|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 22, 2012, 11:01 PM
Post #3151 of 3255
(7910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
camhead wrote: jakedatc wrote: qwert wrote: climbingtrash wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: Qwert: ten day time-out for posting not-all-that-bad pics in the *Worst* thread. You would've escaped punishment if only you hadn't argued about it, and then posted even *more* not-that-bad pics (the offwidth inverts). I second that motion. Also, to everyone in the thread, it would be cool if, when you post the pics, you also post a link to the pic's page, so that we can see comments, info, photographer, etc., and maybe even vote it 5 stars. I almost got GU'd! I vote aye on the 10 day suspenshun. And linking to the profile would be a great rule guideline. Then so be it. I am out of this thread until the 1st of February. And here is a great pic without link, just to piss y'all off: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/468976-largest_For_Whomresized.jpg[/image]  qwert PS: Tape on indoor routes and boulders sucks, and is a sign that only brainless idiots climb at said location! i made a new thread to continue that discussion. Qwert is welcome since he is the only one opposing the common point of view... http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=2563751#2563751 as opposed to the brainless idiots that have to set by color and have a limited selection of what holds they can use each route... silly Euro.. I would respond by telling Qwert that he doesnt know what he's talking about, but that would just encourage him to post more in here. Oh, and, just to keep this thread rolling... [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/479996-largest_DSCN2059.JPG[/image] http://www.rockclimbing.com/...w_bluffs_119167.html
i made a new thread to continue that discussion. Qwert is welcome since he is the only one opposing the common point of view...
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=2563751#2563751
(This post was edited by jakedatc on Jan 23, 2012, 12:41 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Jan 23, 2012, 12:38 AM
Post #3152 of 3255
(7888 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
jakedatc wrote: camhead wrote: jakedatc wrote: qwert wrote: climbingtrash wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: Qwert: ten day time-out for posting not-all-that-bad pics in the *Worst* thread. You would've escaped punishment if only you hadn't argued about it, and then posted even *more* not-that-bad pics (the offwidth inverts). I second that motion. Also, to everyone in the thread, it would be cool if, when you post the pics, you also post a link to the pic's page, so that we can see comments, info, photographer, etc., and maybe even vote it 5 stars. I almost got GU'd! I vote aye on the 10 day suspenshun. And linking to the profile would be a great rule guideline. Then so be it. I am out of this thread until the 1st of February. And here is a great pic without link, just to piss y'all off: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/468976-largest_For_Whomresized.jpg[/image] qwert PS: Tape on indoor routes and boulders sucks, and is a sign that only brainless idiots climb at said location! i made a new thread to continue that discussion. Qwert is welcome since he is the only one opposing the common point of view... http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=2563751#2563751 as opposed to the brainless idiots that have to set by color and have a limited selection of what holds they can use each route... silly Euro.. I would respond by telling Qwert that he doesnt know what he's talking about, but that would just encourage him to post more in here. Oh, and, just to keep this thread rolling... [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/479996-largest_DSCN2059.JPG[/image] http://www.rockclimbing.com/...w_bluffs_119167.html
What was the point of this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
theextremist04
Jan 23, 2012, 4:31 AM
Post #3154 of 3255
(7859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2010
Posts: 189
|
qwert wrote: climbingtrash wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: Qwert: ten day time-out for posting not-all-that-bad pics in the *Worst* thread. You would've escaped punishment if only you hadn't argued about it, and then posted even *more* not-that-bad pics (the offwidth inverts). I second that motion. Also, to everyone in the thread, it would be cool if, when you post the pics, you also post a link to the pic's page, so that we can see comments, info, photographer, etc., and maybe even vote it 5 stars. I almost got GU'd! I vote aye on the 10 day suspenshun. And linking to the profile would be a great rule guideline. Then so be it. I am out of this thread until the 1st of February. And here is a great pic without link, just to piss y'all off: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/468976-largest_For_Whomresized.jpg[/image] qwert PS: Tape on indoor routes and boulders sucks, and is a sign that only brainless idiots climb at said location!
(This post was edited by theextremist04 on Jan 23, 2012, 6:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
TarHeelEMT
Jan 23, 2012, 5:17 AM
Post #3155 of 3255
(7847 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 20, 2009
Posts: 724
|
ilikepargo wrote: Should this be here? [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/479426-largest_climbing_in_el_paso_043.jpg[/image]
Badly framed 5.easy top-rope picture with extraneous gear on harness?
Yes. Yes it should.
|
|
|
|
|
ilikepargo
Jan 23, 2012, 9:12 AM
Post #3156 of 3255
(7826 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2008
Posts: 133
|
Lazlo wrote: Anyone noticed that bolt placement? [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/6/479426-largest_climbing_in_el_paso_043.jpg[/image]
A very easy step up would make the reach possible.
What's up with the d00de's knee?
The frontside, where the bolt is actually placed, has so many jugs that it it looks to be about a 5.6 move (at best).
If this guy is an utter n00b, then I can respect him for getting started and wish him a great time complete with a bunch of learning. After all, everyone starts somewhere. But if this pic is essentially photographic spray, then it has so many issues that I never even get around to noticing the bolt placement.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 23, 2012, 4:11 PM
Post #3157 of 3255
(7801 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
cracklover wrote: Qwert: ten day time-out for posting not-all-that-bad pics in the *Worst* thread. You would've escaped punishment if only you hadn't argued about it, and then posted even *more* not-that-bad pics (the offwidth inverts). Ok, enough of that. Here's a new one. The title is "Gene near the top of Jump Start"  The caption says "This photo shows the upper part of Jump Start" G 
Too bad - he deleted that pic. But for those of you who missed it, looks like he submitted another similar one. Major WTF factor:
Link: http://www.rockclimbing.com/..._Degrees_119215.html
GO
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 23, 2012, 4:13 PM
Post #3158 of 3255
(7799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Ya, Jake, that's a truly great one. Which is why I submitted it like three pages ago, lol.
But nobody noticed it, so good on you for pointing it out again.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jan 23, 2012, 4:17 PM
Post #3159 of 3255
(7795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
shockabuku wrote: qwert wrote: Pics like these are a diamond a dozen… qwert Wow. Dime a dozen. A dime is one tenth of a dollar, i.e. not worth much. And in case you are not familiar with them, diamonds are generally considered to be fairly valuable.
Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, it is a mute point.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 23, 2012, 4:30 PM
Post #3160 of 3255
(7791 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
camhead wrote: j_ung wrote:  Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP.
FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page.
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Jan 23, 2012, 4:43 PM
Post #3161 of 3255
(7783 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO
What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 23, 2012, 5:19 PM
Post #3163 of 3255
(7745 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP?
The powers that be have decided that crap photos that are voted up as a joke to the FP will be suppressed. I hope that's clear?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Jan 23, 2012, 5:26 PM
Post #3164 of 3255
(7737 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP? The powers that be have decided that crap photos that are voted up as a joke to the FP will be suppressed. I hope that's clear? GO
No, still not clear. When was this decision made? Was there any announcement, or discussion? Where did you find out about it?
I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to know the details.
|
|
|
|
|
herites
Jan 23, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #3165 of 3255
(7729 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2011
Posts: 210
|
I see what you did there.
|
|
|
|
|
climbingtrash
Jan 23, 2012, 6:21 PM
Post #3166 of 3255
(7700 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: 5114
|
So we can no long vote gate stuff like this to the front page?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 23, 2012, 6:45 PM
Post #3167 of 3255
(7680 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP? The powers that be have decided that crap photos that are voted up as a joke to the FP will be suppressed. I hope that's clear? GO No, still not clear. When was this decision made? Was there any announcement, or discussion? Where did you find out about it? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to know the details.
I actually made that decision way back when I was blue, but it sort fell by the wayside.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 23, 2012, 7:06 PM
Post #3168 of 3255
(7665 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP? The powers that be have decided that crap photos that are voted up as a joke to the FP will be suppressed. I hope that's clear? GO No, still not clear. When was this decision made? Was there any announcement, or discussion? Where did you find out about it? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to know the details.
It has been a long standing policy, one that the relatively newer photo eds were not aware of.
There was no official announcement, just a directive by the site management to the photo eds (of which I am not in either category, but I do recall the thread where the policy was instated.)
I believe the motive was to have high quality or relevant pics appear on the front page, so that new visitors wouldn't get the impression that the site is full of chuffing wankers, at least until the second click anyways...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 23, 2012, 9:07 PM
Post #3170 of 3255
(7618 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Awesome!
GO
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Jan 24, 2012, 12:43 AM
Post #3171 of 3255
(7564 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
j_ung wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: cracklover wrote: camhead wrote: j_ung wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/1/479461-largest_P081211_09.43__01_.jpg[/image] Although, with some contrast and a better background, this could be some sweet, sweet shit. That is amazing. We need to all vote it five stars to get it on the FP. FYI, you can vote them up if you like, but such photos will now be suppressed from the front page. Cheers, GO What are you talking about? Are you saying that there is a new criteria for pics getting on the front page? Or is it just your personal opinion that (awesome) pics like this should not be on the FP? The powers that be have decided that crap photos that are voted up as a joke to the FP will be suppressed. I hope that's clear? GO No, still not clear. When was this decision made? Was there any announcement, or discussion? Where did you find out about it? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to know the details. I actually made that decision way back when I was blue, but it sort fell by the wayside.
I've already seen it twice on the FP, so either the mods were late to the game or they don't care (or, as Edge noted, they don't know).
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Jan 24, 2012, 12:46 AM
Post #3172 of 3255
(7562 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
I think I dated that one once
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 24, 2012, 12:58 PM
Post #3173 of 3255
(7503 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Oh, fuck yeah!
And just to be fair...
Gumby thong and all.
(This post was edited by j_ung on Jan 24, 2012, 1:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Jan 24, 2012, 2:35 PM
Post #3174 of 3255
(7487 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
j_ung wrote: Oh, fuck yeah! And just to be fair... Gumby thong and all.
Sorry, I just looked at the clipboard, and I don't think this can be a "worst photo," since it involves cute sports tops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
