Forums: Climbing Information: General:
Rudeness works
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for General

Premier Sponsor:

 


Partner rgold


Feb 18, 2013, 6:26 AM
Post #1 of 69 (5233 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1801

Rudeness works
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Good news for those who hope to undermine reasonable discussion by posting rude remarks. It works.

People who read a scientific article about the risks of nanotechnology were evenly split in their conclusions about risk when the accompanying online comments were polite, whereas the same article with rude comments expressing the same reactions as the polite comments produced 32% seeing low risk and 52% seeing high risk, suggesting that the rude comments by themselves produce polarization independently of the content of the original statements.

The authors of the study concluded that banning rude comments was a reasonable way to obtain a fair reading of the original material and recommended that practice to the authors of scientific blogs.

There being no chance of civility ever breaking out in places like this, it may be worth considering whether your own conclusions have been distorted by the tone rather than the content of the conversation.

http://chronicle.com/...wb&utm_medium=en


chadnsc


Feb 18, 2013, 6:59 AM
Post #2 of 69 (5206 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

Ah shut up you hoser! Wink


bearbreeder


Feb 18, 2013, 7:14 AM
Post #3 of 69 (5192 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (7 ratings)  
Can't Post

its RC and the intrawebs

itll be was like it long before ... and will be like it long after Wink

at least its not like some other popular climbing forum where a whole bunch of members are supposedly quitting over some "boobs" thread furor ...

we do however have burqas, and people telling noobs about having more money than brains

Tongue


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 18, 2013, 7:52 AM
Post #4 of 69 (5160 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Good news for those who hope to undermine reasonable discussion by posting rude remarks. It works.

People who read a scientific article about the risks of nanotechnology were evenly split in their conclusions about risk when the accompanying online comments were polite, whereas the same article with rude comments expressing the same reactions as the polite comments produced 32% seeing low risk and 52% seeing high risk, suggesting that the rude comments by themselves produce polarization independently of the content of the original statements.

The authors of the study concluded that banning rude comments was a reasonable way to obtain a fair reading of the original material and recommended that practice to the authors of scientific blogs.

There being no chance of civility ever breaking out in places like this, it may be worth considering whether your own conclusions have been distorted by the tone rather than the content of the conversation.

http://chronicle.com/...wb&utm_medium=en


Interesting! But then again, we already knew that rudeness works.

This is why, despite the majority of Americans saying in various polls that they would prefer to see fewer negative ads, the negative ads continue. Because, despite what people SAY they want to see, the results show time and time again that they are influenced by those ads more than they are by feel-good positive ads or "substantive information" ads.

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic


bearbreeder


Feb 18, 2013, 7:57 AM
Post #5 of 69 (5151 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (7 ratings)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic

theres many more posts "ruder" than mine ..

i assume youll ban the posts of a certain member saying that certain sexes dont really climb hard ...

or ones telling newbs they are going to die

or ones calling people "non climbers" despite awwwsum evidence of awwwsum "posing pics", all photoshopped of course

wouldnt want to be hypocritical would we now Wink


wivanoff


Feb 18, 2013, 8:44 AM
Post #6 of 69 (5111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 23, 2007
Posts: 144

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
There being no chance of civility ever breaking out in places like this, it may be worth considering whether your own conclusions have been distorted by the tone rather than the content of the conversation.

Interesting. I think my conclusions are distorted but not in the way the article suggests. After reading consecutive rude posts I find myself thinking "Yeah, that guy's (girl's) just another ass. (S)he's got nothing to say that I need to know" and I tend to disregard what (s)he writes - even if it's accurate. I wonder if other people do that.


chadnsc


Feb 18, 2013, 9:22 AM
Post #7 of 69 (5088 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (8 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic

theres many more posts "ruder" than mine ..

i assume youll ban the posts of a certain member saying that certain sexes dont really climb hard ...

or ones telling newbs they are going to die

or ones calling people "non climbers" despite awwwsum evidence of awwwsum "posing pics", all photoshopped of course

wouldnt want to be hypocritical would we now Wink

My gawd, you're one self centered, egotistical butthurt little brat aren't you?


Way to keep the trolls rollin' into other threads. T9!


bearbreeder


Feb 18, 2013, 9:57 AM
Post #8 of 69 (5066 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:

My gawd, you're one self centered, egotistical butthurt little brat aren't you?


Way to keep the trolls rollin' into other threads. T9!

why thats mighty rude of ya

go climb Wink


shimanilami


Feb 18, 2013, 10:34 AM
Post #9 of 69 (5025 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (7 ratings)  
Can't Post

Blah, blah, blah.

I come here for entertainment, not enlightenment. And when it all boils down, rudeness is funnier than politeness.


Kartessa


Feb 18, 2013, 12:27 PM
Post #10 of 69 (4974 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7358

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
we do however have burqas, and people telling noobs about having more money than brains

Tongue

Bite me


Kartessa


Feb 18, 2013, 12:29 PM
Post #11 of 69 (4972 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7358

Re: [shimanilami] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

shimanilami wrote:

I come here for entertainment, not enlightenment.

Pretty much sums it up


billl7


Feb 19, 2013, 4:38 AM
Post #12 of 69 (4751 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1888

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

wivanoff wrote:
After reading consecutive rude posts I find myself thinking "Yeah, that guy's (girl's) just another ass. (S)he's got nothing to say that I need to know" and I tend to disregard what (s)he writes - even if it's accurate.

... and it can be a double-edged sword. The weak are irresistibly drawn to someone who superficially appears authoritative and thereby Darwinism bites from both the inside and the outside. Angelic

Bill L


(This post was edited by billl7 on Feb 19, 2013, 5:12 AM)


wivanoff


Feb 19, 2013, 9:40 AM
Post #13 of 69 (4633 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 23, 2007
Posts: 144

Re: [billl7] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

billl7 wrote:
... and it can be a double-edged sword. The weak are irresistibly drawn to someone who superficially appears authoritative and thereby Darwinism bites from both the inside and the outside. Angelic
Bill L

Well, I'm no expert. Not authoritative. Not even an AMGA guide. People probably shouldn't listen to me at all.


billcoe_


Feb 19, 2013, 12:20 PM
Post #14 of 69 (4565 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4668

Re: [wivanoff] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

If everyone posted text as clear, concise, accurate and informed as Rgold, we'd only have a smattering of posts on this (and many) web site(s), and we'd all be the smarter and the better for it.

Thanks for your posts Rich.


onceahardman


Feb 19, 2013, 2:45 PM
Post #15 of 69 (4506 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2473

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

It's interesting, Rich, thanks. I have a little different take on it, though, and I hope you'll appreciate I generally try to be polite, even when I disagree.

I'd like to know what,exactly, constitutes "rudeness"? If it is ad hominem attack, I would tend to discount it. Same with foul language.

Personal insult is a tactic used by people who have no cogent argument.

There is sometimes a fine line between rudeness, and firmly telling someone they are objectively wrong.

The title of the article linked to gives me pause as well. Rudeness "undermines scientists' authority"? Really? Appeal to authority is also a well-described logical fallacy.


blueeyedclimber


Feb 19, 2013, 3:04 PM
Post #16 of 69 (4497 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic

theres many more posts "ruder" than mine ..

i assume youll ban the posts of a certain member saying that certain sexes dont really climb hard ...

or ones telling newbs they are going to die

or ones calling people "non climbers" despite awwwsum evidence of awwwsum "posing pics", all photoshopped of course

wouldnt want to be hypocritical would we now Wink

I find your grammar rude Tongue


blueeyedclimber


Feb 19, 2013, 3:08 PM
Post #17 of 69 (4493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Good news for those who hope to undermine reasonable discussion by posting rude remarks. It works.

People who read a scientific article about the risks of nanotechnology were evenly split in their conclusions about risk when the accompanying online comments were polite, whereas the same article with rude comments expressing the same reactions as the polite comments produced 32% seeing low risk and 52% seeing high risk, suggesting that the rude comments by themselves produce polarization independently of the content of the original statements.

The authors of the study concluded that banning rude comments was a reasonable way to obtain a fair reading of the original material and recommended that practice to the authors of scientific blogs.

There being no chance of civility ever breaking out in places like this, it may be worth considering whether your own conclusions have been distorted by the tone rather than the content of the conversation.

http://chronicle.com/...wb&utm_medium=en

I wonder if some people are swayed by rude comments because they are afraid of being the next target. The whole "pack mentality." They would rather be on the wrong side than be alone to defend themselves.

Interesting, nonetheless.

Josh


curt


Feb 19, 2013, 8:02 PM
Post #18 of 69 (4418 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18234

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic

theres many more posts "ruder" than mine ..

Perhaps you enjoy enhanced consideration for being wrong and rude at the same time?

Curt


bearbreeder


Feb 19, 2013, 8:50 PM
Post #19 of 69 (4393 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [curt] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

curt wrote:

Perhaps you enjoy enhanced consideration for being wrong and rude at the same time?

Curt

youre absolutely right ... the topics everyone goes on and on about on RC such as PASes, daisies, crossloading belay biners, equalettes on TR bolt anchors, autoblock mode, screamers, etc ... are all known common killers ...

i am absolutely wrong in suggesting that those arent generally whats going to kill you ...

if you dont listen and follow exactly what certain RCers tell ya ... youll simply go kaput ... as some will tell you in no uncertain terms

in real life people dont just go out and climb without worrying about the intrawebs

i shook in fear at the horror of my deadly daisy today when climbing in the bluffs Wink


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Feb 19, 2013, 8:53 PM)


chadnsc


Feb 20, 2013, 7:54 AM
Post #20 of 69 (4308 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

You really need to get some new material BB.


bearbreeder


Feb 20, 2013, 8:24 AM
Post #21 of 69 (4292 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
You really need to get some new material BB.

the "material" is simply what has been on RC for years ... the myriad of ways to die on the intrawebs

as evidenced by the regurgitating daisy and dyneema threads Wink


chadnsc


Feb 20, 2013, 8:59 AM
Post #22 of 69 (4268 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
You really need to get some new material BB.

the "material" is simply what has been on RC for years ... the myriad of ways to die on the intrawebs

as evidenced by the regurgitating daisy and dyneema threads Wink


True . . .


Partner rgold


Feb 20, 2013, 9:35 AM
Post #23 of 69 (4255 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1801

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

A few comments on the article and some of the responses to it.

I don't think the article is particularly well-written. "Rudeness" doesn't cover the range of of uncivil, pejorative, and illogical responses that seem to contribute to polarization. I don't know if there is a single word that does the trick, nor do I claim to have covered the bases with three.

The results of the study suggest that the effect of "rude" responses is to weight readers' opinions negatively. But there are other notable effects, which is that the original discussion, whatever its merit, devolves into a personal shouting match and the original topic is lost. I suppose this is gratifying to those who came for the "entertainment value" of bad behavior, but for others it is just an example of static overwhelming the signal.

The term "undermining the authority" was, I think, unfortunate, and resulted in a few comments which I think miss the real point. I don't think that "authority" was meant as personal quality of an individual and that there was ever a suggestion that the options were either blind acceptance or rude rebuttal. I think the author should have spoken about undermining the authority of science rather than of scientists. A scientific result becomes authoritative as a result of an intense and often prolonged discussion. Anything that either inhibits or perverts the results of such discussions undermines the authority of the resulting conclusions.

As for whether the discussions here and on other sites are "relevant" to the "real world" of climbing, I would say first that folks are going discuss what interests them, and incessantly droning on about the fact that those discussions don't matter isn't going to make one iota of difference. But beyond that, I would note that the history of science, and particularly of mathematics, has shown over and over again that the most "irrelevant" topics have turned out to have critical "real-world" uses, and that there is absolutely no way to judge "relevance" at the time of a discussion, nor is there any way to predict what kinds of ideas will arise as a result of a discussion. What we've learned about human progress is that you have to let people investigate and discuss what interests them, and out of this soup comes the world's most important advances. It is true that the price paid is the propagation of much that is unimportant, but no one has found a way to extract the nuggets without sifting through the sand.

It would be absurd to suggest that scientific breakthroughs will result from a discussion about the utility of rappel backups, but I believe that the same basic principle, which is to say that progress is most likely to result from unfettered discussion, applies. So in addition to the fact that no one is going to pay the slightest attention to someone who thinks they can dictate what can or cannot be discussed, I think that such discussions, in total if not individually, are intrinsically valuable.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...


dr_feelgood


Feb 20, 2013, 11:05 AM
Post #24 of 69 (4220 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25939

Re: [blueeyedclimber] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

blueeyedclimber wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

I might become more proactive about banning rude posts though... First on the line, bearbreeder.Angelic

theres many more posts "ruder" than mine ..

i assume youll ban the posts of a certain member saying that certain sexes dont really climb hard ...

or ones telling newbs they are going to die

or ones calling people "non climbers" despite awwwsum evidence of awwwsum "posing pics", all photoshopped of course

wouldnt want to be hypocritical would we now Wink

I find your grammar rude Tongue

Yes, his perpetual ad hominems on the English language are completely uncalled for.


onceahardman


Feb 20, 2013, 4:13 PM
Post #25 of 69 (4141 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2473

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rich, I'm glad you wrote back.

I agree, the wording of the title regarding the "authority of scientists" was unfortunate. It should have been written more carefully.

I have tried to keep the discourse on the injury forum civil at most times, in my limited capacity as a non-moderator. I have noticed your civil tone at most times also. Nothing can really be learned in noisy threads, and that gets boring. I think this thread you started is actually one of the more useful in the General category, and your thoughtful comments were a good contribution. Thank you.

Ultimately, I think we know that certain categories will be noisy, while some will tend to remain on topic. Hopefully those who enjoy bickering will keep to themselves (although I sometimes like participating in lively debate!) while those who prefer getting more useful, in depth conversations can have that, too. I think Injuries and Gear Heads stay on track pretty well. I would hope that Bearbreeder would be patient about the constant dyneema threads. It's not personal; people have a question, so they ask without searching. Don't get mad or abusive about it, either answer well, or leave it alone.

I certainly get tired at times of answering people who wonder why their ring finger hurts after climbing 5 days in a row on plastic and can now boulder V6 in only 2 months and wonder how they can keep their strength up and keep climbing without further injury.

Thanks again.


Gmburns2000


Feb 20, 2013, 4:14 PM
Post #26 of 69 (1786 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15177

Re: [rgold] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:

As for whether the discussions here and on other sites are "relevant" to the "real world" of climbing, I would say first that folks are going discuss what interests them, and incessantly droning on about the fact that those discussions don't matter isn't going to make one iota of difference. But beyond that, I would note that the history of science, and particularly of mathematics, has shown over and over again that the most "irrelevant" topics have turned out to have critical "real-world" uses, and that there is absolutely no way to judge "relevance" at the time of a discussion, nor is there any way to predict what kinds of ideas will arise as a result of a discussion. What we've learned about human progress is that you have to let people investigate and discuss what interests them, and out of this soup comes the world's most important advances. It is true that the price paid is the propagation of much that is unimportant, but no one has found a way to extract the nuggets without sifting through the sand.

It would be absurd to suggest that scientific breakthroughs will result from a discussion about the utility of rappel backups, but I believe that the same basic principle, which is to say that progress is most likely to result from unfettered discussion, applies. So in addition to the fact that no one is going to pay the slightest attention to someone who thinks they can dictate what can or cannot be discussed, I think that such discussions, in total if not individually, are intrinsically valuable.

This


bearbreeder


Feb 20, 2013, 5:11 PM
Post #27 of 69 (1778 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [Gmburns2000] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

the same issues have been discussed over and over again ... and the same "evidence" presented

the bottom line ... discuss it all you want ...

the reality? ... it doesnt matter one bit ... there basically no relevance to real world climbing

if it did ... the crag would be littered with dead daisy climbers for the past few years ...

its a free world so yak .... and other people will ya about your yak ... and so forth

what WILL make you a better and safer climber is to go out and KISSing every day ... practice your skills over and over again ... and train yourself climbing

once upon a time RC made the world a better place with real tests and exposing the aliens fiasco ...

but then in the new spirit of non-rudeness ... i will support these "discussions" by saying YOURE GONNA DIE !!! should you not head the word of RC "experts"

Wink


RobAT


Feb 20, 2013, 5:58 PM
Post #28 of 69 (1769 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 15, 2011
Posts: 15

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder,
why is it so important to you?


Kartessa


Feb 20, 2013, 7:38 PM
Post #29 of 69 (1753 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7358

Re: [RobAT] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

RobAT wrote:
bearbreeder,
why is it so important to you?

He needs affirmation that his daisy is a good thing


curt


Feb 20, 2013, 9:36 PM
Post #30 of 69 (1735 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18234

Re: [RobAT] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

RobAT wrote:
bearbreeder,
why is it so important to you?

He's been climbing for a while and isn't dead yet. Therefore he believes there can't possibly be any reason to listen to anyone else.

Curt


bearbreeder


Feb 20, 2013, 10:42 PM
Post #31 of 69 (1728 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [RobAT] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

RobAT wrote:
bearbreeder,
why is it so important to you?

i personally think its quite "important" to understand that all this dribble on what people argue about isnt whats going to kill you ...

imagine if a newer climber came on some intraweb forum, and looked at the threads that have the most views/posts, what would they see?

people going on and on about how to climb this way or that way, or use this gear or that gear ... or youll be "stupid", "dead", "gumbied", etc ...

the reality is that the things people argue over and over again on the intrawebs have little relevance to climbing in the real world ... yet, read it, youd think that if you didnt do it this way or that way youre "unsafe"

there ARE things that people should worry about ... such as belaying, rapping, going out and climbing stronger thus increasing your margin, rockfall, ground falls, weather and other objective hazards, etc ... ... but these generally receive MUCH LESS attention, if any

use your brain, learn the basic skills from a real live person, practice em over and over again ... climb as much as you can ... thats what will make you "better" and "safer"

not listening to intraweb geezers arguing about this gear or not using that (perfectly fine) technique

go out and climb ... Wink


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Feb 20, 2013, 10:44 PM)


billl7


Feb 21, 2013, 5:27 AM
Post #32 of 69 (1684 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1888

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

"Increasing your margin" can take many forms, in both small, medium, and large ways. I agree a huge part of that is building experience on the rock. Post-climb reflection & sharing are also important.

We'd all like to focus on what for us are the "large ways." And those won't be the same for the newer climber, modestly experienced climber, and veteran climber.

I'd rather not see on-line content geared towards just one type of person since it won't suit most..

Bill L

Edit: Nor would I like on-line content focused towards just the things that will kill you (although that does tend to be what interests me the most!).


(This post was edited by billl7 on Feb 21, 2013, 5:32 AM)


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 5:46 AM
Post #33 of 69 (1674 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [Kartessa] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Kartessa wrote:
RobAT wrote:
bearbreeder,
why is it so important to you?

He needs affirmation that his daisy is a good thing


He's a troll you fool.


njrox


Feb 21, 2013, 7:38 AM
Post #34 of 69 (1659 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

I have to say, out of all the internet forums I follow (not limited to rock climbing) this site has the rudest, nastiest, and most ridiculous members and posts/discussions that rarely have any interesting content. Probably why I hardly come on here anymore. I chalk it up to this site's obvious name. And given such an obvious name, it attracts a lot of newbies and beginners. And for every newbie's "dumb" question there's 1000 replies that forget the question and just argue over the answers and opinions. Makes me think of this...

"We are blessed to be living in an age when we have a global communications network in which idiots, assholes, and total and complete wastes of fucking human life alike can come together to give instant feedback in an unfettered and unmonitored online environment. What better way to take advantage of this incredible technology than to log onto the Internet and insult a complete stranger?"

The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info.

And a quick shout out to bearbreeder since he's following this thread. You actually have some decent thoughts and input. But it's too bad more often than not, you have to throw in all sorts of childish language (interwebz, yer gonna die, I'm gonna die, Tongue Wink, RC.com experts, etc.) and argue your points to death to the point where I can no longer take you seriously.

Anyway, my 2 cents on rudeness and the decline of RC.com.


curt


Feb 21, 2013, 10:06 AM
Post #35 of 69 (1635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18234

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
...The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info...

Are you claiming that your real name is njrox? Oh well, nobody uses their real name here. Cool

Curt


granite_grrl


Feb 21, 2013, 10:15 AM
Post #36 of 69 (1627 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14903

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
I have to say, out of all the internet forums I follow (not limited to rock climbing) this site has the rudest, nastiest, and most ridiculous members and posts/discussions that rarely have any interesting content. Probably why I hardly come on here anymore. I chalk it up to this site's obvious name. And given such an obvious name, it attracts a lot of newbies and beginners. And for every newbie's "dumb" question there's 1000 replies that forget the question and just argue over the answers and opinions. Makes me think of this...

"We are blessed to be living in an age when we have a global communications network in which idiots, assholes, and total and complete wastes of fucking human life alike can come together to give instant feedback in an unfettered and unmonitored online environment. What better way to take advantage of this incredible technology than to log onto the Internet and insult a complete stranger?"

The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info.

And a quick shout out to bearbreeder since he's following this thread. You actually have some decent thoughts and input. But it's too bad more often than not, you have to throw in all sorts of childish language (interwebz, yer gonna die, I'm gonna die, Tongue Wink, RC.com experts, etc.) and argue your points to death to the point where I can no longer take you seriously.

Anyway, my 2 cents on rudeness and the decline of RC.com.

The decline of RC.com huh? What we really need are some more trolls to bring this site back to it's glory days.

IMO - you look at the other sites and the SNR is just as bad, people everywhere giving their opinion on stuff they shouldn't be giving their opinion on. Same thing happens in real life too though. It's amazing how many gumbies there are out there that have been climbing for 5 ro 10 years.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 10:32 AM
Post #37 of 69 (1623 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info.

What would you like the moderators to do?

If some user posts an answer, and this answer contains come correct information, and some wrong information (wrong according to whom, in the first place?), should we delete the post? Edit it? Should we only let people like Rgold answer questions, since his answers are usually detailed and reasoned? Should there be an "expert" for each field, so DouglasHunter is answering questions about training, Oncehardman is answering questions about injury treatment, and jt512 is answering nutrition questions?

Then it becomes an ask-the-expert website, and not a forum.

It is the nature of the forum that there is a lot of back-and-forth, and the topics evolve in whatever direction that people answering the question take it.

We cannot police every response in every detail.

Take bearbreader's combativeness in the anchor thread, for example. Combativeness aside, is it true that a lot of things can be used for anchors? Sure! I think everybody knows that in real life sometimes you use things that are not optimal, because that's what you have on hand, and everybody probably has done so.

Would I use a PAS, if someone handed it to me? Sure! I also used the rope itself, the quickdraws, the slings... Have I used a daisy to anchor myself at some point in my climbing? Yes. I don't think daisy is the best thing to use to clean a sport climb, but I also have done things that may not be "the best", because I didn't have other options at the time. I have on some occasions gone in direct into one bolt only, have been on climbs where there WAS only one bolted anchor, have bailed off gear that may not have been picture perfect, etc. etc. etc.

BUT... when a n00b is asking, what should I get for cleaning anchors ( on a sport climb), a daisy or a PAS? The most rational response is, neither. There is absolutely no reason to get a daisy, and there is no need to spend money on PAS, when a cheaper and most logical option is the quickdraw (that the guy will have to get, if he is sport climbing) or a sling with locking 'biner (again, something that most people would get, or have already, if they are planning on setting TRs).

So, every response that bearbreeder posted in that thread (and every response to his posts) is completely unnecessary to answer the OPs question, regardless of the tone of his posts, or the merits.

Do you think I should hide every one of them? I am asking seriously.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 10:40 AM
Post #38 of 69 (1619 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [curt] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

curt wrote:
njrox wrote:
...The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info...

Are you claiming that your real name is njrox? Oh well, nobody uses their real name here. Cool

Curt

Only you and I Curt, only you and I.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 10:45 AM
Post #39 of 69 (1615 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 10:49 AM
Post #40 of 69 (1612 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

I think that would remove at least 50% of the posts. Seriously.

And would make the place pretty much dead.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 10:53 AM
Post #41 of 69 (1608 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

And I just hid your cheesetitting comment from the other thread, because it didn't contribute anything. Angelic


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 10:57 AM
Post #42 of 69 (1605 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Did you fix your cheesetit then? Laugh


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 11:00 AM
Post #43 of 69 (1600 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
Did you fix your cheesetit then? Laugh


I did, thank you.

But see, we are now derailing this thread by completely unneeded back-and-forth bantering.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 11:04 AM
Post #44 of 69 (1598 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

I think that would remove at least 50% of the posts. Seriously.

And would make the place pretty much dead.

Wow.

So the management and the mods would rather have quantity over quality? I suppose that makes the management more money with advertising.


Your statement Lenna makes it seem as if the mods and management are incredible shallow and take no pride in the site.

That's too bad.


(This post was edited by chadnsc on Feb 21, 2013, 11:05 AM)


njrox


Feb 21, 2013, 11:08 AM
Post #45 of 69 (1594 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

Yeah, that sounds like a good start. I mean, isn't that would mods should be doing?

I will say again that I rarely use RC.com anymore because it's a website (forum) overrun by bullies who just want to prove their point while degrading someone else's statements/opinions. Almost everyt thread ends up going off topic. I read/follow/post/discuss topics on other sites daily and don't come across half the nonsense that I do here. It's like grade school playground arguing vs. college classroom debating. I don't want to discuss rock climbing here because 9 out 10 times discussions turn to insults and the whole thread goes off topic. You don't make friends here. You want a user's feedback on your site? Well, there it is.

I can see this already becoming yet another RC.com pissing contest so I'm not going to add any more fuel to the fire. You can take my statement for what it's worth (accept that's how I feel, and deal with it) or you can post reply after reply breaking down every little thing I said and defend, argue, and belittle it (typical RC.com responses to anything not found to be agreeable).


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 11:09 AM
Post #46 of 69 (1590 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
Did you fix your cheesetit then? Laugh


I did, thank you.

But see, we are now derailing this thread by completely unneeded back-and-forth bantering.

So? Is it rude or offensive? Does it involve childish name calling? How about an obvious troll?

See I have nothing against thread drift, that's how conversations work.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 11:22 AM
Post #47 of 69 (1581 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

I think that would remove at least 50% of the posts. Seriously.

And would make the place pretty much dead.

Wow.

So the management and the mods would rather have quantity over quality? I suppose that makes the management more money with advertising.


Your statement Lenna makes it seem as if the mods and management are incredible shallow and take no pride in the site.

That's too bad.

Sorry, in case it wasn't clear, this was my opinion, and not a policy.

The policy is to remove offensive, rude, inappropriate-content posts (with more leniency in the low-moderation forums)

But posts that are made in a combative tone, but without outright name-calling, or posts that make the thread go into a direction away from the original topic, have never been subject to moderation.


csproul


Feb 21, 2013, 11:25 AM
Post #48 of 69 (1577 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1768

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Better moderating doesn't necessarily fix the problem either. Look at Mountainproject. I'd say that there is more moderating of posts over there than here and that some (not all) of the negative bullshit is kept in check there. But there is just as much misinformation spread over there as there is here, only people get called out on much less and much less aggressively. So it's a "happier" place to be in that I think they are less tolerant of trolling and name calling and such...but at the same time, misinformed posts and "facts" are perpetuated just as much or more than here. I think there is something to be said for getting a smackdown when you say stupid shit. Not sure what the answer is, and I'm not sure there is one.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 11:26 AM
Post #49 of 69 (1577 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
Did you fix your cheesetit then? Laugh


I did, thank you.

But see, we are now derailing this thread by completely unneeded back-and-forth bantering.

So? Is it rude or offensive? Does it involve childish name calling? How about an obvious troll?

See I have nothing against thread drift, that's how conversations work.

YOU have nothing against the thread drift, but njrox does. (see his post above)

So right away, you can see that even though you guys started by agreeing with each other ,you two have very different ideas of what constitutes "good" moderation.

And that's just two people.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 11:31 AM
Post #50 of 69 (1573 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

It's good to know that these are your views and no the sites. It is worth pointing out that the mods are the face of this site and your posts represent the site management.

Wouldn't being a combative jerk be categorized at rude?

If you and I where talking about the average grade of sport climbs across the country and someone jumped in and said 'you don't know shit Lena, only a weakling would think most sport climbs are rated 5.?'

Wouldn't you call that being rude, offensive, and inappropriate? I would.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 11:36 AM
Post #51 of 69 (1270 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
Did you fix your cheesetit then? Laugh


I did, thank you.

But see, we are now derailing this thread by completely unneeded back-and-forth bantering.

So? Is it rude or offensive? Does it involve childish name calling? How about an obvious troll?

See I have nothing against thread drift, that's how conversations work.

YOU have nothing against the thread drift, but njrox does. (see his post above)

So right away, you can see that even though you guys started by agreeing with each other ,you two have very different ideas of what constitutes "good" moderation.

And that's just two people.

I understand that, you can't please everyone. Also I believe that njrox was referring to the thread drift that takes place when people attack each other in a pissing contest. Correct me if I'm incorrect though.

Regardless' I'm only commenting on people here conducting themselves with some shred of civility and dignity instead of acting like spoiled children who want attention.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 11:40 AM
Post #52 of 69 (1262 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
lena_chita wrote:

What would you like the moderators to do?

I dunno, how about removing the aforementioned 'pissing' contests from threads?

Maybe not standing for the childish name calling?

How about this, would you let someone act / talk like they do here in person? If not don't stand for it here.

Yeah, that sounds like a good start. I mean, isn't that would mods should be doing?

I will say again that I rarely use RC.com anymore because it's a website (forum) overrun by bullies who just want to prove their point while degrading someone else's statements/opinions. Almost everyt thread ends up going off topic. I read/follow/post/discuss topics on other sites daily and don't come across half the nonsense that I do here. It's like grade school playground arguing vs. college classroom debating. I don't want to discuss rock climbing here because 9 out 10 times discussions turn to insults and the whole thread goes off topic. You don't make friends here. You want a user's feedback on your site? Well, there it is.

I can see this already becoming yet another RC.com pissing contest so I'm not going to add any more fuel to the fire. You can take my statement for what it's worth (accept that's how I feel, and deal with it) or you can post reply after reply breaking down every little thing I said and defend, argue, and belittle it (typical RC.com responses to anything not found to be agreeable).

Which part do you consider pissing contest? I honestly would like to understand what you mean by it, because while I see multiple posts deviating from the original subject, I didn't see pissing contest, so my definition of it must be different from yours.

I think it is good that you have spoken up. I am sure there are people who agree with you, and there are people who don't. Ultimately, the site (any forum, not just RC.com) evolves because people who like it stick around, and contribute more of the type of content that they like, which drives away other people more.

the truth is, most people who hang out on RC.com ALSO check out, read, respond to other climbing-related forums. And if each forum develops different sub-flavor... well, there are people who like multiple things, so they go to one forum for one thing, and to another forum for something else.

Personal experience varies, always. I happen to have made some good friends on this site, but I might have easily met them on other sites, too. It was a pure chance that I first logged in to RC.com, because someone told me that the information about the accident involving someone I knew was posted here.


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 11:52 AM
Post #53 of 69 (1252 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

First off, I want to thank you for being so civil and listing to the criticisms I have of the site. I know your's is a hard, thankless job and that 99% of the contact you get with site members is negative. Thank you for volunteering your time here.

As for what defines a 'pissing contest' that is a hard one. I personally would define it as two people going at it just to show superiority and belittle those that don't agree. They're not arguing to convey a point, they're arguing to make the other person look bad and to make themselves look/ feel better.

A prime example of this for me would be the interaction between bearbreeder and jt512 about daisy chains.


njrox


Feb 21, 2013, 11:54 AM
Post #54 of 69 (1252 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Yes, chadnsc, that's what I was referring to.

And I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it.

If your a moderator or "manager" of the content that ends up on this forum, you ought to feel responsible when users complain about how this site is being managed because it's your job to.


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 12:00 PM
Post #55 of 69 (1251 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
It's good to know that these are your views and no the sites. It is worth pointing out that the mods are the face of this site and your posts represent the site management.

Wouldn't being a combative jerk be categorized at rude?

If you and I where talking about the average grade of sport climbs across the country and someone jumped in and said 'you don't know shit Lena, only a weakling would think most sport climbs are rated 5.?'

Wouldn't you call that being rude, offensive, and inappropriate? I would.

My threshold for being offended must be pretty high, because that imaginary example would make me laugh, and not take offense.

Yes, if the subject of discussion is 'What is the average grade of climbs in the United States?", then i would like to see some statistics (such as people jumping in to point out that there is a grade distribution chart of all climbs at the Red River Gorge on redriverclimbing.com website), and not name-calling.

But if someone jumps in to say that you don't know shit, and doesn't contribute anything useful, most people can and do mark that person as a combative jerk not to listen to, and move on past it.

But it goes back to how you decide what contribution is good-enough to keep, and which one isn't?

What if the guy jumped in and said, you don't know shit, the grade distribution at the Red is in no way indicative of the grade distribution at Wild Iris?

Sure, shit part wasn't needed, but the rest of it? I have never climbed at Wild Iris, maybe he is completely correct, the distribution of the grades at the Red is skewed, and the distribution of the grades at place X much more closely mirrors the distribution of grades in the entire country? (I personally wouldn't know)

Should that post be removed just because the word shit was used? What if the rest of it was factually correct?


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 12:08 PM
Post #56 of 69 (1243 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
Yes, chadnsc, that's what I was referring to.

And I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it.

If your a moderator or "manager" of the content that ends up on this forum, you ought to feel responsible when users complain about how this site is being managed because it's your job to.

So, when you said that THIS THREAD is deteriorating into pissing contest, what exactly were you referring to?

Yes, I do have a general understanding of what pissing contest is, but I didn't see it in THIS thread, yet you said it was going there.

We have already drifted, topic-wise... And I have contributed to that topic drift, but then, so have you.

If I am a moderator reading this thread, where, in your opinion, should I step in? It seems that the very act of me posting all of this constitutes nit-picking on YOU, or it could be interpreted that way by some people...


Kartessa


Feb 21, 2013, 12:13 PM
Post #57 of 69 (1237 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7358

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
But if someone jumps in to say that you don't know shit, and doesn't contribute anything useful, most people can and do mark that person as a combative jerk not to listen to, and move on past it.

I pick people like that to be my playmates


lena_chita
Moderator

Feb 21, 2013, 12:14 PM
Post #58 of 69 (1236 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5858

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
First off, I want to thank you for being so civil and listing to the criticisms I have of the site. I know your's is a hard, thankless job and that 99% of the contact you get with site members is negative. Thank you for volunteering your time here.

As for what defines a 'pissing contest' that is a hard one. I personally would define it as two people going at it just to show superiority and belittle those that don't agree. They're not arguing to convey a point, they're arguing to make the other person look bad and to make themselves look/ feel better.

A prime example of this for me would be the interaction between bearbreeder and jt512 about daisy chains.

Yes, I can see that. IMO, bearbreeder's contributions in that thread, while factually not too wrong, have been unnecessary. A guy asking whether to buy a daisy chain or a PAS to clean a sport climb was told that he needs neither.

After the first couple responses, that thread was done, as far as useful factual information.

I will ask the opinion of other moderators/administrators. My understanding of the policy is that this thread, while full ounneeded and combative back-and-forth, did not violate any rules of conduct.


bearbreeder


Feb 21, 2013, 12:18 PM
Post #59 of 69 (1229 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

mmmm ... keep in mind that some of the complainers are just as guilty of these "rude" post ... on that particular thread as well

Wink


curt


Feb 21, 2013, 12:24 PM
Post #60 of 69 (1224 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18234

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
...I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it...

You clearly missed csproul's point altogether. Here it is again with some highlighting to emphasize the point he was actually trying to make:

csproul wrote:
Better moderating doesn't necessarily fix the problem either. Look at Mountainproject. I'd say that there is more moderating of posts over there than here and that some (not all) of the negative bullshit is kept in check there. But there is just as much misinformation spread over there as there is here, only people get called out on much less and much less aggressively. So it's a "happier" place to be in that I think they are less tolerant of trolling and name calling and such...but at the same time, misinformed posts and "facts" are perpetuated just as much or more than here. I think there is something to be said for getting a smackdown when you say stupid shit...

Don't confuse a low tolerance for stupidity with being uncivil.

Curt


njrox


Feb 21, 2013, 12:29 PM
Post #61 of 69 (1221 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 12, 2011
Posts: 251

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
njrox wrote:
Yes, chadnsc, that's what I was referring to.

And I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it.

If your a moderator or "manager" of the content that ends up on this forum, you ought to feel responsible when users complain about how this site is being managed because it's your job to.

So, when you said that THIS THREAD is deteriorating into pissing contest, what exactly were you referring to?

Yes, I do have a general understanding of what pissing contest is, but I didn't see it in THIS thread, yet you said it was going there.

We have already drifted, topic-wise... And I have contributed to that topic drift, but then, so have you.

If I am a moderator reading this thread, where, in your opinion, should I step in? It seems that the very act of me posting all of this constitutes nit-picking on YOU, or it could be interpreted that way by some people...

Well, Lena, you are a forum moderator. You ought to, excuse me, you should know when to step in.

Anyway, I'm done with this. I think I've said all that I wanted to say. How this site is run, or moderated, isn't my concern. It is what it is. All I know is that it's nice and cold outside, and there's ice to be climbed this weekend. So, I'm going to visit another website to discuss this weekend's conditions and read about what's been happening.

Get what I'm saying???


chadnsc


Feb 21, 2013, 1:53 PM
Post #62 of 69 (1204 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
mmmm ... keep in mind that some of the complainers are just as guilty of these "rude" post ... on that particular thread as well

Wink

Yup, and we ALL should behave better.

Myself included.


jt512


Feb 21, 2013, 2:18 PM
Post #63 of 69 (1195 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21893

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
They're not arguing to convey a point, they're arguing to make the other person look bad and to make themselves look/ feel better.

A prime example of this for me would be the interaction between bearbreeder and jt512 about daisy chains.

Except that's not what I was doing. Re-read my posts. I made a claim, backed it up with evidence, and then when challenged by bearbreeder, explained the flaws in his logic. Bearbreeder accused me twice in that thread of posting only "because [I] have to be right," whatever that actually means, and you have essentially just made the same accusation, not only of me, but of bearbreeder. Believe it or not, I don't think that's why he posts either. Rather, I think he actually believes what he posts. However, I†think he is fundamentally wrong about the (lack of) value of the discussions we have here. As rgold said, we don't really know in advance where discussions will lead or which will end up proving to be valuable in the long run.

Jay


jt512


Feb 21, 2013, 4:21 PM
Post #64 of 69 (1180 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21893

Re: [lena_chita] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
chadnsc wrote:
First off, I want to thank you for being so civil and listing to the criticisms I have of the site. I know your's is a hard, thankless job and that 99% of the contact you get with site members is negative. Thank you for volunteering your time here.

As for what defines a 'pissing contest' that is a hard one. I personally would define it as two people going at it just to show superiority and belittle those that don't agree. They're not arguing to convey a point, they're arguing to make the other person look bad and to make themselves look/ feel better.

A prime example of this for me would be the interaction between bearbreeder and jt512 about daisy chains.

Yes, I can see that. IMO, bearbreeder's contributions in that thread, while factually not too wrong, have been unnecessary. A guy asking whether to buy a daisy chain or a PAS to clean a sport climb was told that he needs neither.

After the first couple responses, that thread was done, as far as useful factual information..

Well, I disagree. Every few years the Internet needs to be reminded of Chris Harmston's cardinal post about the possibility of daisy failure when the daisy is properly clipped.

Jay


bearbreeder


Feb 21, 2013, 4:56 PM
Post #65 of 69 (1172 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [jt512] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
Well, I disagree. Every few years the Internet needs to be reminded of Chris Harmston's cardinal post about the possibility of daisy failure when the daisy is properly clipped.

Jay

not quite anything more to say is there?

in the new spirit of non-rudeness i whole heartily support this decision about the deadly nature of deadly daisies clipped to a single pocket and FF2 falls ... its a known killer of people using them for cleaning

i cant stop counting the bodies that are littering the base of the crag because of it

Angelic


jt512


Feb 21, 2013, 5:41 PM
Post #66 of 69 (1157 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21893

Re: [bearbreeder] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Well, I disagree. Every few years the Internet needs to be reminded of Chris Harmston's cardinal post about the possibility of daisy failure when the daisy is properly clipped.

Jay

not quite anything more to say is there?

No, there is isn't, but that didn't stop you:

You still wrote:
in the new spirit of non-rudeness i whole heartily support this decision about the deadly nature of deadly daisies clipped to a single pocket and FF2 falls ... its a known killer of people using them for cleaning

i cant stop counting the bodies that are littering the base of the crag because of it

Angelic


Partner robdotcalm


Feb 21, 2013, 8:21 PM
Post #67 of 69 (1128 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1023

Re: [njrox] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

njrox wrote:
And I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it.

If your a moderator or "manager" of the content that ends up on this forum, you ought to feel responsible when users complain about how this site is being managed because it's your job to.


I really donít find much difference in the quality of discussions between this site and Mountain Project. To consider this I just went to MP and found a truly fatuous discussion concerning Ivan Greenís chipping and manufacturing a route I havenít seen anything here as personally insulting and vulgar as this:

ďThanks, Killis. Im glad your grandstanding on MP and I except your twattishness, Its nice to know your seriously fucked and a Urban shithead from Vegas. Im sorry you got molested by your mom though, thats pretty ruff. But at least you got molested by a nice twat like you mom's.Ē

MP has become the principal site for route information and finding partners for which this site is now rarely used. Also, itís a lot easier to post pictures there and create links. RC is last century as far as this goes. However, itís inconvenient following a long thread on MP as it does not direct one to the new posts on a followed thread as occurs here. Thus, Iím very seldom inclined to follow a long thread on MP, and anyway after the first page little new is said as the insults, repititions and irrelevancies mount.

Rob.calm


wonderwoman


Feb 22, 2013, 7:39 AM
Post #68 of 69 (1077 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [chadnsc] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

chadnsc wrote:
curt wrote:
njrox wrote:
...The mods here suck. They let topics go wild and turn into back-and-forth battles that really turn people off from having intelligent discussions. Other rock climbing sites, you see this a lot less. And again, I think it's because their names aren't as obvious as "rockclimbing.com" so there are less uneducated climbers. In fact, I see on other sites people using their real names and regularly selling gear, which would provide personal info...

Are you claiming that your real name is njrox? Oh well, nobody uses their real name here. Cool

Curt

Only you and I Curt, only you and I.

Says you. I demand to be called wonderwoman in real life, too.

That being said, we gave people a handy-dandy 'report this post' button to call moderators attention to inappropriate content / personal attacks. Since we cannot all be everywhere at once, we encourage people to utilize it when they see something.


Partner cracklover


Feb 22, 2013, 9:16 AM
Post #69 of 69 (1053 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10061

Re: [robdotcalm] Rudeness works [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

robdotcalm wrote:
njrox wrote:
And I agree with csproul about Mountain Project having a much more controlled, on-topic, and civilized forum. In fact, MP is the reason why I hardly ever visit RC.com anymore.

I wouldn't think of asking the same questions or posting the same topics I do on MP here. RC.com is unfriendly and volitile. There's really no other way to say it.

If your a moderator or "manager" of the content that ends up on this forum, you ought to feel responsible when users complain about how this site is being managed because it's your job to.


I really donít find much difference in the quality of discussions between this site and Mountain Project. To consider this I just went to MP and found a truly fatuous discussion concerning Ivan Greenís chipping and manufacturing a route I havenít seen anything here as personally insulting and vulgar as this:

ďThanks, Killis. Im glad your grandstanding on MP and I except your twattishness, Its nice to know your seriously fucked and a Urban shithead from Vegas. Im sorry you got molested by your mom though, thats pretty ruff. But at least you got molested by a nice twat like you mom's.Ē

MP has become the principal site for route information and finding partners for which this site is now rarely used. Also, itís a lot easier to post pictures there and create links. RC is last century as far as this goes. However, itís inconvenient following a long thread on MP as it does not direct one to the new posts on a followed thread as occurs here. Thus, Iím very seldom inclined to follow a long thread on MP, and anyway after the first page little new is said as the insults, repititions and irrelevancies mount.

Rob.calm

I couldn't agree more. I find MP and RC (and, for that matter, the Taco) to be equally childish. They're just each childish in their own special way. Even so, each is capable of hosting worthwhile discussions. And for that matter, each is capable of hosting entertaining drama-fests. In between, there's a lot of noise on all of 'em. So what?

Even before www climbing forums, threads on the wreck were getting derailed left and right by trolls, big egos, and stubborn fools. Same as here, and same as whatever will come next.

GO


Forums : Climbing Information : General

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook