|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 2:40 AM
Post #1 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Ok not only is their a diversity to normal english from coast to coast but there is also a diversity to the slang in the rock climbing world. I thot since i have been out for a few years and have recently seen a new Term being used i would start a post and hope that all can contribute to it. Ill put in a few simple ones to get it rolling and none are stupid.
Crux = hardest move on a climb (my definition)
Dyno = Move where you let all your points of contact leave the rock to
grab a new hold.
Static = A move that is easily done by Dynoing it but you try not to lose contact with the rock to complete the same move. Most times harder then the short Dyno in my expericane alot of fun for boulder puzzles.
Now one that throws me i got an idea but need clerification.
Beta?
i take it as giving verbal advice to a climber weather needed or not?!
|
|
|
|
|
tradkelly
Feb 19, 2004, 2:48 AM
Post #2 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2003
Posts: 278
|
Tradgirl is a good place to start. There's a lot of info out there on the 'slang' - google it to find some more comprehensive sites for the lingo. :idea:
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 2:49 AM
Post #3 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Thanks been out of it so long and it tends to change so much just thot id ask for others input.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 19, 2004, 2:52 AM
Post #4 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Ok not only is their a diversity to normal english from coast to coast but there is also a diversity to the slang in the rock climbing world. I thot since i have been out for a few years and have recently seen a new Term being used i would start a post and hope that all can contribute to it. Ill put in a few simple ones to get it rolling and none are stupid. Crux = hardest move on a climb (my definition) Dyno = Move where you let all your points of contact leave the rock to grab a new hold. Static = A move that is easily done by Dynoing it but you try not to lose contact with the rock to complete the same move. Most times harder then the short Dyno in my expericane alot of fun for boulder puzzles. Now one that throws me i got an idea but need clerification. Beta? i take it as giving verbal advice to a climber weather needed or not?!
Beta = specific information about a climb or boulder problem. It could be anything like which holds to use, what the sequence of moves is, where to rest, etc.
BTW, your definitions of both "dyno" and "static" are both wrong.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 3:05 AM
Post #5 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Well i guess i was wrong then so i will not post anymore on terms. All tho that is not only what i was taught but shown. Maybe im right just not expressing it properly i have no idea sorry.
EDIT:Ok from the above posted link here are the two glossory's from the site.
http://home.tiscalinet.de/ockier/climbing_dict.html
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Trails/8700/glossary.html
However Static does not show up in either, and Dyno is not really expressed in it so i feel that since one says Dyno is a move done in a Dynamic way that my definition is pretty good for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 3:15 AM
Post #7 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Well my only good example i can give for a Dyno is like in Cliff Hanger when Stallon lunges up to the next hold. Dynamic to me i thot wow big move oh and no points of contact. So i always have desided any move that is extreamly like to cause you to fall if you miss is dynamic. or a dyno for short.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 19, 2004, 3:23 AM
Post #8 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Well my only good example i can give for a Dyno is like in Cliff Hanger when Stallon lunges up to the next hold.
The movie "Cliff Hanger" may not be your best reference source for accurate climbing information.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
tnjim
Feb 19, 2004, 4:21 AM
Post #9 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 63
|
In reply to: BTW, your definitions of both "dyno" and "static" are both wrong.
I thought they were pretty accurate curt....if not maybe you should enlighten us with your definitions.
|
|
|
|
|
tnjim
Feb 19, 2004, 4:21 AM
Post #10 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 63
|
Curt Wrote
In reply to: BTW, your definitions of both "dyno" and "static" are both wrong.
I thought they were pretty accurate curt....if not maybe you should enlighten us with your definitions.
|
|
|
|
|
jv
Feb 19, 2004, 5:53 AM
Post #11 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 363
|
In reply to: Curt Wrote In reply to: BTW, your definitions of both "dyno" and "static" are both wrong. I thought they were pretty accurate curt....if not maybe you should enlighten us with your definitions.
Here's the problem: In reply to: Dyno = Move where you let all your points of contact leave the rock to grab a new hold.
So it's not a dyno if only three limbs lose contact, or two? A deadpoint is technically a dyno, and you can do that with only one hand free and three points of contact. Dyno: a move where the climber uses momentum to close the distance between him and the next hold.
In reply to: Static = A move that is easily done by Dynoing it but you try not to lose contact with the rock to complete the same move. Most times harder then the short Dyno in my expericane alot of fun for boulder puzzles.
Problem: So static moves can all be done more easily if done dynamically? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In other words, not the defining quality. Static: moving toward the next hold without using momentum or dynamic movement.
JV
|
|
|
|
|
keazah
Feb 19, 2004, 6:37 AM
Post #12 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 132
|
In reply to: In reply to: Well my only good example i can give for a Dyno is like in Cliff Hanger when Stallon lunges up to the next hold. The movie "Cliff Hanger" may not be your best reference source for accurate climbing information. Curt
Completely in favor!! That movie is not acceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
climbon_stone
Feb 19, 2004, 6:57 AM
Post #13 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2004
Posts: 43
|
Dyno = Dynamic move
look at the word, it defines itself
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 12:06 PM
Post #15 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Why is it when someone uses an example he figures most everyone has seen it some how is not a good example. I think that it was a perfect example for my statement on a dynamic move. Just because its in a movie does not make it any less of a climbing move. Heck i have practice those kinds of moves in a gym while bouldering. Does that make me any less of a climber for trying new things? no i dont think so. I was only using it as an example.
Remember there is no expert to rock climbing in my opinion cause if you were you would not be interested in it any longer as it would no longer be a challenge. That is my thots. I have not said anyone was wrong and only made some statements out of my knowledge yet somehow you seem to think my ideas are totally wrong when infact if anything they are incomplete.
|
|
|
|
|
corpse
Feb 19, 2004, 12:55 PM
Post #16 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 822
|
taalon - you are way wrong in your assumption.. There are EXPERTS around here that you should listen too. And these experts continue to climb because they enjoy it. There's not much reason to discusss what each climbing term means, thats what the terms database is for. If someone doesn't agree with the term, then chances are they are being way too critical and can't truly have fun in climbing anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Feb 19, 2004, 2:13 PM
Post #17 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
RC.com has a great climbing dictionary: :wink:
(Teddy posted the link above)
to-wit:
Crux - n. the most crucial., difficult part of the climb.
(Crux is an interesting word - related to "cross" & once you're past it you've crossed the most difficult territory. Defining it as "crucial" is a bit circular but draws the connection . . . )
Dyno - n. abbreviation for "dynamic movement", a move that requires some use of momentum. (antonym: static movement) 2. (vb.) to perform a dyno.
No def. for static given (but see Dyno)
Beta - n. information about a route.
The dictionary was how I first happened upon RC.com - it's definitely worth a read.
enjoy
leinosaur
|
|
|
|
|
coylec
Feb 19, 2004, 2:19 PM
Post #18 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024
|
As everyone jumps on-board, they forget there is a dictionary on the site. Does no one read? Are these definitions not good enough? Do we need a climbers OED?
I use terms that I have COMPLETELY made up. When other people ask, I tell them I made it up, but they are free to use it in anyway they want. As long as everyone is on the same page, its cool if they aren't on the same sentence. As long as you don't think "take" means "take me off belay," I think we'll be okay.
BTW, if anyone has heard the term "coyling" or "coiling" a cigarette (to extinguish prematurely), that's my most popular word (when I smoked, I'd always put out cigarettes before I got near the filter).
coylec
|
|
|
|
|
oldsalt
Feb 19, 2004, 2:45 PM
Post #19 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 19, 2004
Posts: 919
|
"Coyling" is new to me. It would not be a flattering use of your name if it meant to "bogart" or "mooch". Do you?
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 19, 2004, 3:58 PM
Post #20 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Curt Wrote In reply to: BTW, your definitions of both "dyno" and "static" are both wrong. I thought they were pretty accurate curt....if not maybe you should enlighten us with your definitions.
jv already covered this pretty well and the dictionary definitions are fine too. My specific problem of the definition of "dyno" was the concept of coming entirely off the rock. That only occurs in one specific type of dynamic move. There are actually several types of dynamic climbing maneuvers--and only one of them involves total separation of the climber with the rock.
Dead point - using upward body momentum to grab a hold at the top of your motion. In many deadpoint situations both feet and one hand will stay on the rock. It is still a dynamic move though, because it is not done statically. Dynamic layback - In this situation one hand (on a lieback hold) and at least one foot will stay on the rock. There are other types of dynos where at least one hand will stay on the rock, even if both feet come off. A Dyno where all contact is lost with the rock is most accurately called a free aerial move. This term was coined by John Gill over 30 years ago to describe the maneuver.
Of course, the other problem with the original definitions was in defining a static move as one that is harder than a dynamic move. As has been noted later, sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jv
Feb 19, 2004, 4:38 PM
Post #21 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 363
|
In reply to: Well my only good example i can give for a Dyno is like in Cliff Hanger when Stallon lunges up to the next hold. Dynamic to me i thot wow big move oh and no points of contact. So i always have desided any move that is extreamly like to cause you to fall if you miss is dynamic. or a dyno for short.
While that is an example of a dyno or dynamic move, it is not a definition. You understand that example does not equal definition, right?
Also, the relative probability of falling has nothing to do with the definition of dyno. It is not a defining quality. As you said before, it may be easier to make a move dynamically than statically. So the climber may be less likely to fall in that situation.
JV
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 19, 2004, 8:18 PM
Post #22 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Remember there is no expert to rock climbing in my opinion cause if you were you would not be interested in it any longer as it would no longer be a challenge. That is my thots.
The validity of your "thots," is about on par with that of your spelling and grammar.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
sticky_fingers
Feb 19, 2004, 8:27 PM
Post #23 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: Beta? i take it as giving verbal advice to a climber weather needed or not?!
I need weather
I like good weather....so gimme beta
|
|
|
|
|
climbersoze
Feb 19, 2004, 9:25 PM
Post #24 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2003
Posts: 1142
|
In reply to: I thot since i have been out for a few years
thot - hvaing formerlated in the mind v. thought, (thôt)
Srory... ahd to be the dcikhade
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Feb 19, 2004, 10:41 PM
Post #25 of 53
(8484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
this seems to be a nice time to have a symantical discussion. If you want to get technical, words don't have meaning at all. They have usage. What I mean by that is the word, "word" for example, can either mean "the smallest combination of letters used to communicate a thought", it may mean "a verbal expression uttered in communication" or, if you're in compton, it usually means "yes". Or how about his one, "hooey". In English, it has come to mean, "darn!" But, in Russian, it means "penis." Hmmm... The reason communication is possible between people is because we have an agreement on what certain terms and phrases mean. When I look at all the work I have to do this afternoon and say, "this sucks!" people will think that I don't enjoy it. No body is really going to think I am referring to it's power to create a vaccume. So, if someone disagrees on what "Dyno" means, then they're "outside the cool circle" and they don't "use" the word the same way. Words on their own have no intristic meaning. Spelling, on the other hand, is a little more rigid. Mine "sucks" (as in, "it's not very good", not "it creates a strong vaccume"). :wink: You know what a particular word means judging by the context in which it's used. Um, I think it's funny that people are so dogmatic on things like word usage. The reason we have trouble understanding Old English is because it's become obsolete. Words have a funny way of doing that. They'll even change their "meaning" so much that they're used in the exact opposite way of what they started out meaning. Take, for example, "sick". This word used to refer to something that wasn't good at all. But just think of how it's used commonly today. "Dude, that was a 'sick' dyno!" What is meant by that? The "dyno" was impressive. Words don't have specific "meanings" attached to them. Their meaning is determined by their usage. Doesn't mean that I disagree with the way words have been defined here, just means that it should be a guidline, not an absolute law. If you want to get more complex, read up on "uses loquindi" (sp?)
word.
|
|
|
|
|
scottcody
Feb 19, 2004, 10:59 PM
Post #26 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2003
Posts: 577
|
Choss...
re-read this thread for refrence
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 19, 2004, 11:25 PM
Post #27 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: The reason communication is possible between people is because we have an agreement on what certain terms and phrases mean. ... So, if someone disagrees on what "Dyno" means, then they're "outside the cool circle" and they don't "use" the word the same way. Words on their own have no intristic meaning. ...You know what a particular word means judging by the context in which it's used.
The problem is that you don't always know what a word means by its context, and so we have to agree on common meanings. This is especially true for technical jargon, including climbing jargon. "Dyno" is short for "dynamic move," which, in climbing, means a move that uses momentum to reach a hold. This can be anything from a deadpoint to an all-points dislocate dyno. If you think that you can always tell the differnce from context, then consider the following hypothetical conversation:
Climber A: Chossforfun is a great 5.11. You can't do the crux move statically, you need to dyno [meaning you have to deadpoint it].
Climber B: Yeah, it looks great, but I suck at dynos [thinking an all-out lunge]. I better find another route.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 19, 2004, 11:36 PM
Post #28 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Well this is my last post on this site cause there are so many english majors here im tired of them tearing me and others down for our spelling. And tring to impress me and others with their blatant harasment of us that do not spell so well...
But out of all the posts on this thread and all the posted links there is one term that is missing.
A term that maybe the climbers as a whole can help to determine the meaning of so RC can add it to their dicitonary.
Static...... What is a Static move there is no defenition for it on any of the links posted that i could find. But i'm a subpar intelectual person and thus can not intelegently make a statement like that or add my bit of attempt at a definition for a intelegent discussion. Because if i try all i get is harased by greater intelectual people.
Personally all the most well known climbers in the world i have met have more tact and understanding to listen and not nit pick. But it seems that the climbing community has turned into the who is better then who. Rather then ok lets talk this out and make some meaningful comments rather then picking on others to make ourselfs look better.
Now i do not want to believe this so i will only assume it is a select few who do this for whatever reason. So this will be my last post on the boards as it is not worth my time to argue and have to restate everytime i post that i am not a good speller. And even when i say that someone still has to point it out.
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Feb 19, 2004, 11:44 PM
Post #29 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
RIP Taalon.
Was a good guy with good intentions who thought it a good idea to get up to date on climbing slang. Was sprayed with beta in a type-by-rc.comming for being honest about not knowing everything.... may he post freely at the pearly forum gates, because he wont be around here long enough to actually learn anything.
- n -
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2004, 12:22 AM
Post #30 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Well this is my last post on this site cause there are so many english majors here im tired of them tearing me and others down for our spelling. And tring to impress me and others with their blatant harasment of us that do not spell so well...
harassment
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
pipsqueekspire
Feb 20, 2004, 1:17 AM
Post #31 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2003
Posts: 222
|
Whew... good thread gone lame...
But now that I'm here!!!??? It can be revived....
I have a totally new word for you all. I am proposing that we start using this word to define a dynamic move that requires both feet and both hands to lose contact with the rock. Its a DANO! Its a nice tribute to the man soloing The Line at Lovers Leap in under 5 minutes. He does a crazy full on (and unrequired) DANO on this classic line. (Its on video)
(My apologies if its not The Line but I know its on Lovers Leap in South Tahoe.)
Now we have two word to discribe a quick climbing movement
Dyno- The act of moving in a quick powerful stroke to obtain the next hold. (This includes dead points and roof type moves that cut ones feet loose.)
Dano- The act of moving in a quick powerful stroke to obtain the next hold where all contact with the rock is severed for an instant.
(All Danos are Dynos but not all Dynos are Danos!)
This is my humble suggestion... Dan Osmon had a powerful impact on the climbing world and why not give him a word??
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Feb 20, 2004, 7:30 AM
Post #32 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
In reply to: In reply to: The reason communication is possible between people is because we have an agreement on what certain terms and phrases mean. ... So, if someone disagrees on what "Dyno" means, then they're "outside the cool circle" and they don't "use" the word the same way. Words on their own have no intristic meaning. ...You know what a particular word means judging by the context in which it's used. The problem is that you don't always know what a word means by its context, and so we have to agree on common meanings. This is especially true for technical jargon, including climbing jargon. "Dyno" is short for "dynamic move," which, in climbing, means a move that uses momentum to reach a hold. This can be anything from a deadpoint to an all-points dislocate dyno. If you think that you can always tell the differnce from context, then consider the following hypothetical conversation: Climber A: Chossforfun is a great 5.11. You can't do the crux move statically, you need to dyno [meaning you have to deadpoint it]. Climber B: Yeah, it looks great, but I suck at dynos [thinking an all-out lunge]. I better find another route. -Jay
JT: point taken. But the point of my post is that you need to have an understanding and pre-agreement of how words are used in order for meaningful conversation to take place. In the above hypothetical conversation, meaningful conversation didn't take place. The reason is because two people are using the same word in 2 different ways. This is called "equivocation." That's a problem when people are trying to communicate. And you're right, you don't always know what a word means by it's context. That's when you need to ask the person what they mean. But yes, I agree with you. Language is more complex than we usually realize. A common meaning must be decided on in order for people to communicate. Imagine if every time I said the words "rock climbing" I really meant "in-line skating"? These fourms would be very, VERY confusing for both of us.
|
|
|
|
|
bucephalus
Feb 20, 2004, 9:41 AM
Post #33 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2004
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: this seems to be a nice time to have a symantical discussion.
you mean "semantic"?
ahahahahaha. sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
sticky_fingers
Feb 20, 2004, 2:45 PM
Post #34 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Shall we lower him down with a pulley? :)
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 20, 2004, 4:34 PM
Post #35 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Well this is my last post on this site cause there are so many english majors here im tired of them tearing me and others down for our spelling. And tring to impress me and others with their blatant harasment of us that do not spell so well...
So, you come here to RC.com--and post definitions that are totally wrong (without even looking in the site dictionary) and then you feel that you are a victim for being corrected?
Nobody here, myself included, is picking on you for being new or for not knowing the answers to the questions you are curious about. However, people will make fun of those who presume to know what they are talking about, when in reality they don't have a clue.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
taalon
Feb 20, 2004, 8:18 PM
Post #36 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Now you have shown your true ignorance i stated to add to or change as needed and i did not deside to stop based off the Dyno and Static statement. I stopped do to the lack of actual intelectual posting. Re read the whole post and many of the others here. We have ENGLISH majors that all they want to do is complain about some of our spelling mistakes. Which is fine to hear once but to hear time after time by many people is just crap. So yes i stopped posting i even admited when i was wrong or incomplete in my defenitions thus you did not fully read the whole post. Thus showing that you to me in my eyes are another what i classify as a Flamer, one who loves to be mean to others and not help out in any constructive way.
(not back just had to make one last statement)
|
|
|
|
|
pipsqueekspire
Feb 20, 2004, 8:23 PM
Post #37 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2003
Posts: 222
|
Does anyone like my DANO idea?
|
|
|
|
|
oldsalt
Feb 20, 2004, 8:59 PM
Post #38 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 19, 2004
Posts: 919
|
I would offer a definition for "static":
Any move where the climber maintains 3 points of contact and without the use of momentum.
|
|
|
|
|
superdiamonddave
Feb 20, 2004, 9:09 PM
Post #39 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2002
Posts: 443
|
I just love our crazy jargon.
Here's one that is not in the climbing terms forum.
Power glide: Pretty much the same thing as the Deadpoint's description.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2004, 9:40 PM
Post #40 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Now you have shown your true ignorance i stated to add to or change as needed and i did not deside to stop based off the Dyno and Static statement. I stopped do to the lack of actual intelectual posting. Re read the whole post and many of the others here. We have ENGLISH majors that all they want to do is complain about some of our spelling mistakes. Which is fine to hear once but to hear time after time by many people is just crap. So yes i stopped posting i even admited when i was wrong or incomplete in my defenitions thus you did not fully read the whole post. Thus showing that you to me in my eyes are another what i classify as a Flamer, one who loves to be mean to others and not help out in any constructive way. (not back just had to make one last statement)
Is whiner in the glossary?
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
cryder
Feb 20, 2004, 10:06 PM
Post #41 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
In reply to: Shall we lower him down with a pulley? :)
No need for pulleys. I do believe, sir, that Mr.Taalon has already decked on the forum. We are merely here to sort out the details of his early demise... or should I say dimize?
- n -
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 20, 2004, 11:02 PM
Post #42 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: ....Thus showing that you to me in my eyes are another what i classify as a Flamer, one who loves to be mean to others and not help out in any constructive way.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Feb 21, 2004, 8:37 PM
Post #43 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: We have ENGLISH majors that all they want to do is complain about some of our spelling mistakes.
JOURNALISM, you jackhole, not ENGRISH!
heheh
Oh, and FWIW, Jay is a biostatistician and nutritionist, and Curt is a broker who buys and sells semiconductors. Geeks, sure, but of the bonafide graphing-calculator-carrying type! 8)
So, you come here asking for advice, because you are obviously lacking in knowledge (nothing too bad, but still), and you cry when you get regulated? :cry: Pity. God forbid anybody try to correct you if you do something stupid at the crags...
|
|
|
|
|
mingleefu
Feb 21, 2004, 10:37 PM
Post #44 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 466
|
In reply to: you mean "semantic"?
I think RC.com is pretty anti-semantic.
That said...
Knowing that there are differences, isn't it relatively common to qualify words that are commonly misused and misunderstood? If the move involves jumping upwards and removing all appendages from the rock, I usually say it's a "full on dyno". If it is on a roped route, where full on dynos are rare, I'll say "dynamic move" if the climber does not entirely detatch. If the group is talking about a bouldering move that makes it a "Dyno problem".. I'm pretty sure it is understood to be a full-on dyno.
Taalon- Stick around. Don't get bummed out by Idiots because, well, they're Idiots.
In reply to: Does anyone like my DANO idea?
no.
|
|
|
|
|
johnnord
Feb 22, 2004, 1:56 AM
Post #45 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2003
Posts: 162
|
Re: DANO. Wasn't that Jack Lord's partner on Hawaii 5-0? Oops! I guess that really dates me.
Is there any chance this is a troll?
|
|
|
|
|
vertical-rockrat
Deleted
Feb 22, 2004, 9:16 PM
Post #46 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: In reply to: ....Thus showing that you to me in my eyes are another what i classify as a Flamer, one who loves to be mean to others and not help out in any constructive way. Well, don't let the digital door hit you in the ass on your way out jackass. Curt
Snippit from TOS "Constructive criticism is welcome; destructive attacks on others, particularly the volunteer staff members of the site, are extremely unwelcome. "
Holy cow am i the only one that reads the TOS on forums when i chose to post on them? Cause curt you seem to have actually violated it when you made your last post. But i am not and Admin here however i do have to say your manner sure was not very nice.
Now to add to the post i think that the Dnyo explanation at the beginning was a good start but needed tweaked was all. There are many diffrent climbers and many diffrent ways to define something. I just think his earlier post was missing one important thing mentioned by others. Momentum. However instead of trying to complete his thoughts you had to tear him down. That sure sucks i think.
Anyways i think we whould all remember the Golden Rule even when we post, it will make for a much better place for all.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 22, 2004, 11:41 PM
Post #47 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Holy cow am i the only one that reads the TOS on forums when i chose to post on them? Cause curt you seem to have actually violated it when you made your last post. But i am not and Admin here however i do have to say your manner sure was not very nice......Anyways i think we whould all remember the Golden Rule even when we post, it will make for a much better place for all.
It looks to me like you have only chosen to read this thread selectively. I first only said to taalon that his definitions were wrong--because they were. Later, after a few other people added thoughts, I posted my definitions of dyno and static climbing. Only after this nitwit continued to whine, complain, argue and then threaten to leave the site--did I call him out for being the know-nothing Gumby that he obviously is.
If you want the answer to a question, there are people here at RC.com that can most likely provide you with the correct answer. There is nothing wrong with asking any kind of question here. However, if you start posting things that are wrong and it is obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about--expect (properly) to be called a know-nothing Gumby.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
fireftr
Feb 23, 2004, 12:11 AM
Post #48 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2003
Posts: 5
|
If something is wrong fix it. But there is no need to be an ass about it, which is most definitely what you were curt. Fix the problem don't be an ass.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 23, 2004, 12:18 AM
Post #49 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: If something is wrong fix it. But there is no need to be an ass about it, which is most definitely what you were curt. Fix the problem don't be an ass.
Sorry, but I'm not a professional babysitter. Oh, and stfu, n00b. :lol:
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jv
Feb 23, 2004, 1:07 AM
Post #50 of 53
(7041 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 363
|
In reply to: Well this is my last post on this site cause there are so many english majors here im tired of them tearing me and others down for our spelling. And tring to impress me and others with their blatant harasment of us that do not spell so well... But out of all the posts on this thread and all the posted links there is one term that is missing. A term that maybe the climbers as a whole can help to determine the meaning of so RC can add it to their dicitonary. Static...... What is a Static move there is no defenition for it on any of the links posted that i could find. But i'm a subpar intelectual person and thus can not intelegently make a statement like that or add my bit of attempt at a definition for a intelegent discussion. Because if i try all i get is harased by greater intelectual people.
I didn't harrass you. I just pointed out some problems with your definitions. It was an attempt to make them better. I thought that's what you were trying to do.
In reply to: Personally all the most well known climbers in the world i have met have more tact and understanding to listen and not nit pick. But it seems that the climbing community has turned into the who is better then who. Rather then ok lets talk this out and make some meaningful comments rather then picking on others to make ourselfs look better.
My comments were not meaningful? Now who is insulting who? You only pay attention to the mean people.
JV
|
|
|
|
|
fireftr
Feb 23, 2004, 5:02 AM
Post #51 of 53
(5437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2003
Posts: 5
|
Now Curt, this is what I was talking about. Your being an ass again.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Feb 23, 2004, 5:21 AM
Post #52 of 53
(5437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Now Curt, this is what I was talking about. Your being an ass again.
I've never claimed that I was not an ass, OK? So take my posts for what they are worth. Oh, and BTW, its "you're" to be grammatically correct.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
crazy_aussi
Feb 29, 2004, 9:41 AM
Post #53 of 53
(5437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 1
|
Lol. Guys, you really are the greatest. First, I LOVE the Dano idea sweetym I thik it's wonderful. Would possibly solve a lot of problems.
Just out of interest, did any of you guys do IB? Philsophy? I thin I may be able to subit a lot of what you've all written in my essays to make points. I find it a bit worrying that you're all so stuck on the subject, it's been continuing for quite a while. Personally, I think it's your responsibilty as a climber to communicate what you mean to someone else in such a way that they can explain it back to you in their own words and you agree that's what you meant. That is, if you want to be pedantic. Anyway, everything is personal opinion. We all get taught different things, in different countries by different teachers. I'm not going to try and add any light on the defenition at hand, but may you find peace when you're happy you've found the answer
Luv Tav
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
