Forums: Rockclimbing.com: Suggestions & Feedback:
Re: [k.l.k] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users?
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Suggestions & Feedback

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All


notapplicable


Feb 9, 2011, 7:16 AM
Post #102 of 147 (1639 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17766

     Re: [blondgecko] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.


sungam


Feb 9, 2011, 7:27 AM
Post #103 of 147 (1621 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26597

     Re: [notapplicable] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

"SPCI, like the BET but we don't tell you to play in traffic blindfolded" Snappy!


camhead


Feb 9, 2011, 7:29 AM
Post #104 of 147 (1618 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20753

     Re: [notapplicable] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.


airscape


Feb 9, 2011, 7:34 AM
Post #105 of 147 (1609 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

     Re: [camhead] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.


jakedatc


Feb 9, 2011, 7:47 AM
Post #106 of 147 (1599 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054

     Re: [airscape] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

airscape wrote:
camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.

no it isn't.

do not.


spikeddem


Feb 9, 2011, 8:03 AM
Post #107 of 147 (1580 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

     Re: [jakedatc] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

jakedatc wrote:
airscape wrote:
camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.

no it isn't.

do not.
Remember when I did so then doc feel good started spamming long ass posts in the SPCI, and you guys laffed?

Haha.

Oh yeah, then I did the exact same thing in BET and you guys cried.

Haha.

Oh yeah, and then a mod told me to stop or I'd be banned?

Haha.

Oh yeah, great modding.


(This post was edited by spikeddem on Feb 9, 2011, 8:05 AM)


sungam


Feb 9, 2011, 8:07 AM
Post #108 of 147 (1572 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26597

     Re: [spikeddem] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

spikeddem wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
airscape wrote:
camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.

no it isn't.

do not.
Remember when I did so then doc feel good started spamming long ass posts in the SPCI, and you guys laffed?

Haha.

Oh yeah, then I did the exact same thing in BET and you guys cried.

Haha.

Oh yeah, and then a mod told me to stop or I'd be banned?

Haha.

Oh yeah, great modding.
Hah, then INC posted that quote from War and Peace and I was like "damn, that's some good writing" and went to the library to get it. Good book.

Thanks, INC!


spikeddem


Feb 9, 2011, 8:10 AM
Post #109 of 147 (1565 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

     Re: [sungam] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

sungam wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
airscape wrote:
camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.

no it isn't.

do not.
Remember when I did so then doc feel good started spamming long ass posts in the SPCI, and you guys laffed?

Haha.

Oh yeah, then I did the exact same thing in BET and you guys cried.

Haha.

Oh yeah, and then a mod told me to stop or I'd be banned?

Haha.

Oh yeah, great modding.
Hah, then INC posted that quote from War and Peace and I was like "damn, that's some good writing" and went to the library to get it. Good book.

Thanks, INC!

Oh yeah.


sungam


Feb 9, 2011, 8:12 AM
Post #110 of 147 (1564 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26597

     Re: [spikeddem] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

p.s. that was some baaaaaalin' modding.


imnotclever


Feb 9, 2011, 8:16 AM
Post #111 of 147 (1556 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Posts: 10000

     Re: [sungam] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

sungam wrote:
spikeddem wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
airscape wrote:
camhead wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
notapplicable wrote:
blondgecko wrote:
...there are others who keep essentially all their posting confined to those threads - and that's a real waste.

Um, more than 9/10 of your posts are in Scummunity or the S&F forum. Just sayin.

http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post_time&mh=250

I think you've missed the point. Last time I checked, those forums didn't have the digital equivalent of a skull-and-crossbones and "members only" painted over the door.

I would imagine that scummunity is not the part of the site that generates those ever coveted "unique hits" you keep talking. 90% of the posts in scummunity are by the same people and soapbox can be a rather repulsive place at times. So, are you posting habits comparable to those of the BETers, no. Are they similar, yes.

And again, the SPCI is one of the more friendly and welcoming places in all of scummunity and we regularly gather new posters that stick around for awhile. Combine that fact with the number of lukers we have and I think you could make a pretty good case for the SPCI being one of this sites greatest assets. I think some kind of award, or even honorary status is in order.

We've been over this before.

You guys are the Little SPCI Achievers, disadvantaged users without the means for the necessary means to succeed in the BET. Proud we are of all of you.

You are making me/everyone want to post in the BET, it seems the only way I can call myself Elite.

I shall start promptly.

no it isn't.

do not.
Remember when I did so then doc feel good started spamming long ass posts in the SPCI, and you guys laffed?

Haha.

Oh yeah, then I did the exact same thing in BET and you guys cried.

Haha.

Oh yeah, and then a mod told me to stop or I'd be banned?

Haha.

Oh yeah, great modding.
Hah, then INC posted that quote from War and Peace and I was like "damn, that's some good writing" and went to the library to get it. Good book.

Thanks, INC!

Twas doc that posted pages of war and peace, I only posted the part of the Duel between you and Stymingersfink, where you killed him!

But doc was threatened with the ban as well for the mass text postings.


drivel


Feb 9, 2011, 8:16 AM
Post #112 of 147 (1556 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2453

     Re: [sungam] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

sungam wrote:
p.s. that was some baaaaaalin' modding.

ballin' has two Ls.


sungam


Feb 9, 2011, 8:44 AM
Post #113 of 147 (1542 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26597

     Re: [drivel] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

drivel wrote:
sungam wrote:
p.s. that was some baaaaaalin' modding.

ballin' has two Ls.
Heh. My bad.


ddt


Feb 9, 2011, 8:45 AM
Post #114 of 147 (1540 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2005
Posts: 2304

     Re: [drivel] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
 

This thread has drifted way off topic... let's stick to the topic, or take it elsewhere.

DDT

Edit: OK, I've since detached all the off-topic posts to create this new thread.


(This post was edited by ddt on Feb 9, 2011, 1:07 PM)


Partner cracklover


Feb 9, 2011, 10:52 AM
Post #116 of 147 (1504 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10014

     Re: [caughtinside] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

caughtinside wrote:
Also... I think that often posters have a life cycle on sites. I don't think this site is very informative any more.... <snip> Maybe that's why cracklover's friends bailed, because there was no new meaningful content.

Actually, I think you've got it backwards. They still post new "meaningful" (whatever that means) content. They just don't do it here. As for why they left, I'll quote my prior post where I explained (to the best of my recollection, this was like three years ago) what they told me:

In reply to:
What it boils down to is that the maturity level of the discourse was so low as to make it an unpleasant experience to participate. Noobs giving bad advice, people being rude to each other, a large and vocal group who treat the whole site and the posts in it as a big joke for their amusement.

And to top it all off, there were the frequent changes (seemingly every couple of years) in management, with major (and sometimes not fully implemented) site changes, new draconian restrictions on content and inline images, fights amongst the moderators resulting in mass layoffs....

The whole package left a bad taste in the mouth and these guys had limited patience for juvenile BS. Especially since they could be (and now are) spending their time online with people who respect them - at other climbing sites.

As for:

In reply to:
but, if they're only going to PM him, and not either contribute something worthwhile, or at least complain to a mod who could potentially but won't do something, I guess they don't get a vote.

I have no idea what they did or didn't do on their own, and neither do you. As for whether they get a vote or not, climbsforfun and others were wondering why many of these types of posters frequent rc.com less and less. That sure sounds like a request for info, or, as you put it, a "vote".

GO


Partner cracklover


Feb 9, 2011, 10:55 AM
Post #117 of 147 (1496 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10014

     Re: [jakedatc] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
 

jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO


jakedatc


Feb 9, 2011, 11:21 AM
Post #118 of 147 (1471 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054

     Re: [cracklover] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic. Think back to some of the winter months.. it was way more social than beta. Being in community it can be more of a chat thread.

BET has had decent meet ups at Rumney, RRG, Gunks, various Socal places, IC, Mo's wedding (which included Camden and Acadia)

I started climbing with Doc, Jay, and Mo on a regular basis through BET.. have met Meatbomz, camhead, dribble, chossy, GG, Marco and by association Lena and Curt. others have done similar

There is encouragement to improve. you just have to not take yourself seriously and have thick enough skin to realize it.


Partner cracklover


Feb 9, 2011, 11:46 AM
Post #119 of 147 (1453 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10014

     Re: [jakedatc] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO


jakedatc


Feb 9, 2011, 11:59 AM
Post #120 of 147 (1439 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054

     Re: [cracklover] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO

It does help if you climb with some of the folks in there. Like i said before. everyone except INC has climbed with a half dozen or so of the folks in there. Kaboom even made a chart. it was amazing.


drivel


Feb 9, 2011, 12:03 PM
Post #121 of 147 (1432 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2453

     Re: [jakedatc] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO

It does help if you climb with some of the folks in there. Like i said before. everyone except INC has climbed with a half dozen or so of the folks in there. Kaboom even made a chart. it was amazing.

and people do periodically join. maybe half? of who posts there regularly now is original. i'm not. 'biner's not. bombz is not. jake is not.


camhead


Feb 9, 2011, 12:08 PM
Post #122 of 147 (1419 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20753

     Re: [drivel] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

drivel wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO

It does help if you climb with some of the folks in there. Like i said before. everyone except INC has climbed with a half dozen or so of the folks in there. Kaboom even made a chart. it was amazing.

and people do periodically join. maybe half? of who posts there regularly now is original. i'm not. 'biner's not. bombz is not. jake is not.

I'm not either.

technically, nobody is original there, except the chossmarmots. They really got butthurt about the invasion of the Californians back in the day. Diversity! Melting Pot! E pluribus unum! A nation of immigrants!


sungam


Feb 9, 2011, 12:11 PM
Post #123 of 147 (1416 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26597

     Re: [drivel] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
 

drivel wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO

It does help if you climb with some of the folks in there. Like i said before. everyone except INC has climbed with a half dozen or so of the folks in there. Kaboom even made a chart. it was amazing.

and people do periodically join. maybe half? of who posts there regularly now is original. i'm not. 'biner's not. bombz is not. jake is not.
And me, I'm not. But, you know, I'm totally "one of the gang" now. Camhead said if I sent him pictures of myself in my crocsock/borat swimsuit he'd "let me in the loop".


snoopy138


Feb 9, 2011, 12:12 PM
Post #124 of 147 (1409 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28796

     Re: [camhead] Why are Ad Hominem Attacks Allowed By Some Users? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
 

camhead wrote:
drivel wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
cracklover wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
I quickly joined the Mass Climbers thread which was basically the original BET thread with a slightly different vibe but basically the same principle.

For the record, actually, no, the principle of BET is not "basically the same" as the Mass Climbers thread. Here are a few key aspects I can think of that differ.

The Mass Climbers thread is/was:

1 - Totally inclusive, and actively welcoming of new posters (unless they wanted to grid-bolt all the routes in Quincy Quarries, lol)

2 - First and foremost a method for organizing climbing outings.

3 - Way off topic stuff was actually discouraged. From the OP:

In reply to:
The primary purpose of this thread is to organize climbing with each other. Secondary is to share beta on the climbs of the region, and encourage each other in our progress. Third, of course, is social. It's hard enough for those of us who do have valid contributions to stay on track here. So if you do have something valid to add, please step up. If not please step out.

4 - I can think of a few posters who seemed to mostly join rc.com to post in the MC thread. I'd even go so far as to say that for folks in the region, the Mass Climbers thread was a nice entrance to rc.com: A way to get local beta, meet some folks, learn a little about climbing, and then start playing in the other forums outside of the Mass Climbers thread.

Four ways in which the MCs thread is/was pretty radically different than the BET threads.

GO

I said it had a different vibe. It is still at heart a social thread. Mass climbers was threatened to get shut down since it was in a Partner forum if it didn't stay on topic.

You are mis-remembering. It *was* shut down. And it always was beta/get-together/partner oriented, more than it was social. Right back to the beginning.

As for BET having meetups, I can't speak to that - I wouldn't know. I think I've looked at a half a dozen posts there in however many years it's been going on. Remember, the thread(s) are explicitly hostile to anyone who wants to visit.

GO

It does help if you climb with some of the folks in there. Like i said before. everyone except INC has climbed with a half dozen or so of the folks in there. Kaboom even made a chart. it was amazing.

and people do periodically join. maybe half? of who posts there regularly now is original. i'm not. 'biner's not. bombz is not. jake is not.

I'm not either.

technically, nobody is original there, except the chossmarmots. They really got butthurt about the invasion of the Californians back in the day. Diversity! Melting Pot! E pluribus unum! A nation of immigrants!

CI actually posted on page 1.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Rockclimbing.com : Suggestions & Feedback

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook