An Open Letter to My Climbing Community

Scott M. McNamara wrote:Both SACC & CASA seek to do good for the S. Arizona climbing community. In my opinion, both have done significant good. Disparaging them probably harms (to some extent) all S. Arizona climbers. I wish we could disagree without being quite so disagreeable. But these internecine quarrels have existed for a very long time. Humans rarely change. Killing our neighbors has been a time honored tradition since we appeared on the planet. I do not see it changing anytime soon. It always amazes me we have not already destroyed ourselves. I used to think climbers were different. I used to think climbing ennobled. Now I realize that climbers, at best, are no different---Trump/Clinton versus Clinton/Trump —bitter unchanging, perpetual personal animosity. They push their own agendas, sometimes they benefit the community, but mostly they just benefit themselves. Climbing imitates life. Which is worse—the vitriol or the censorship? China zealously prohibits its citizens from speaking or accessing the Internet. Despotic governments censor. They fear speech. They fear ideas different from their own. Burning books is the hallmark of a totalitarian regime. If Trump/Clinton could, then I am sure they would silence their opponent—they want to win. But in the U.S. we tolerate very broad spectrum of speech when it concerns public figures and public policy. The unruly market place of ideas promotes wisdom. While vitriolic speech in the various threads may damage our S. Arizona climbing interests, I would prefer it to censorship. I would prefer the standard to be the same as the U.S. law surrounding censorship/defamation of public figures. In law, speech (very generally) about public figures goes too far when there is “actual malice”—that is to say, knowledge that the information is false or that it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. Truth is the ultimate defense. In my view, these unruly discussions almost always concern public figures in our S. Arizona climbing community. The bottom line, however, is that Mountain Project is privately owned---a for profit business. The First Amendment does not apply. The owners’ (advertisers/readers) dollars must of necessity be the ultimate arbiter of what speech is allowed. We are guests in the neighbor’s home whose mortgage is paid by the advertisers. Strangely though, it is “these disagreeable threads” that seem to be the most popular—if “views” are any indication. For me, tolerating and disputing disagreeable views seem better than censoring. I believe that in the market place of ideas---good ones frequently prevail.

Fascinating post Scott (as usual).

I don't mind John or the admins keeping things in check. It's a private site and we are guests here.

As to what is best for open discussion, I am not sure what level of moderating is needed. John's a fair guy so I don't mind him making the judgement calls.

Climbing has too many passive agressive / insecure white people.

Sorry...

Well said Emily. It is a real shame when an adopt-a-crag type event notification falls apart into people bickering with each other. A local community is not just a physical thing now, it's also online and that kind of bickering on MP simply erodes the quality of a local community.

GDavis wrote:Climbing has too many passive agressive / insecure white people. Sorry...

I see more active aggression than passive

GDavis wrote:Climbing has too many passive agressive / insecure white people. Sorry...

would it help to have more passive aggressive colored people as well?

T Roper wrote: would it help to have more passive aggressive colored people as well?

Unfortunately we'll never know.

Geir wrote: Fascinating post Scott (as usual). I don't mind John or the admins keeping things in check. It's a private site and we are guests here. As to what is best for open discussion, I am not sure what level of moderating is needed. John's a fair guy so I don't mind him making the judgement calls.

Interesting.. I didn't even hear about the Adopt a Crag and I'm in the Stronghold nearly every weekend either climbing or establishing routes. I suppose it's bc I left facebook months ago and I just don't cruise the mp forum.

It's great to see these trail maintenance events pop up. When Brigette and I ran the Cochise Refuse Roundup events in the past, the turnout wasn't great. And if I had to guess why I'd have to say it was bc we were factionless, nonpartisan group not loyal to any particular "side" in the grand scheme of the climbing community. That and lacking any big label, sponsors or flashy name.. well, what's the point? Picking up trash for what? We didn't post pictures, there was no fame or fortune to be had. Maybe if we had Facebook posts to share or cool swag to give away (Actually, we did; we just didn't advertise it). Water under the bridge and this is all retrospection. I remember who showed up and I'm very grateful. So was the Forest Service management office when they came to pick up the trailer they dropped off for us to fill with trash.

An interesting anecdote (adding to the tldr factor - whatever) is that we informally started up a "biggest single piece of trash" contest and I believe the winner ended up being Christian's group that actually found and hauled back a bench seat out of a pick-up truck. Tires, car parts, discarded tents/canopies (whatever that thing was), bottles and cans galore. I remember the Douglas office manager's reaction to the trailer full of trash after just one day of work... blown away, to say the least.

So in spite of my waning participation in mp forums due to aggression, anonymous trolling & downright hateful posts, I'm actually in agreement with Jimbo and Scott. Like Geir, I trust John's discretion in keeping certain threads on track but I thinking wanton removal of any malevolence is just careless and does nothing but sweep under the carpet undeniable truths about our community. And fwiw, the entire notion of anonymous posting is just plain horsecrap. I typically skip over comments from anonymous accounts.

And thanks for your post Emily. Very well written and on target. And while I certainly agree that the tone of many posts is something you wouldn't want said directly to your face, I feel obliged to comment on my experiences with the mp forums and Tucson climbers over the years. I've met many folks from the Tucson crowd and a few I've met after I got to "know" them via the forum. What you're seeing here with at least some of these folks is just one facet of their overall personal composition.

Climbers tend to be very passionate about their hobby and the Southern AZ group is no exception. Folks like Jimbo (sorry.. I'm going to pick on you here) aren't going to post up how willing they are to make three trips to The Fortress to carry you and all your gear out after you fell and broke your leg. They're not going to explain to you, via the MP forums, how willing they'd be to spend the day looking for your lost dog either. He will , however, tell you that your views on "aggressive cleaning" vs chipping are bullshit as he shares a beer with you or belays you. My point is that it's easier for us to be offended by folks when we don't know them personally.

Just to clarify I'm not making excuses for anyone here. I'm just sharing what I've learned. And that is, while there's no silver bullet to us all getting along, if there is a solution, it involves us all meeting "in the middle". Those of us that tend to get offended (myself being a bonafide member of this group) can try to take comments less personally. And, of course, aggressive posters could make an effort to not use personal attacks (not picking on anyone in particular).

Daryl Allan wrote:And thanks for your post Emily. Very well written and on target. And while I certainly agree that the tone of many posts is something you wouldn't want said directly to your face, I feel obliged to comment on my experiences with the mp forums and Tucson climbers over the years. I've met many folks from the Tucson crowd and a few I've met after I got to "know" them via the forum. What you're seeing here with at least some of these folks is just one facet of their overall personal composition. Climbers tend to be very passionate about their hobby and the Southern AZ group is no exception. Folks like Jimbo (sorry.. I'm going to pick on you here) aren't going to post up how willing they are to make three trips to The Fortress to carry you and all your gear out after you fell and broke your leg. They're not going to explain to you, via the MP forums, how willing they'd be to spend the day looking for your lost dog either. He will , however, tell you that your views on "aggressive cleaning" vs chipping are bullshit as he shares a beer with you or belays you. My point is that it's easier for us to be offended by folks when we don't know them personally. Just to clarify I'm not making excuses for anyone here. I'm just sharing what I've learned. And that is, while there's no silver bullet to us all getting along, if there is a solution, it involves us all meeting "in the middle". Those of us that tend to get offended (myself being a bonafide member of this group) can try to take comments less personally. And, of course, aggressive posters could make an effort to not use personal attacks (not picking on anyone in particular).

Re: " aggressive " posts. I admit I haven't enjoyed some of what has been slung my way, BUT, I also can see a live person on the other end of those posts. Who knows what other crap is going on in their lives then, or why they are so frustrated? As soon as people get to know each other even a little, even just by other posts, looking at a page, seeing their dog photo, whatever, then we become real people to each other.

Truly horrible things happen in people's real, offline lives; I'd rather err on the side of compassion and patience for those people online. Kudos to those of you who can do the same when someone gets overheated here.

Old lady H wrote: Re: " aggressive " posts. I admit I haven't enjoyed some of what has been slung my way, BUT, I also can see a live person on the other end of those posts. Who knows what other crap is going on in their lives then, or why they are so frustrated? As soon as people get to know each other even a little, even just by other posts, looking at a page, seeing their dog photo, whatever, then we become real people to each other. Truly horrible things happen in people's real, offline lives; I'd rather err on the side of compassion and patience for those people online. Kudos to those of you who can do the same when someone gets overheated here.

Perhaps, but there does seem to be a certain minority of toxic personalities that are always antagonistic and unpleasant for no good reason.