Reading the thread in Accidents and Injuries about the tragic death of Mr. Forrester, I had a thought:
Would it be appropriate, in cases where a member of RC.com dies, to put a little blurb on their profile:
"RC.com member JohnSmith died tragically on Jan 1st, 2006, while climbing at Road Cut Cliffs. He leaves behind a wife and two children. He was loved by friends and family, as well as climbing partners. The climbing community has noted his passing here, and all of us at RC.com mourn his loss."
Or something like that? (BTW, the "noted his passing here" part would be a link to a thread, if there is one.)
I don't know how well this would be viewed by the users or family, so I wanted to run it past y'all. We also don't want to deal with accusations of "Profile editing Nazi Mods!" or other such BS. This is a chance for the users to speak up and decide an issue.
Vote, and let your voice be heard.
(This post was edited by reno on Dec 4, 2006, 6:14 PM)
IMHO, this would be a great feature. i believe it was also discussed at some time on the old rc.com (or i just wanted to suggest it and never got around to do it).
anyway, another nice thing would be that upon a confirmed death of a rc.coms user, their profile would be locked and thus wouldnt be deleted for lack of use.
I agree. If the family wants something up there, they can talk to the owners/mods and have that done.
I think it would be a nice idea, but the family's perspective is indeed important. I say rather than wait for them to contact you, how bout - if you have a way to reach them - you contact them. I think it's a nice gesture, and if nothing else, it is a chance to offer personal condolences on behalf of the site/community even if the family declines on the note being added to the profile.
(This post was edited by htotsu on Dec 5, 2006, 4:50 AM)
I think contacting the family first is also a good idea, but I don't know how I'd go about that. Cold-calling someone after the death of their son/daughter/husband/wife/etc. seems kinda... well, cold. And family's e-mails aren't listed in a profile. And it wouldn't be good juju to ask for a "next of kin" box when signing up for an account. And so forth...
I like the idea, just not sure how to do it. If you have suggestions, PM me.
I don't think it's the business of the site. Just let the profile fade into obscurity.
I agree. If the family wants something up there, they can talk to the owners/mods and have that done.
I agree, too. I think the sentiment is commendable, but here's the thing... Every new policy or initiative has the potential to cause problems. In most cases, those problems are worth dealing with, but for this... Any such problems would likely be extremely messy and highly traumatic. I had to vote no, though, for the record, I would feel honored by such a distinction.
Dec 5, 2006, 9:10 PM
Post #12 of 99
(5419 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
Re: [atpeaceinbozeman] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
atpeaceinbozeman wrote:
To view the 'Injuries & Accidents' forum, you have to be a logged in as a RC.com user.
Family and friends have to register if they want to see the thread on thier love one who passed. LAME
Really? On the old site, I&A was one of the many forums viewable to guests. And knowing this, mods would constantly be reminding users to keep their flames and suppositions to themselves. Family and friends WOULD have to register to post to said threads but anybody could read them. I'll post this then sign out to see if that's the current case, though.
Anyway, reno's heart is in the right place, but yeah, this really isn't what the site is here for. Still, with keeping reno's line of work in mind, I am sure he had only the best intentions with this idea.
Dec 5, 2006, 9:14 PM
Post #13 of 99
(5414 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
Re: [climbsomething] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
Huh, you're right, bozeman. Yeah, I&A does require you to be a registered user to even lurk.
If the logic was to protect family and friends from seeing gory or unpleasant posts about their loved one's passing, then I can see it. But if the choss in Community is visible (esp. when it didn't used to be), it comes off as a tad arbitrary.
Did I miss an announcement where this was made or input sought from users?
Dec 6, 2006, 7:50 PM
Post #15 of 99
(5359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 2304
Re: [atpeaceinbozeman] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
Hi everyone,
Regarding the requirement to be logged in to view the Accidents and Injuries forum:
It was not done on a whim. The rationale for this requirement was to prevent (or at least make it harder) for the general media to converge on the forum like vultures every time there is an accident or fatality. As soon as the contents of this forum shows up in Google's search results, they'll come. They will directly quote users, even out of context, all in the name of a sensational story. And unfortunately, in our sport there all too frequently is something to manufacture a sensational story about.
The requirement to be logged on to view another user's profiles is to prevent every second internet bot to crawl your profiles and glean personal information.
Both these strategies are far from watertight, but at least puts up some level of "resistance" if you will. I'll be interesting to get your thoughts on our rationale.
I think that having to log into the site before accessing A&I is better as well as looking at profiles. I think ddt's reasons are valid. I for one would like to see it stay non-public.
It was not done on a whim. The rationale for this requirement was to prevent (or at least make it harder) for the general media to converge on the forum like vultures every time there is an accident or fatality. As soon as the contents of this forum shows up in Google's search results, they'll come. They will directly quote users, even out of context, all in the name of a sensational story. And unfortunately, in our sport there all too frequently is something to manufacture a sensational story about.
While I ultimately appreciate your reasoning, I think this is a pretty silly assumption and an insult to responsible media- which is actually the vast majority. If you could supply me with one or two or three examples of a reporter at the Podunk Daily Star quoting an rc.com accident thread out of context, I'd stand corrected (and actually be quite peeved at my brethren for doing such a thing). Did you have a nasty experience like this over on DZ?
I can say, as a member of the media (and one who specializes in public safety issues), that I wouldn't use something written on an online message board in a serious story.* For one thing, so many posts are anonymous anyway, and we limit use of anonymous sources. A gory rubbernecking post about a climber's serious or fatal injury is not one of those uses.
I might log in and personally contact somebody for a quote or interview, disclosing my position, if I found a particularly interesting post that I wanted to follow up on, and maintain an "offline" private discussion from there. Online communities are certainly a viable tool for researchers and reporters if used properly.
*Actually, in the interests of disclosure and never saying "never," I have used a well-written post from a known, named expert posting to the access forum in a climbing magazine news story, and it was used fully in context and with his knowledge (in fact, it was his idea). But way more often than not, what is thrown out in forums like these is simply not solid enough to grab off the net and use in a story, and I cannot fathom a real journalist carelessly using that tack. Though... stranger things happen every day I guess.
Your reasoning for keeping profiles private to guests is good though. Before, profiles were somewhat limited to guests but this extra security step only cinches that up. I don't have a problem with that.
(This post was edited by climbsomething on Dec 7, 2006, 4:30 AM)
While we're on the topic of forums you need to be logged in to see, for the record I really, really think Community should be one of those. I hate that the first thing people see is that, which has nothing to do with climbing.
Whether it stays on top for those who are logged in is a separate matter (and I do think it should be on the bottom once it is seen), but for those who are just browsing the site, I feel strongly that the first thing they see should be climbing-related.
Hil didn't something like that happen with Ambers thing? I have a feeling that might be where the no-guest policy came from
However i do think the forum title should be visible and with an error when guests hit it saying "please log in to view blah blah' so at least family members who arent RC members can see there is a place where a thread might be and then they can make an account.
from the original topic.. i think retiring a user name when someone dies would be a good thing.. how weird would it be if someone with ____ posts has an accident and then months/years later someone used their name . The comments in their profile i'd say would be up to the family if they wanted anything there or not.
Hil didn't something like that happen with Ambers thing? I have a feeling that might be where the no-guest policy came from
I don't know if that's where the no-guest policy came from. But I did speak with Amber personally about that flap, and I am pretty confident that the quotes in the NYT (or was it LAT?) story were not taken from posts. I believe the reporter read the posts (I don't know if she had an account or was lurking- if she had an account this whole point really is moot), then privately contacted Tim and took his offline quotes out of context. But the thread, per se, was not what was abused. So, close, but no cigar.
Dec 7, 2006, 5:48 AM
Post #23 of 99
(5304 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
Re: [climbsomething] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
Climbsomething:
Points well made, but (you just knew there was gonna be a "but", didn't ya?) I have trepidations about journalists. Color me cynical, but as a whole, I don't trust 'em. Been burned more than once, and there's that whole "Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me" mentality.
I've been on calls and situations with the media where, looking back, if I didn't know they were talking about the same event, I'd'a swore they were talking about something else.
So, while I admire your personal integrity and your backing of your profession, I'm saddened to say that not everyone in your line of work has the same code of ethics. There ARE, sadly, people who call themselves "journalists" who will stoop to the lowest possible levels just to get a scoop. Sucks, but there you have it.
There ARE, sadly, people who call themselves "journalists" who will stoop to the lowest possible levels just to get a scoop. Sucks, but there you have it.
Oh, I know. And there have been far more dismaying examples of journalists behaving badly (like the reporter who fabricated the story of a 10-year-old heroin junkie and had to give back her Pulitzer). It just seems like citing rc.com the way ddt envisions is just out there... or something one of the kids at the college paper would do...
Dec 7, 2006, 3:01 PM
Post #25 of 99
(5286 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 304
Re: [climbsomething] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
climbsomething wrote:
While I ultimately appreciate your reasoning, I think this is a pretty silly assumption and an insult to responsible media- which is actually the vast majority. If you could supply me with one or two or three examples of a reporter at the Podunk Daily Star quoting an rc.com accident thread out of context, I'd stand corrected (and actually be quite peeved at my brethren for doing such a thing). Did you have a nasty experience like this over on DZ?
Hillary,
Like Reno I too think it's great that you're standing up for your profession. Unfortunately your claims above are simply not a reflection of reality at all. While we will reach out to anyone who makes a bona fide attempt to find the facts and report on an incident, our responsibility on this site is first and foremost to the climbing community and the families of those involved, not to the media.
On Dropzone.com, due to the nature of our sport, it is not uncommon to say "good bye" to a friend every weekend. Our experience with the media for more than ten years has shown us that while there are responsible journalists like those at the Podunk Daily Star out there, they are unfortunately outnumbered by those looking to put a body to a story with a headline like:
"Skydiver plummets to death in front of family" "Skydivers living in fear for the killer in their midst" "Father of 3 dies in final death leap."
We have many examples of this. I did a quick search in the DZ.com fatalities forum and unfortunately (fortunately?) most newspaper articles seem to expire or get archived after a while so there are many broken links. By that time that happens, the damage is done. Below are a few threads for you to take a look at. Even a poor researcher with a little more available time than I have, will find a myriad of other examples. If anything, they show that the media do in fact use message boards as "sources" for their stories. How they end up positioning the actual content is anyone's guess. Have a look:
Believe me there was no communication between that poster and the media. I know her personally and I had to deal with the fall-out from this.
Due to the fact that we deal with so many fatal incidents and because the true facts are often compromised for the benefit of circulation numbers, our relationship with the media has evolved to a point where the journalists and writers in our midst (just like you here) has set out and written some guidelines for both the media to consider, as well as for skydivers when they talk to the media.
Christy West who wrote these two articles is a journalist and gold/silver skydiving medalist with over 1,800 jumps at the time of writing.
For all I know this level of consideration comes naturally for your team at the Podunk Daily Star, but I can assure you the need for these articles weren't born out of a "pretty silly assumption and an insult to responsible media".
We're not as naive as to think that reporters won't find what is written here if we require registration to view the Incidents forum. We're simply putting up barrier to entry that will ensure that it's not as easy as a quick Google search for the irresponsible journalist sitting somewhere trying to punch out a few words to meet a deadline. The responsible ones will take their time, find this forum, find the facts and hopefully report on the incident in a way that will not see this community and the families of the deceased cringe, but honor the memory of our friend.
(This post was edited by sangiro on Dec 7, 2006, 4:30 PM)
"Its all right mates! WE'LL SEE EM AGAIN IN ELL! AAARRRRGGGGHHHH!"
or how about
"Bummer dude."
or maybe
'Goodbye girl we didn't really know and never really met, we hardly knew thee."
I think death notices should be spontaneous and should be written by those moved to do so. I don't think there should be a program or a programmed response, not ever. The text of a programmed response is entirely meaningless.
Well, curse those nasty yeller journalists! Seriously, I'm really sorry that DZ.com has been abused by the media. I can see why you're gun-shy. That sucks.
But to answer my other question, has this happened on rc.com? Not that I know of, in the 4.5 years I've been here. For example, we (and by we I mean the paper that I work for) have reported on serious climbing accidents without referencing rc.com. Climbing accidents are not unheard of in Northern AZ since we have so much rock up here.
So I believe you that this has happened on DZ, and I sympathize with your indignation. I really do. But applying the rule to rc.com, especially when nothing like that has ever happened here to warrant it ("yet?" but still, it hasn't) and then putting the policy into place without even an announcement is... a bit of a fumble. Letting users just stumble upon it and then draw their own conclusions about your motivations and style is not something you should want.
I don't think you had Net Nazi intentions but I think the whole thing could have been handled better. Even if you don't plan on reversing the decision, at least tell your users at the outset about a change and explain why.
Dec 7, 2006, 8:14 PM
Post #30 of 99
(3079 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 304
Re: [climbsomething] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
climbsomething wrote:
So I believe you that this has happened on DZ, and I sympathize with your indignation. I really do. But applying the rule to rc.com, especially when nothing like that has ever happened here to warrant it ("yet?" but still, it hasn't) and then putting the policy into place without even an announcement is... a bit of a fumble. Letting users just stumble upon it and then draw their own conclusions about your motivations and style is not something you should want.
Granted. We certainly could have done a better job informing users up front as to why this decision was made. People die and loose friends climbing (as we've unfortunately just seen again) and this is a simple precaution to help protect those who are most impacted by these events when they do occur. I believe you when you say this has never happened on RC.com, but we do think that in this case prevention is better than cure.
You have to register and log in to post a photo or make a post. To us, this is a bigger deal.
Dec 7, 2006, 8:21 PM
Post #32 of 99
(3074 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 304
Re: [coldclimb] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
coldclimb wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
SANGIRO. THIS IS A ROCKCLIMBING SITE. NOT A SKYDIVING SITE.
I was going to say the same thing. Looks like both you and Hillary beat me to it.
There are some parallels to be sure, but our community is NOT dz.com.
Of course not. But we can agree that it is the same media which covers incidents in both activities right? I used that as a simple example. I could have grabbed an example from any "risky" sport or activity where fatalities occur which often get reported in a sensational way in the media. It's not the nature of the site or community that's the issue or under discussion, it's the behavior of the media.
(This post was edited by sangiro on Dec 7, 2006, 8:23 PM)
The difference, however, is that we don't lose people once a week, and therefore we draw very little media attention. In my five years being here, I can remember two users who have died. One was hit by a car and the other was indeed a climbing accident. Maybe someone else can recall more than me. I understand you may not be aware of this, having not been a user here very long.
Climbers don't die all that much more often than non climbers. We don't have the same issue that DZ.com has, why should we suffer through the same precautions?
Then there's the fact that all it takes is free registration. What media sleeze is going to be stopped by that, when they push through so many other obstacles to get their story.
(This post was edited by coldclimb on Dec 7, 2006, 8:29 PM)
Well then let me say that I think it was really foolish to make that forum private, and make community, soap box, and campground public.
but I suppose that's the sort of site we've got now. Minimal user imput, decisions made by people who don't climb, but can readily tell us all how climbing is just like skydiving.
I don't give a shit about your little skydiving analogy. I don't skydive. I'm not interested in reading about skydiving. I am somewhat resentful that you guys think it's the same thing.
I have to back up managements decision on this one (as much as it kills to do so). It has happened in the climbing community up here in NS, once for sure and I think twice. Not from RC.com but from a forum that we use for eastern Canada climbing (climbeasterncanada.com). It sucked big time when we discussed the death and then found out from one of the survivors that the family did not want us to get into specifics just yet. Sure enough the media came out with quotes directly from our forum. I agree with adding a little difficulty with accessing these posts and not having a search engine running all over them.
Dec 7, 2006, 8:54 PM
Post #37 of 99
(3042 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
Re: [caughtinside] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
caughtinside wrote:
Well then let me say that I think it was really foolish to make that forum private, and make community, soap box, and campground public.
but I suppose that's the sort of site we've got now. Minimal user imput, decisions made by people who don't climb, but can readily tell us all how climbing is just like skydiving.
I don't give a shit about your little skydiving analogy. I don't skydive. I'm not interested in reading about skydiving. I am somewhat resentful that you guys think it's the same thing.
"you're doing a hell of a job, brownie"
It was a pleasant, civilized, and respectful conversation up until this point.
Dec 7, 2006, 10:59 PM
Post #39 of 99
(3020 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2004
Posts: 2397
Re: [climbsomething] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad one, I don't know if Brent was contacted or not, I don't know how faithful to the original version the mag was, I don't even know if this is truly relevant, but this kinda stuck out at me (despite the fact that GG (happily) didn't die)...
I would guess that Brent voluntarily submitted the letter. From the sounds of Brent's post, though, he did mean to send them something, he's just surprised thatit was picked for publication. Climbing, R&I and newspapers publish letters that are purposefully sent to them so I can't imagine Gripped being different (?). Although, some publications tell letter-writers beforehand that their letter has been selected for publication, but some don't.
I should check out that copy (yes, we get Gripped in Arizona).
Regarding the requirement to be logged in to view the Accidents and Injuries forum:
It was not done on a whim. The rationale for this requirement was to prevent (or at least make it harder) for the general media to converge on the forum like vultures every time there is an accident or fatality. As soon as the contents of this forum shows up in Google's search results, they'll come. They will directly quote users, even out of context, all in the name of a sensational story.
On the basis of what experience are you making this claim? We have had many accidents and a handful of fatalities in the years that I have been associated with this site, and, to the best of my knowledge, the media have paid no attention to any of them. Quite the contrary, we have rarely, if ever, been able to find information in the media about the details of climbing accidents; climbing accidents just don't seem to be that newsworthy.
In reply to:
And unfortunately, in our sport there all too frequently is something to manufacture a sensational story about.
Since that essentially never happens with respect to rock climbing accidents, I have to assume that by "our" sport you are referring to your and Sangiro's sport -- skydiving.
The general public should be allowed to freely view the Injuries and Accidents forum. On the one hand, your claim about inappropriate media converge of climbing accidents is simply untrue; the claim is either entirely baseless, or it relies on the incorrect assumption that the media cover climbing accidents with the same lurid interest that they do skydiving accidents.
On the other hand, every time that a member of this site has died, whether while climbing or not, non-climbing surviving family and friends have taken comfort in the thoughts about the deceased posted in the Accidents and Injuries forum. We know this because some surviving loved ones have join the site just to express their gratitude. We have no idea how many others have not join the site, but have been comforted by reading the threads. Nor do we know how many would never have seen these threads had they not been able to view them as non-members.
I implore you to open the A & I thread to the general public. No harm has ever come to any climber, dead or alive, as a result of this forum's long history of being available to non-members. And we have done immeasurable good by allowing survivors of the deceased to view threads remembering their loved ones. Closing the forum does way more harm than good. Please open it back up.
While I ultimately appreciate your reasoning, I think this is a pretty silly assumption and an insult to responsible media- which is actually the vast majority. If you could supply me with one or two or three examples of a reporter at the Podunk Daily Star quoting an rc.com accident thread out of context, I'd stand corrected (and actually be quite peeved at my brethren for doing such a thing). Did you have a nasty experience like this over on DZ?
Hillary,
Like Reno I too think it's great that you're standing up for your profession. Unfortunately your claims above are simply not a reflection of reality at all. While we will reach out to anyone who makes a bona fide attempt to find the facts and report on an incident, our responsibility on this site is first and foremost to the climbing community and the families of those involved, not to the media.
DURRR! Then let them view the Injuries and Accidents forum.
In reply to:
On Dropzone.com, due to the nature of our sport, it is not uncommon to say "good bye" to a friend every weekend. Our experience with the media for more than ten years has shown us that while there are responsible journalists like those at the Podunk Daily Star out there, they are unfortunately outnumbered by those looking to put a body to a story with a headline like:
"Skydiver plummets to death in front of family" "Skydivers living in fear for the killer in their midst" "Father of 3 dies in final death leap."
I have no doubt that happens with skydiving accidents. I can assure you it does not with climbing accidents. Unless a party of 10 dies in an avalanche on Everest, the media takes no interest. Routine climbing accidents just aren't that newsworthy. Probably because they're not sensational enough, but for whatever reason, your extrapolation of skydiving news coverage to climbing is not valid.
So I believe you that this has happened on DZ, and I sympathize with your indignation. I really do. But applying the rule to rc.com, especially when nothing like that has ever happened here to warrant it ("yet?" but still, it hasn't) and then putting the policy into place without even an announcement is... a bit of a fumble. Letting users just stumble upon it and then draw their own conclusions about your motivations and style is not something you should want.
Granted. We certainly could have done a better job informing users up front as to why this decision was made. People die and loose friends climbing (as we've unfortunately just seen again) and this is a simple precaution to help protect those who are most impacted by these events when they do occur. I believe you when you say this has never happened on RC.com, but we do think that in this case prevention is better than cure.
You have to register and log in to post a photo or make a post. To us, this is a bigger deal.
Thanks for the good spirit of your reply.
No, to the real "us" it is not a bigger deal. Stop protecting "us" from things we don't want to be protected from. The only thing you are doing is hindering the family and friends of accident victims from reading the outpourings of the hearts of their friends on this site.
I for my part wonder what is the real interest of this forum. Posts are either of people looking for an online diagnosis, or people complaining about their tendonitis (people, warm up and stop climbing when you start feeling a pain!!!), or people looking for blood and death. So locked or open, go see a doctor, watch ER, or go climb.
Well then let me say that I think it was really foolish to make that forum private, and make community, soap box, and campground public.
but I suppose that's the sort of site we've got now. Minimal user imput, decisions made by people who don't climb, but can readily tell us all how climbing is just like skydiving.
I don't give a shit about your little skydiving analogy. I don't skydive. I'm not interested in reading about skydiving. I am somewhat resentful that you guys think it's the same thing.
"you're doing a hell of a job, brownie"
It was a pleasant, civilized, and respectful conversation up until this point.
One in every crowd.
Damn Reno your feathers ruffle in the slightest breeze these days. Caughtin The Barbarian, how dare you Sir, HOW DARE YOU....
(I have no idea if these simple tags work anymore)
The forum in question is 100% open to public viewing. For many of the people who posted to that thread, that is the first and likely only time they were moved to post to a climbing thread.
I'm perfectly serious, if you really want to know the answer of why an A&I forum should be open to the you should read that thread. I won't presume to tell you what you should think of it - just read it. DMT
(This post was edited by dingus on Dec 8, 2006, 3:05 PM)
Of course this thread is moving and many posts are definitely interesting, either coming from the family or from the community. But such a thread could be posted in a General forum as well. I go through I&A forums in french as well, and they are not more interesting. Always the same questions with so little medical and physiological knowledge that it can become ridiculous. But this is my opinion, and some exceptional threads can arise sometimes.
Dec 8, 2006, 6:06 PM
Post #50 of 99
(2945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
Re: [thomasribiere] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
thomasribiere wrote:
Of course this thread is moving and many posts are definitely interesting, either coming from the family or from the community. But such a thread could be posted in a General forum as well. I go through I&A forums in french as well, and they are not more interesting. Always the same questions with so little medical and physiological knowledge that it can become ridiculous. But this is my opinion, and some exceptional threads can arise sometimes.
Well, in the "technical" climbing forum you can't go but a few posts before spotting some patently ridiculous bumbling n00b nugget. It's the norm, not the exception, in pretty much all forums.
Dec 8, 2006, 6:33 PM
Post #51 of 99
(2799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
Re: [thomasribiere] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
thomasribiere wrote:
Of course this thread is moving and many posts are definitely interesting, either coming from the family or from the community. But such a thread could be posted in a General forum as well.
No offense but THAT thread couldn't be posted at all on this site. Most of those people won't read or participate in this board. Some of them used to but no more.
I gave you an example of an open board and a heartfelt and positive accident thread born from tragedy, no 'news media hype bullshit, none of that, and your response is 'well we could just file it elsewhere.'
yes, you can file it elsewhere.
DMT
(This post was edited by dingus on Dec 8, 2006, 6:34 PM)
sorry Dingus, but I only frequent ONE US forum, so I can't compare them. We have equivalent threads on french forums when a major climber disappears (like Berhault last year). I don't remember how the Skinner's thread went here on rccom because I was not interested in reading it all - I just took the harness info (with the newspaper and url reference)s to throw it in a french forum. Was it bad?
Dec 8, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #53 of 99
(2786 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2001
Posts: 17990
Re: [thomasribiere] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
thomasribiere wrote:
Of course this thread is moving and many posts are definitely interesting, either coming from the family or from the community. But such a thread could be posted in a General forum as well.
Okaaaaayyy then what's the point of having a seperate forum for accidents and injuries? Wouldn't such a thread be subject to the same media perusal that you're trying to protect us from? Gah...I don't know why I'm even posting, it's becoming obvious that the new site Fallers (excuse me owners) DO NOT VALUE USER INPUT.
Dec 8, 2006, 7:12 PM
Post #55 of 99
(2781 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
Re: [thomasribiere] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
thomasribiere wrote:
sorry Dingus, but I only frequent ONE US forum, so I can't compare them. We have equivalent threads on french forums when a major climber disappears (like Berhault last year). I don't remember how the Skinner's thread went here on rccom because I was not interested in reading it all - I just took the harness info (with the newspaper and url reference)s to throw it in a french forum. Was it bad?
Ah just forget it. Lock the forum and throw away the key, I don't care. You and major sabbet can discuss helmets and shit to your heart's content.
Dec 8, 2006, 7:21 PM
Post #56 of 99
(2775 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
Re: [thomasribiere] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
thomasribiere wrote:
I AM NOT AN OWNER! I give here MY PERSONAL OPINION like you do. So forget my green username and consider me as a normal user. Word!
Yeah guys, Thomas is right. The mods have no more input in the direction of the site than we do. Can't blame Thomas when things are lame around here. They're just glorified users with a green name who have their own forum and more responsibility.
Dec 9, 2006, 12:34 AM
Post #57 of 99
(2745 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
Re: [coldclimb] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
No offense coldclimb but I'm going to call bullshit here (or shenanigans) The green people are as accountable as the red people. By having your name in green and posting you open yourself up to the same accountability and ridicule as the red fellas. We all know that if they didn't support the regime they would be like yourself and Hillary, by maintaining their "status" they open themselves up to being compared to the owners.
Mitt BTW, after having several glasses of wine I find the font in the text box incredibly small, is it me or should I just be looking through the several empty beer bottles here on my desk?
No offense coldclimb but I'm going to call bullshit here (or shenanigans) The green people are as accountable as the red people. By having your name in green and posting you open yourself up to the same accountability and ridicule as the red fellas. We all know that if they didn't support the regime they would be like yourself and Hillary, by maintaining their "status" they open themselves up to being compared to the owners.
That's simply not true. I'm about the biggest boat-rocker in the Mods forum and have disagreed with nearly every decision that has been "cast in stone" by the new owners, including this one. This site has never experienced any issues with content being abused from the A&I forum by the media, and I agree that the threads started about the death of fellow climbers have all -- each and every one -- lead to the creation of a "keepsake" post for viewing of family and friends who would otherwise never visited our site. That said, if this isn't a decsion that's open for discussion, then I'm not going to waste my energy debating it. There are PLENTY of other issues that the owner have been and are willing to debate. I focus on getting those changed favorably.
Back to the topic of the poll -- I'm all in favor of a memorandum being created out of the profile. In fact, if I crater I would hope many of you would stop by my profile and turn it into a full blown "roast". Those of us who have been a round this site a while have friends in far stretches of the country who wouldn't be able to attend a memorial service. I'd hope, for me, that my friends would be able to use the profile as a place to yuck about old times and re-live glory days...however brief they were.
I was so appalled by the notion that the forum suddenly needed to be protected from unscrupulous reporters that I didn't even think of the obvious, which Jay brought up: the threads have provided unique and possibly indispensable comfort to survivors.
Again, I'm sorry DZ's death threads have been abused. But for the umpteenth time, this is not DZ- which has an option in the pull-down search menu specifically for "fatalities."
In reply to:
That said, if this isn't a decsion that's open for discussion, then I'm not going to waste my energy debating it.
When you consider just how many topics are deemed set in stone and not open for discussion, you should in fact take a long look at what you're willing to waste your mod energy and title on... nawsayin?
(This post was edited by climbsomething on Dec 11, 2006, 11:22 PM)
I think its pretty obvious that you weren't the biggest boat rocker because you are still a moderator. I would suggest that there were others before you. The gist of what I said was that by maintaining your "status" as a mod you will be compared to them (read:owners) and even lumped in with them during times of criticism. I think it is very obvious who chose to support the owners in "all" of their decisions and who did not. You may have argued your points but at the end of the day you lost your arguments you chose to stay and now you are "pulling in the same direction." How many arguments have you won?
You don't have to justify your actions, you chose to stay and support the owners and not one of your fellow mods. The whole I chose to stick around to fight the battles I think I can win excuse is pretty weak. It just says the little battles are bigger than my support for the fired mods.
I ask if people who have died tragically should be memorialized in some unique way, as a way of paying respect and honor to them and their memory. And yet it becomes a "slam the staff" thread.
Sickening doesn't begin to describe it. THIS is how you treat the dead and their surviving family?
At the end of the day, this is just a website. I go to work, spend time with my family, and volunteer a small portion of my time to rc.com.
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute. If that makes me some sort of turncoat, fine............keep flinging the poo!!!
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute. If that makes me some sort of turncoat, fine............keep flinging the poo!!!
That's what I said! And I got canned for it!
I said I strongly disagreed with the decision to fire Hillary, and I could not be swayed to agree, and it made me lose the respect I formerly had in the owners, but I elected to stay aboard based on urgings from my fellow moderators and especially Phil. Next day I woke up canned.
Why am I singled out, owners? Why not other mods who also disagree? Or why not none of us, since we all care about this site and enjoy offering our time to make it better? Why?
Oh, and Reno, in repsonse to your question, I think a little note in the profile would be good. Just a note, saying the user passed away in a car accident, climbing accident, or whatever, but with no link to any forum discussions. The forum discussions are never fun.
Dec 12, 2006, 7:39 AM
Post #69 of 99
(2592 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
Re: [coldclimb] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
coldclimb wrote:
Oh, and Reno, in repsonse to your question, I think a little note in the profile would be good. Just a note, saying the user passed away in a car accident, climbing accident, or whatever, but with no link to any forum discussions. The forum discussions are never fun.
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute.
But the truth is that you have nothing to contribute. The people who actually contribute to these forums are the ones who post interesting (or humorous) things, not the mindless file-clerks who shuffle posts from forum to forum.
You're just gullible. You've been duped into volunteering your time for free. You do not do a useful service here. You are a problem.
Dec 12, 2006, 3:33 PM
Post #72 of 99
(2566 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 1150
Re: [coldclimb] In memoriam: TO READ, PLEASE REGISTER!!!
[In reply to]
Report this Post
Average:
(0 ratings)
Can't Post
coldclimb wrote:
Oh, and Reno, in repsonse to your question, I think a little note in the profile would be good. Just a note, saying the user passed away in a car accident, climbing accident, or whatever, but with no link to any forum discussions. The forum discussions are never fun.
No little note, standard image linked to the discussion in I&A. After all, whose gonna write it, the lackeys... I mean minions... I mean admins?
Lots of blabbing for what seems to be 2 deaths in the last 4 years for folks w/profiles.
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute.
But the truth is that you have nothing to contribute. The people who actually contribute to these forums are the ones who post interesting (or humorous) things, not the mindless file-clerks who shuffle posts from forum to forum.
You're just gullible. You've been duped into volunteering your time for free. You do not do a useful service here. You are a problem.
Please stfu and go away.
As opposed to you, right? :rolleyes:
-F
(This post was edited by fenix83 on Dec 12, 2006, 5:33 PM)
I ask if people who have died tragically should be memorialized in some unique way, as a way of paying respect and honor to them and their memory. And yet it becomes a "slam the staff" thread.
Sickening doesn't begin to describe it. THIS is how you treat the dead and their surviving family?
this is one of the funniest things I've ever read on this website.
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute.
But the truth is that you have nothing to contribute. The people who actually contribute to these forums are the ones who post interesting (or humorous) things, not the mindless file-clerks who shuffle posts from forum to forum.
You're just gullible. You've been duped into volunteering your time for free. You do not do a useful service here. You are a problem.
Please stfu and go away.
The women in your family tree get pregnant through anal sex, don't they?
No i don't agree with everything the owners have done, but i stick around because i like this site and i feel i have something to contribute.
But the truth is that you have nothing to contribute. The people who actually contribute to these forums are the ones who post interesting (or humorous) things, not the mindless file-clerks who shuffle posts from forum to forum.
You're just gullible. You've been duped into volunteering your time for free. You do not do a useful service here. You are a problem.
Reading the thread in Accidents and Injuries about the tragic death of Mr. Forrester, I had a thought:
Would it be appropriate, in cases where a member of RC.com dies, to put a little blurb on their profile:
"RC.com member JohnSmith died tragically on Jan 1st, 2006, while climbing at Road Cut Cliffs. He leaves behind a wife and two children. He was loved by friends and family, as well as climbing partners. The climbing community has noted his passing here, and all of us at RC.com mourn his loss."
Or something like that? (BTW, the "noted his passing here" part would be a link to a thread, if there is one.)
I don't know how well this would be viewed by the users or family, so I wanted to run it past y'all. We also don't want to deal with accusations of "Profile editing Nazi Mods!" or other such BS. This is a chance for the users to speak up and decide an issue.
Vote, and let your voice be heard.
The mods, staff and owners of this site should not presume to hack the profile of a deceased site member, short of a court order, even to put dearly departed words there.
Spontaneous posts are they way to do it, written by those users moved to do so. You don't need to formulate words about people you didn't know, searching for 'just the right turn of phrase.'
You damn sure don't need to be hacking profiles that aren't yours and editing words you didn't write.
Beyond that (accessing and editing other peoples' data) you can bloody 'ell do what you want.
Hope that clears it up for you. I can send a hard copy if you like.
Reading the thread in Accidents and Injuries about the tragic death of Mr. Forrester, I had a thought:
Would it be appropriate, in cases where a member of RC.com dies, to put a little blurb on their profile:
"RC.com member JohnSmith died tragically on Jan 1st, 2006, while climbing at Road Cut Cliffs. He leaves behind a wife and two children. He was loved by friends and family, as well as climbing partners. The climbing community has noted his passing here, and all of us at RC.com mourn his loss."
Or something like that? (BTW, the "noted his passing here" part would be a link to a thread, if there is one.)
I don't know how well this would be viewed by the users or family, so I wanted to run it past y'all. We also don't want to deal with accusations of "Profile editing Nazi Mods!" or other such BS. This is a chance for the users to speak up and decide an issue.
Vote, and let your voice be heard.
The mods, staff and owners of this site should not presume to hack the profile of a deceased site member, short of a court order, even to put dearly departed words there.
Spontaneous posts are they way to do it, written by those users moved to do so. You don't need to formulate words about people you didn't know, searching for 'just the right turn of phrase.'
You damn sure don't need to be hacking profiles that aren't yours and editing words you didn't write.
Beyond that (accessing and editing other peoples' data) you can bloody 'ell do what you want.
Hope that clears it up for you. I can send a hard copy if you like.
DMT
I wasn't thinking like that though Dingus, I was thinking of sort of tagging a user as "deceased" and then an extra note shows up at the top of their profile, not actually in their description. Something like "Rockclimbing.com member Coldclimb passed away in a climbing accident on December 25th, 2006." so anyone browsing the forums knows I'm dead. Just a short note is all.
I wasn't thinking like that though Dingus, I was thinking of sort of tagging a user as "deceased" and then an extra note shows up at the top of their profile, not actually in their description. Something like "Rockclimbing.com member Coldclimb passed away in a climbing accident on December 25th, 2006." so anyone browsing the forums knows I'm dead. Just a short note is all.
That was my original idea, for what it's worth. No editing of the user's actual profile, just a blurb at the top to let folks know....
I wasn't thinking like that though Dingus, I was thinking of sort of tagging a user as "deceased" and then an extra note shows up at the top of their profile, not actually in their description. Something like "Rockclimbing.com member Coldclimb passed away in a climbing accident on December 25th, 2006." so anyone browsing the forums knows I'm dead. Just a short note is all.
That was my original idea, for what it's worth. No editing of the user's actual profile, just a blurb at the top to let folks know....
*shrug*
Just in case dingus's and my point haven't been made clear enough, we believe that no one has the right to alter the climbing profile of a deceased user, unless explicit instructions were given to do so. Dingus limited that to a court order. To that I would add, the request of the legal next of kin, and explicit instructions in the deceased's will.
I think it would be nice if members who died (whether in a climbing accident or not) were honored in some way on the site, perhaps in a dedicated obituary column; although, if I understand him correctly, dingus would be opposed to this, preferring "spontaneous" posts exclusively.
I think it would be nice if members who died (whether in a climbing accident or not) were honored in some way on the site, perhaps in a dedicated obituary column; although, if I understand him correctly, dingus would be opposed to this, preferring "spontaneous" posts exclusively.
another forum?
it would make it easy to keep the threads on topic, as opposed to "he shoulda used this other knot" drift that seems to happen in past obit threads.
if i had to choose, i'd make it closed to the public...
i voted no in the poll above, but i'd vote for an obit forum, for sure.
Let's turn on the WAY BACK machine, clear back to Dec. 7th (I was in Honolulu that day, remember it vividly as it was less than a week ago):
dingus wrote:
May I submit the canned death notice?
"Its all right mates! WE'LL SEE EM AGAIN IN ELL! AAARRRRGGGGHHHH!"
or how about
"Bummer dude."
or maybe
'Goodbye girl we didn't really know and never really met, we hardly knew thee."
I think death notices should be spontaneous and should be written by those moved to do so. I don't think there should be a program or a programmed response, not ever. The text of a programmed response is entirely meaningless.
Just in case dingus's and my point haven't been made clear enough, we believe that no one has the right to alter the climbing profile of a deceased user, unless explicit instructions were given to do so. Dingus limited that to a court order. To that I would add, the request of the legal next of kin, and explicit instructions in the deceased's will.
How many different ways can I say this???? I am not talking about editing anyone's work. Not their profile, nor their posts, nor anything that is theirs. Anyone that thinks I want to do that, please contact me via PM and I'll ease your fears as best I can.
What I was talking about was adding a small banner at the top of someone's profile page that says "Just FYI, this guy's dead." Somewhat more diplomatically, of course, but that's the general idea.
At the moment, my profile page has the black menu bar (Home, Forums, Routes, etc.) and a gray menu bar (My profile, Messages, Watched Threads, etc.) at the top, then a BIG blank white space, then "Personal Profile (edit)" below that.
In that white space, imagine a short message. The rest of the page remains EXACTLY THE SAME.
In reply to:
I think it would be nice if members who died (whether in a climbing accident or not) were honored in some way on the site, perhaps in a dedicated obituary column;
Now, that's an interesting idea.... a listing of people from RC.com who have died climbing, with links to their profiles and an excerpt from the news blurb?
Just in case dingus's and my point haven't been made clear enough, we believe that no one has the right to alter the climbing profile of a deceased user, unless explicit instructions were given to do so. Dingus limited that to a court order. To that I would add, the request of the legal next of kin, and explicit instructions in the deceased's will.
How many different ways can I say this???? I am not talking about editing anyone's work. Not their profile, nor their posts, nor anything that is theirs. Anyone that thinks I want to do that, please contact me via PM and I'll ease your fears as best I can.
What I was talking about was adding a small banner at the top of someone's profile page that says "Just FYI, this guy's dead." Somewhat more diplomatically, of course, but that's the general idea.
At the moment, my profile page has the black menu bar (Home, Forums, Routes, etc.) and a gray menu bar (My profile, Messages, Watched Threads, etc.) at the top, then a BIG blank white space, then "Personal Profile (edit)" below that.
In that white space, imagine a short message. The rest of the page remains EXACTLY THE SAME.
In reply to:
I think it would be nice if members who died (whether in a climbing accident or not) were honored in some way on the site, perhaps in a dedicated obituary column;
Now, that's an interesting idea.... a listing of people from RC.com who have died climbing, with links to their profiles and an excerpt from the news blurb?
Hmmmm. I think I like this....
I wouldn't restrict it to the cause of death being climbing related. Death of a site member is death of a site member. Who cares whether they died climbing, died of cancer, or died in a car accident. Death is death. It might be nice to have a place (ie, a forum) dedicated to their memory.
I wouldn't restrict it to the cause of death being climbing related. Death of a site member is death of a site member. Who cares whether they died climbing, died of cancer, or died in a car accident. Death is death. It might be nice to have a place (ie, a forum) dedicated to their memory.
Jay
Yeah, I agree. Users have died in non-climbing accidents and still been remembered quite fondly and vocally by many members here.
I wouldn't restrict it to the cause of death being climbing related. Death of a site member is death of a site member. Who cares whether they died climbing, died of cancer, or died in a car accident. Death is death. It might be nice to have a place (ie, a forum) dedicated to their memory.
Yeah, I agree. Users have died in non-climbing accidents and still been remembered quite fondly and vocally by many members here.
How about a sticky at the top of Accidents/Injuries, locked to replies, where an obit is posted about the deceased?
I say "locked to replies" because we all know how people will start to speculate on cause, what went wrong, and so forth. That sort of thing could be done in the "regular" thread, but the obit column would be akin to the "Announcements" forum, where the post is made, and any further discussion is held elsewhere.
I say "locked to replies" because we all know how people will start to...
What say ye, gentlemen?
Yes WE ALL KNOW users can't be trusted. Lock ALL the threads dude and type our replies for us. PLEASE SAVE US FROM OURSELVES!!!111
DMT
I have hidden entire threads about accidents involving deaths of climbers. Sometimes at the request of loved ones and friends, sometimes of my own volition. Those that I moved of my own volition, I did so because they had become like this one, with insults supplanting the OP's very admirable intended purpose. I will never apologize for such an action and if you want to view it as "protecting yourself from yourself," instead of protecting the people closest to to the accident victims from assholes with nothing to offer but hurtful comments, then so be it.
That said, I'm also against locking such threads. I would, however, wholeheartedly endorse moderation of such a vigorous level that your head might very well spin.
Having an obit that is locked to replies is OK if there can be a separate thread if people want to do the usual discussing, et. al. I don't see a problem with the actual obit acting as an "announcement" that is merely there to inform. Besides - by that time there would surely already be a discusison thread, so nothing is lost.
Editing to add that maybe the sticky thread can be all of the obits in one place, one thread to honor the deceased without flames. Reopened to add a new one whenever (unfortunately) needed, then locked again. Just a thought.
(This post was edited by htotsu on Dec 14, 2006, 5:01 PM)
Editing to add that maybe the sticky thread can be all of the obits in one place, one thread to honor the deceased without flames. Reopened to add a new one whenever (unfortunately) needed, then locked again. Just a thought.
That's kinda what I was thinking, htotsu. I don't think we have enough deaths to warrant a seperate "Obits" forum, let alone the macabre nature of such a forum. But an Obit sticky thread at the top of I&A.... well, that's an idea that has workability.
I wouldn't restrict it to the cause of death being climbing related. Death of a site member is death of a site member. Who cares whether they died climbing, died of cancer, or died in a car accident. Death is death. It might be nice to have a place (ie, a forum) dedicated to their memory.
Yeah, I agree. Users have died in non-climbing accidents and still been remembered quite fondly and vocally by many members here.
How about a sticky at the top of Accidents/Injuries, locked to replies, where an obit is posted about the deceased?
I say "locked to replies" because we all know how people will start to speculate on cause, what went wrong, and so forth. That sort of thing could be done in the "regular" thread, but the obit column would be akin to the "Announcements" forum, where the post is made, and any further discussion is held elsewhere.
What say ye, gentlemen?
I can see two ways that this might work. The first would be a sticky "In memorium" thread in the injuries and accidents forum. By necessity, it would have to be locked to replies because it would be a single thread. The deceased member's name would be in the post heading.
The second way, which I think is better, would be to have a dedicated "In memorium" forum, with a full thread dedicated to each deceased member. This gives friends and family an opportunity to post remeberences to the deceased. It also gives the tribute more prominence, which I think is appropriate, than having it contained within a forum. The forum would have to be skillfully moderated.
We shouldn't be too concerned about creating "another forum," as long as the new forum serves a good purpose. One poker site I visit, twoplustwo.com, has about 60 forums, each covering a distinct subject area.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Dec 14, 2006, 6:14 PM)
The second way, which I think is better, would be to have a dedicated "In memorium" forum, with a full thread dedicated to each deceased member. This gives friends and family an opportunity to post remeberences to the deceased. It also gives the tribute more prominence, which I think is appropriate, than having it contained within a forum. The forum would have to be skillfully moderated.
We shouldn't be too concerned about creating "another forum," as long as the new forum serves a good purpose. One poker site I visit, twoplustwo.com, has about 60 forums, each covering a distinct subject area.
18 /
60%
). It has happened in the climbing community up here in NS, once for sure and I think twice. Not from RC.com but from a forum that we use for eastern Canada climbing (climbeasterncanada.com). It sucked big time when we discussed the death and then found out from one of the survivors that the family did not want us to get into specifics just yet. Sure enough the media came out with quotes directly from our forum. I agree with adding a little difficulty with accessing these posts and not having a search engine running all over them. 
