Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Docs rant thread

Onsight

10-Jul-2006
8:36:35 PM

On 10/07/2006 kieranl wrote:

>So promote it; what's stopping you?

Jacqui's censorship?

simey

10-Jul-2006
9:00:56 PM

Have enjoyed reading your rant Doc.

Although I've always supported bumbly climbers (being one myself), I can't understand Jacquie's emphasis of appealing to non-climbers.

kieranl

10-Jul-2006
10:29:04 PM

On 10/07/2006 simey wrote:
>Although I've always supported bumbly climbers (being one myself), I can't
>understand Jacquie's emphasis of appealing to non-climbers.
>
>
I think it's called getting community support. The thing is that it's not the old Burnley (and thank god for that - I feared for my rotator cuffs each time I worked it) and it is not going to be the same.
It is not a project developed in the shadows so it has a much wider audience and rightly so. I won't pontificate too much because it's a facility that I will rarely use and so am just an interested bystander but I'm a bit shocked at the level of abuse being directed at Jacqui over this and other issues. Some of it is outright sexism (as in characterising her as a "gym bunny") or, in this thread, it's tall poppy time.
Also apparently, there's a censored thread that's also down to her. Must be this one.

I've been away in west australia for five weeks and I've come back to find this topic basically devoted to rubbishing Jacqui. Leave off! She's done what most of us thought was the impossible - officially replace a climbing facility at Burnley - and you guys just want to carp and bitch and drag her down!
What a pack of losers we are if this if what we have to offer in thanks.


timmy

10-Jul-2006
10:31:45 PM

So this is not about old Burnley vs. new Burnley, corporate sponsors, influx of new people to the "sport", or whatever the hell you were moaning about.

It was about Jacqui's censorship... righty-o...

kieranl

10-Jul-2006
11:04:03 PM

It's also particularly invidious that someone hides behind internet anonymity while criticising an individual. And also claiming to speak for many others with not the slightest shred of evidence provided for that claim (no-one on the internet would lie would they?).
Disgraceful.

gfdonc

10-Jul-2006
11:42:22 PM

On 10/07/2006 nmonteith wrote:
Places
>like Arapiles, Werribie, Camels, Summer Day and Spurt are really trashed
>compared to when i started
>climbing there (10 years ago). I shudder to think what they will look
>like in 50 years time.

Actually Neil I disagree. I reckon both Arapiles and Werribee are in *better* shape than when I started climbing there (more than 20 years ago). In both cases, conservation initiatives by both Parks Vic and the climbing movement in general have resulted in improvement. Most of the change is below the cliffs, not on them.


nmonteith

11-Jul-2006
8:32:25 AM

On 10/07/2006 gfdonc wrote:
>Actually Neil I disagree. I reckon both Arapiles and Werribee are in
>*better* shape than when I started climbing there (more than 20 years ago).

But probably only due to construstion of large scale fences & platforms, cemeneted stone-steps, 'official'
walking tracks and wholesale retrobolting of rap anchors. The actual routes themselves is where the
damage lies (chalk laden slimey holds and beaten out trad placements). Restorative conservation work
by clubs and Parks Vic is greatly needed and appreciated - but wouldn't need to be done if there was less
climbers trashing the place! Thats my 2c anyway. This topic is getting all too personal for me....

Stuey

11-Jul-2006
8:50:46 AM

On 10/07/2006 nmonteith wrote:
>On 10/07/2006 chalkischeap wrote:
>>There is so much rock out there - and no one is climbing it.
>
>I disagree Mike. Every bit of rock can be climbed - but it doesn't need
>to have climbers on it 24/7.

Too right - There is no need for more climbers. One of the best things for me about moving to Oz from the UK is the lack of crowds at the crags. And after having to climb on plastic alot in London I've seen what can happen to your favourite gym once the place gets popular and it ain't pretty!

drdeviousii

11-Jul-2006
9:09:14 AM

Wow the fires been burning...

This thread was never about any personal attacks on anyone. It was about unreasonable censorship & the perceived preferential treatment given to but 1 of the many advertisers. Too bad if you couldn't see that. Word.

11-Jul-2006
9:19:56 AM

Anyone wanna climb on taipan this weekend ? I got my eye on father O and some other gems. but will belay on anything...

Onsight

11-Jul-2006
9:57:34 AM

On 11/07/2006 drdeviousii wrote:
>This thread was never about any personal attacks on anyone. It was about
>unreasonable censorship & the perceived preferential treatment given to
>but 1 of the many advertisers. Too bad if you couldn't see that. Word.

Word!

I'm sorry to see you initial post was deleted. I think you were perfectly entitled to ask the questions. The amount and type of censorship has been getting ridiculous of late and this was just another example.


timmy

11-Jul-2006
10:35:47 AM

Let's get this thread locked and deleted.

If you want to discuss censorship, post it on the old censorship thread. This is no longer, or ever was, about censorship. It is now a personal attack over a censorhip issue.

If you want to do a bit of character assassination, go right ahead, just keep it out of the public arena that is Chockstone and aim it directly, not behind anonymous user names. No-one is benifiting from this, and most likely driving people away. Let's stop the bitching and focus on more important issues.

drdeviousii

11-Jul-2006
11:03:12 AM

On 11/07/2006 timmy wrote:
>Let's get this thread locked and deleted.

3rd time lucky? ********659 views so far******** ;-)

>
>If you want to discuss censorship, post it on the old censorship thread.
>This is no longer, or ever was, about censorship. It is now a personal
>attack over a censorhip issue.

We didn't want to talk about censorship but it was forced upon us. We wanted to talk about problems
associated with promoting the wall to non climbers.

> Let's stop the bitching and focus on more important
>issues.

Like over crowded climbing areas and how profit goes before the enviroment.


timmy

11-Jul-2006
11:34:03 AM

>3rd time lucky? ********659 views so far******** ;-)

You've proven my point on this. A scrag fight will always attract far more people than a formal debate.

>We didn't want to talk about censorship but it was forced upon us. We
>wanted to talk about problems
>associated with promoting the wall to non climbers.

Censorship is always forced on somebody, sometimes rightly so, sometimes not. When it's forced upon you unjustly, take the issue up with the sensor and discuss it constructively. So let's keep the to the issue of attracting more people, and keep the undertones out of it.

>Like over crowded climbing areas and how profit goes before the enviroment.

I hear a lot of bitching about overcrowding, environmental damage etc., but are you blaming Burnley as the root cause of it all?

What do you propose we do with Burnley? Tear it down again? Pick it up and move it out of the public's eye? Tear down anything that's too easy for you so only people who crank harder than you can climb there?

How do we stop/slow down the impact? Can we do things differently? How do we educate people on what our concerns are, and how they can contibute as well. These are the questions that we should be asking and working through on this thread.

drdeviousii

11-Jul-2006
12:01:40 PM

>So let's keep the to the issue of attracting
>more people, and keep the undertones out of it.

agreed

>I hear a lot of bitching about overcrowding, environmental damage etc.,
>but are you blaming Burnley as the root cause of it all?

no. burnley is brand new. the impact will be felt later. we have the opportunity to direct the future path
of climbing through projects such as burnley.

>What do you propose we do with Burnley? Tear it down again? Pick it up
>and move it out of the public's eye? Tear down anything that's too easy
>for you so only people who crank harder than you can climb there?

no. nothing so radical has been proposed. we meerly wish that the "recruiting drive" mentality of the
management of burnley needs to be toned down. we don't "need" a massive influx of new climbers to
our sport. there is enough already emerging from schools, uni clubs and commercial gyms. our gyms
are crowded and our campsites are full. we have nothing against beginner climbers or easy routes. not
everyone in melbourne needs to discover what we all love. we are afraid that with more climbers the
whole attraction of the activity we all enjoy will evaporate due to additional strain on resources [plastic
and real]. we also don't agree with sending people off to buy new gear from the "sponsors". if people
really had beginners at heart we would be collecting old shoes and leaving a bin of them at the wall for
all to use.

we all put our own energy, holds and time into this project. call us elitist if you will. what we say here is
the voice of at least three local climbers who feel very strongly about this subject.

Bob Saki

11-Jul-2006
12:06:07 PM

and while were about you may have heard of such places as Mt Bogong, Mt feathertop and the Main Range.

These are ALL fictional places much like Narnia.

I repeat do not waste time even looking for these places.
also it does not snow in Australia!

Ronny

11-Jul-2006
12:06:35 PM

On 10/07/2006 drdeviousii wrote:
>
>since when was Burnley designed to be a way to introduce newbies to climbing?
> Is the new Burnley designed to intent to provide a replacement training
>venue, or is it an advertising tool for certain retailers?
>
>the old Burnely was designed as a serious training venue for climbers
>- I very much doubt Chris Shepherd's vision was for a facility to line
>retail sponsors pockets!!

Timmy can you identify the personal attack in this for me? Where does it even mention a person other than Chris Shepherd?

The only reason that anyone thinks that this thread contains personal attack is if they are unable to distinguish between the person and the project the person is involved in. Its perfectly acceptable for someone to comment on something and expect that it won't be shouted down as a personal insult. Are we to have a situation where as soon as someone does something, the way in which it was done is immune from criticism?

No one, devious included I would assume, thinks that Jacquie has done anything other than an excellent effort at getting Burnley together. There's also no doubt that it was done truely altruistically. But it is still fine for someone to say that they don't like the way it is being run, or would prefer it had a differnt focus. Devious did this a bit provocatively, but that's what he did.


nmonteith

11-Jul-2006
12:11:11 PM

On 10/07/2006 timmy wrote:
>What the f*uck?? Selfish pricks...
>
>If you don't want to share a crag, you're a selfish idiot...
>
>Show a little f*cking gratitude for the fact that it's free, it's
>easy to get to, and it caters for everyone.
>
>-Just shut the f*ck up and use it for what it is, a free facility..

This seems to be a much more personal attack in my opinion! (mods please consider!)


nmonteith

11-Jul-2006
12:21:40 PM

[back on topic]

I kind of agree with Devo (his ideas mayeb but not his style!). I've can't actually think of a public
accessible news article about climbing and climbers that didn't make us sound like arenaline soaked
idiots! Personally i prefer to see climbers come from some sort of outdoor sports backgroudn (ie
bushwalking, camping ect). It gives people a feel for the value we shoudl be placing on our climbing
areas. I've never been a fan of gyms being the feeding groudn for the next generation. That probably my
old school roots though! Please ignore me! (you'll probably see me at nati pub with simey real soon)

Duncan

11-Jul-2006
12:28:27 PM

On 11/07/2006 Ronny wrote:
>The only reason that anyone thinks that this thread contains personal
>attack is if they are unable to distinguish between the person and the
>project the person is involved in. Its perfectly acceptable for someone
>to comment on something and expect that it won't be shouted down as a personal
>insult. Are we to have a situation where as soon as someone does something,
>the way in which it was done is immune from criticism?
>
>No one, devious included I would assume, thinks that Jacquie has done
>anything other than an excellent effort at getting Burnley together. There's
>also no doubt that it was done truely altruistically. But it is still
>fine for someone to say that they don't like the way it is being run, or
>would prefer it had a differnt focus. Devious did this a bit provocatively,
>but that's what he did.
>

Well said. I think Timmy needs to take a deep breath and read back over all the posts in this thread before his.

There are 86 messages in this topic.