the thing was to have definitions injected for obscure or cryptic terms, not to underline every 'the' and 'move' and 'open' in every post. Nota bene: one of the most-bitched-about things on this site is people asking (for the 10,000th time) what a drop knee is or what foo to wear with bar. I am unconvinced that the light gray underlines inserted into posts where a definition is encountered are going to spell the end of the world. Kindly un-wad your panties. The other gobblydegook being inserted was, obviously, a bug, which had to be fixed. It didn't show up in testing because there weren't any terms that overlapped. :-? I'm out of here for the weekend, in any case.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
May 28, 2005, 5:02 AM
Post #18 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
In reply to: I am unconvinced that the light gray underlines inserted into posts where a definition is encountered are going to spell the end of the world. Kindly un-wad your panties. The other gobblydegook being inserted was, obviously, a bug, which had to be fixed. It didn't show up in testing because there weren't any terms that overlapped. :-? I'm out of here for the weekend, in any case. Now that I can see how it's supposed to function, I have no beef whatsoever. I'll gladly check out some of the other problematic threads and catch what I missed earlier. Thanks for the debugging and have a good weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
May 28, 2005, 5:51 AM
Post #19 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: Terribly helpful isn't it? A climbing website that caters to people who don't climb. What, is this something new? 8-)
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
May 28, 2005, 6:05 AM
Post #20 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
wow...and i thought i was talkative before...now the site is making it even worse!!! :evil:
|
|
|
|
|
hex
May 28, 2005, 10:22 AM
Post #21 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 110
|
How about the ability for us to toggle it on/off in our profiles? I admit that it would be very helpful for those who don't know what many of the terms mean but for those of us who do I think it will get very annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 28, 2005, 3:51 PM
Post #22 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
How about posting up the list of defined words (so I can avoid using them should I choose)? There may be times when this auto-definition stuff is OK, but there may be times when it isn't. Or about about just including an html tag and maybe a global switch in a user's profile to enable or disable. Leave it up to the original author in other words, rather than assuming one size fits all? Cheers DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 28, 2005, 3:55 PM
Post #23 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
How about posting up the list of defined words (so I can avoid using them should I choose)? There may be times when this auto-definition stuff is OK, but there may be times when it isn't. Or how about about just including an html tag and maybe a global switch in a user's profile to enable or disable. Leave it up to the original author in other words, rather than assuming one size fits all? Cheers DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 28, 2005, 3:56 PM
Post #24 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Sorry, but only moderators can delete posts in this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
May 28, 2005, 4:23 PM
Post #25 of 26
(3038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
One obvious problem with this is that the definitions do not correspond with context. For example in the Closure of Oak Flat thread I used the word crater to define an actual crater in the surface of the earth. The definition tool says I mean something about falling and hitting the ground--which is totally incorrect. Curt
|
|
|
|
|
|