|
fanederhand
Aug 13, 2003, 12:20 PM
Post #51 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2002
Posts: 243
|
This is a rock climbing site. Hopefully used by responsible environmentally minded climbers. If people want to be perverts and be pornographic they should go some where else. If climbers are involved in illegal activities and discuss them in this forum they make us all look bad and should be reported to the proper authorities.
|
|
|
|
|
justsendingits
Aug 13, 2003, 12:33 PM
Post #52 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 1070
|
Yes I know,I should be banned from the park for at least a year for using broken bear boxes no one els has used for the last 2 years.Or better yet,a year for each broken bear box,and 100 hrs. of hard labor breaking rocks behind curry so the NPS can develop more housing for low wage employes.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 13, 2003, 2:12 PM
Post #53 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Wow... This really has exploded, eh ???
I am looking into who deleted this post, and why. As I stated when I replied to that thread, that "it needed to remain civil, as it echoed the Front Page." And I agree that the topic was legite, but unfortunately the delivery and tone brought down the thread. I did not see how the thread progressed after your first reply Pete, so I don't know how far it decragded. I can say that even your post was boarder line on violating the TOS, but we try to be tolerant, and only Moderate "blatant" and/or "excessive" stuff.
As for Andrew "joking" about deleting your Index... You have said yourself that "The Aid Forum is not full of all the fluff and of-topic stuff in the other Forums, and is strioctly related to Aid technique", but you seem to inject most of the "fleff and off-topic"... Just look at the first page of your Index... How much does it have to do with Aid ??? :roll:
Once again you have turned on the very person who has been on your side, and deffended you countless times... Andrew. Just as you turned on me, when it was me who fought to get you your own Forum, and even thought of the name Dr Piton (remember, you wanted to use Professor Piton), only to have you abuse it to promote yourself, and prey upon naive female users. You like to label people Pete, but you have no integrity, as you stand for whatever promotes you, and even this changes.
One last thing... Funny how many know that I am the Lead in regards to the Staff, and the TOS directs users to "PM any Admin if you feel that you have been Moderated unfairly", yet I have recieved no PMs from any users, just from a few Mods asking about this. It seems that many would rather use this as a platform to publically inject more drama, than to really resolve it.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 2:23 PM
Post #54 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
In reply to: If climbers are involved in illegal activities and discuss them in this forum they make us all look bad and should be reported to the proper authorities.
Whoa. Was that a joke or what?
|
|
|
|
|
xcel360
Aug 13, 2003, 2:31 PM
Post #55 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2002
Posts: 481
|
In reply to: You realize you're being an imbecile, right? Either that or you're trolling. If I toss my dog's poo into the middle of your shindig, do you 'just deal'? Thought not. What about if I choose to express my satisfaction with your mother`s sexual favors by spraypainting a big thank-you on your car? Is that, too, something with which you should 'just deal'? I mean, I'd surely be expressing myself freely. And without my efforts, that piece of 'art' would not exist! So you'd just 'deal' with your displeasure, right? Unlikely. Every time you post, right at the bottom of your window, you're agreeing to this site's fine little Terms of Service. In consideration of the Service (5 million visits a month and counting), you agree to the Terms (no cussin', no fightin', no smokin' at the dinner table), and everybody is usually happy. You really ought to read the agreement that you're agreeing to.
WTF did that come from? Someone blabbing about something is different than you vandalizing my vehicle. You can say whatever you want about my mother, but the second you take it out on a persons property it's a whole other story. Really bad example Tim. And yes I've read the terms of service, and I know what it says. I was just expressing *my* opinon of the situation. Your response is exactly what I'm talking about it. So I guess you felt the need to flame me for it for whatever reason. That's fine, I'll *deal* with it. I have no need to get involved in a flame war with you, all I did was express my opinion. I don't know which part it was but something I said obviously sent you over the top.
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Aug 13, 2003, 2:40 PM
Post #56 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: Gawd/tito is not a mod. I could flip his IP on and off to verify this further, but I don't much need to. In reply to: The entire survival of the website is on the line. Without the ability to express ourselves freely, the place is doomed. I should write a blather filter or just put a hard limit on the # of words average per post by a user. I'll bet the site improves.
Please. Continue running the forums into the ground. These kinds of comments from you don't serve any other purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 2:47 PM
Post #57 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
In reply to: In reply to: Gawd/tito is not a mod. I could flip his IP on and off to verify this further, but I don't much need to. In reply to: The entire survival of the website is on the line. Without the ability to express ourselves freely, the place is doomed. I should write a blather filter or just put a hard limit on the # of words average per post by a user. I'll bet the site improves. Please. Continue running the forums into the ground. These kinds of comments from you don't serve any other purpose.
Right on. The arrogance of these people is just amazing.
|
|
|
|
|
killclimbz
Aug 13, 2003, 2:49 PM
Post #58 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2000
Posts: 1964
|
What gawd did was crap. Plain and simple. Guys like him don't belong in this sport. What he did just brought another issue to plate in the ongoing climbers vs. rangers scene in Yosemite. I haven't climbed in Yosemite actively for a few years now, so I am not sure of the legitimacy of "Camp 5". Sounds like from the other posts on this subject the rangers are aware of it and they do seem to be tolerant of it at the minimum.
Now then, dirtbagging and over staying your limit at the Valley has always been part of the scene. How many climbing trips would be cut short if everyone followed these lame rules? How many people have slept at the base of a climb to get a good early morning start at a route there? Whether if you believe this is acceptable or not it still happens.
All gawd has done is add another incident to the argument against climbing in Yosemite. Attracting attention where it didn't need to be. Way to go. You can be certain when restrictions are being considered by the powers that be, this will be used as one of many examples.
Way to go gawd.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 2:52 PM
Post #59 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
In reply to: What gawd did was crap. Plain and simple. Guys like him don't belong in this sport. What he did just brought another issue to plate in the ongoing climbers vs. rangers scene in Yosemite. I haven't climbed in Yosemite actively for a few years now, so I am not sure of the legitimacy of "Camp 5". Sounds like from the other post on this subject the rangers are aware of it and they don't seem to be tolerant of it at the minimum. Now then, dirtbagging and over staying your limit at the Valley has always been part of the scene. How many climbing trips would be cut short if everyone followed these lame rules? How many people have slept at the base of a climb to get a good early morning start at a route there? Whether if you believe this is acceptable or not it still happens. All gawd has done is add another incident to the argument against climbing in Yosemite. Attracting attention where it didn't need to be. Way to go. You can be certain when restrictions are being considered by the powers that be, this will be used as one of many examples. Way to go gawd.
Ah, well said.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 3:05 PM
Post #60 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
Alright, everybody quit hijacking PTPP's thread here. He raised the issue of freedom of speech in the forums.
I took a look at the TOS because I was curious to see how this policy is stated. I expected to see at least some prominent lip service to this uniquely American value. Instead all I saw was this:
In reply to: Therefore, if an individual is acting in a manner that reduces the value of this investment, we (the owners and administrators of the site) reserve the right to refuse service to that individual, indefinitely and absolutely.
Surprising to say the least. As if any small committee of people could read a thread and somehow expect to gauge its effect on the "value of this investment" (not to mention its value to the community).
I seached the page for a mention, any mention, of the word "freedom". I got one hit:
In reply to: This is a business decision, not a freedom-of-speech decision, and we view it as a necessary evil.
They just don't get it.
|
|
|
|
|
bluto
Aug 13, 2003, 3:15 PM
Post #61 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525
|
:cry: Pete :cry:
Am I really supposed to take a diatribe about censorship and right and wrong seriously when it's coming from a guy (Canadian) who refuses to pay entrance or camping fees in American National Parks.
In addition to dubious behavior noted above you have committed some reprehensible acts regarding women on this site, the details of which many are aware.
Persons with little or no ethics or integrity have no right to question others.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 3:17 PM
Post #62 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
In reply to: In addition to dubious behavior noted above you have committed some reprehensible acts regarding women on this site, the details of which many are aware. Persons with little or no ethics or integrity have no right to question others.
Jesus Christ. That is totally inappropriate. Somebody should tarpit this idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 13, 2003, 3:26 PM
Post #63 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
My 2nd post to this...
Again, I am looking into the details of this, and there is a thread in the M+E where the concenceous is that it should not have been deleted. However, since the details are not known, the labeling of Censorship seems a bit premature, as Andy said, I have accidentally deleted items I meant to move. This may or may not be the case... If it ism then also as Andy stated, I doubt that any of theose crying foul will apologize, as it seems that many would rather use this as a platform to inject more drama, intead of actually resolve anything. This is apparent by nobody following the "suggested course of action" and PMing Admins if they feel they have been Moderated unfairly, instead we have this very dramatic thread... I at least, have recieved none from any users.
So in a nutshell, we have three possibilities:
1. Mistake... Happens to everyone, I would ask that they be more carefull, privately or more than likeliy in the M+E Forum, so we all can learn from it.
2. Poor Judgement... Again happens to everyone, as we are human. If so, this will be handled privately, as many need to be "calibrated" when they first start.
3. Moderator abuse... I doubt it, but I do take this seriously, and if so, will be dealt with privately, as I will not offer anyone up to be roasted in public.
I am a big fan of "praise publically, and critique privately", and will offer nobody up in public. This also extends to users who we have had to take action against for consistantly violating the TOS. I will not offer them up in public either, by posting a user's entire history to justify our actions... This would be unfair to the user.
Now, I will ask... Does anything I have just posted sound unfair ???
The TOS is editable, and we encourage anyone to provide reasonable feedback or suggestions.
|
|
|
|
|
daisuke
Aug 13, 2003, 3:42 PM
Post #64 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2001
Posts: 904
|
anne, I tarpitted you for getting around the language filter in the very post that got deleted, and don't go telling me I don't have proof, you've been warned enough times.
and no I didn't tarpit pete and he knows it, I also didn't see that post anyway, oh and "frickin" isn't a swear word, pete knows how to tone down his vocabulary. you're just trying to start more flames as usual, get a life.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 13, 2003, 3:54 PM
Post #65 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: My 2nd post to this...
My first (just to keep the record straight...)
In reply to: Now, I will ask... Does anything I have just posted sound unfair ???
I'll have to consult the TOS to see if I'm allowed to use fairness on this site. Do you have a fairness filter too? Oh wait, that's just around the corner. I almost forgot.
rc.com = Matrix? You decide? Nope. Decisions are not covered by your TOS. Your decisions are made for you here.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
calamity_chk
Aug 13, 2003, 4:07 PM
Post #66 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 7994
|
okay, i havent read this entire thread, nor do i really intend to as my opinions regarding censorship would not be changed.
you people are taking this site entirely too seriously. pete -- few people are here like you, perhaps this is why you're always so paranoid about admins being out to get you? even as a total gumbie, i can see the unnecessary complication in your systems -- especially for beginners.
as for the whole censorship bs, this is a privately run site. if you really want to change the world, then donate or volunteer for ACLU or EFF. that would make more sense than this crap. besides, if the site were run by nazi's, this thread would have disappeared long ago.
and if you need more bullshit in your life, then consider the idea of being in love with climbing and the mountains and then having some selfish asshole put a residency restriction on you so that you have to live near him so that he can see the kid that he abandoned for seven years -- that's f*cking unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 13, 2003, 4:11 PM
Post #67 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
I agree that you people take it all too seriously. Mostly you CAN say what you want, but if it isn't constructive, what the heck is the point? That's all I got to say.
|
|
|
|
|
stick233
Aug 13, 2003, 4:35 PM
Post #68 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 339
|
All you first amendment people are funny. This is a private web site. if the owners and their chosen moderators want to delete something, it's their choice. Go create your own site if it's that big a deal that they have the power over choice here.
THEY have the right to refuse service to ANYONE... just like mcdonald's. (i sure could go for a big mac about now)
|
|
|
|
|
wpy71
Aug 13, 2003, 4:43 PM
Post #69 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 195
|
In reply to: Jesus Christ. That is totally inappropriate. Somebody should tarpit this idiot
Kind of ironic to suggest tarpitting someone in a thread against censorship.
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Aug 13, 2003, 4:54 PM
Post #70 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
In reply to: This is a rock climbing site. Hopefully used by responsible environmentally minded climbers .... If climbers are involved in illegal activities and discuss them in this forum they make us all look bad and should be reported to the proper authorities.
"Bending the rules" to live cheaply in an expensive National Park is a time-honoured tradition among Yosemite reprobates, slackers, and the world's greatest climbers. If you would like to discuss the bending of rules, I would ask that you respond in the post that has re-appeared in the Aid Climbing Forum. This post is more about the alleged censorship, which perhaps was an error? I'm typing as I read the post, so I don't know if a solution has been looked into.
In reply to: "Just as you turned on me, when it was me who fought to get you your own Forum, and even thought of the name Dr Piton (remember, you wanted to use Professor Piton), only to have you abuse it to promote yourself, and prey upon naive female users. You like to label people Pete, but you have no integrity, as you stand for whatever promotes you, and even this changes.
Rrretard, you HYPOCRITICAL PIECE OF SH|T!
YOU - Adam Bingel - are the person who illegally hacked into someone's email by using your admin powers. You were virtually fired as a result. What you did was borderline criminal.
If the rest of you are not aware of this, please click here to read where rrretard demonstrated his 'integrity' by illegally hacking someone's password.
If would would like to learn more about rrretard's "integrity", you can click here to read about how rrretard was fired from RC.com.
I do not want to hijack my own post and turn it into a flame war, but when rrretard says that I have no integrity, I understandably bristle. I suggest he take a look in the mirror.
If I were half the villain that rrretard and bluto have suggested, would I not have been banned long ago? In fact, I'm rather visible here. When rrretard's behaviour came to light, Trevor telephoned me to make sure that I [and my supporters] were in favour of Trevor's decision to fire rrretard! I assured him we were.
However, I am far from being without blame. If you would like to read some of the ranting I have done that's got me into trouble, you can click here.
May I suggest the killclimbz and skibabeage take their excellent responses to the Aid Climbing forum, where we continue to discuss gawd ratting out we climbers.
Home is where I hang my heart, and my heart hangs in Yosemite.
|
|
|
|
|
theooze
Aug 13, 2003, 5:03 PM
Post #71 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2003
Posts: 619
|
In reply to: In reply to: Jesus Christ. That is totally inappropriate. Somebody should tarpit this idiot . Kind of ironic to suggest tarpitting someone in a thread against censorship.
You don't make off-topic personal attacks on people like that. How would you like it? We won't listen to you because we all know you like little boys, something like that? Whether or not it's true? If I were Pete I'd be mightily pissed.
Is anybody moderating this? What actions, if any, do Bluto's comments require?
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 13, 2003, 5:03 PM
Post #72 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
In reply to: Rrretard, you HYPOCRITICAL PIECE OF poo! YOU - Adam Bingel - are the person who illegally hacked into someone's email by using your admin powers. You were virtually fired as a result. What you did was borderline criminal.
Correct... I did abuse my privledges, and acknowledged that I was wrong puplically (I can provide the link, if you like), with no strings attached. This is integrity Pete. I never claimed to be infalible, and acknowledge my faults publically, and learn from them. I also tell on myself, even when nobody would know... This is evidenced in the thread about the RC.com sticker placed in a bathroom out at Tuolumne that I put there. It was noticed, and someone made a post about it here, and I owned up to it. Again Pete... This is an example of integrity, as I am willing to take the beatings I deserve.
On the otherhand... You "emphatically and catagorically deny" that which cannot be proven, and you have even recomended the same to many... Me being one of them, when we were friends, remember ??? This is not integrity Pete.
In reply to: If I were half the villain that rrretard and bluto have suggested, would I not have been banned long ago? In fact, I'm rather visible here. When rrretard's behaviour came to light, Trevor telephoned me to make sure that I [and my supporters] were in favour of Trevor's decision to fire rrretard! I assured him we were.
Not true... Trevor made a Poll on the Front Page asking user's input on your fate, remember ??? I believe that it was:
1. 45% Ban him
2. 20% Remove his Forum
3. 30% Do nothing
4. 5% What's this about
One reason for the poll was this thread from that era:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4561
When many of the site's users took acception to you abusing your Moderator privledges, abusing users, and your treatment of the female users of the site. Note - How many of the few users who defended you in that thread, quickly denounced you after finally meeting you ??? :roll:
Trevor alone made the choice to keep you. If the site made had the choice, you'd have been long gone. You want democracey when it suits you, this also is not integrity... But like I said, "even what you stand up for changes to suit you."
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Aug 13, 2003, 6:28 PM
Post #73 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
Until Gawd is proven to have told "that" to the Rangers, he's innocent. It's not because he claimed it that he did it. We are not under Staline, when people were judged guilty when they were forced to say they commited something "wrong". Even if Gawd was not forced, we cannot say he's guilty or not for it.
And I don't say this to back him, because I don't like his posts and his personality!
PTPP, pay your fees, honesty is a good thing even if you will never be rewarded for it, probably. And calm down, you will be rewarded for that!
About staying more than 2 weeks, there's something incompatible with solo aid climbing El Cap, so...?
About censorship, well... :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
cthcrockclimber
Aug 13, 2003, 6:31 PM
Post #74 of 266
(16962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 1007
|
Gawd admitted to doing it in the deleted post.
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Aug 13, 2003, 6:45 PM
Post #75 of 266
(16953 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
to admit is not a proof...
|
|
|
|
|
|
