One simple ethics question:

Sam Lightner, Jr. wrote: Or Generals!

I guess they might argue cavalry vs. guerrilla tactics, although I think it's probably safe to say that generals like any technology or tactic that blows the most shit up and makes them look tougher than their opponents.

Thanks to everyone posting up their opinion, except Andy :).

If anyone cares, I now believe that there is almost never a reason to glue a hold back onto a route or problem. Climbing holds break incidentally all the time. IMO, the carnage should join the rest of it on the ground. All that talus that you see surrounding climbing destinations is obviously carnage from previous rock breakage. To me, whether it happened a thousand years ago or last week is irrelevant. Let things run their course.

I have never considered gluing a hold back on that I've broken (and I've broken plenty in my day) and I don't understand how that even enters someones mind. To me, if a hold breaks, you now have a newer (usually more difficult) route or problem. If you can't climb it, too bad. Someone down the line will probably be able to. Out of respect for those future climbers, we need to not use glue to "revert" a problem or route back to it's "original" or "natural" state, IMO.

To me, routes and problems don't have "original" or "natural" states. They are pieces of rock in constant flux. The less we mess with them, the better, IMO.

Thanks again for participating everyone. I learned a few things here.

--Marc

Bob D'Antonio wrote:Ethics...that's funny.

You don't believe this question falls into the ethics category?

Why don't you answer the question at face value? Why not say, "I think there are times when glue is warranted?"

You're a relatively high-caliber climber, Bob. People will value your opinion (if you don't attack them first). You should think about providing it occasionally, instead of attacking others' opinions, character and climbing ability.

--Marc

Marc Horan wrote:Thanks to everyone posting up their opinion, except Andy :). If anyone cares, I now believe that there is almost never a reason to glue a hold back onto a route or problem. Climbing holds break incidentally all the time. IMO, the carnage should join the rest of it on the ground. All that talus that you see surrounding climbing destinations is obviously carnage from previous rock breakage. To me, whether it happened a thousand years ago or last week is irrelevant. Let things run their course. I have never considered gluing a hold back on that I've broken (and I've broken plenty in my day) and I don't understand how that even enters someones mind. To me, if a hold breaks, you now have a newer (usually more difficult) route or problem. If you can't climb it, too bad. Someone down the line will probably be able to. Out of respect for those future climbers, we need to not use glue to "revert" a problem or route back to it's "original" or "natural" state, IMO. To me, routes and problems don't have "original" or "natural" states. They are pieces of rock in constant flux. The less we mess with them, the better, IMO. Thanks again for participating everyone. I learned a few things here. --Marc

I am glad that you have resolved this issue for yourself, as long as you understand that your conclusion is no more than your opinion.

The issue of replacing severed holds is a gray area for many, and no ethic is written in stone. Therefore, don't be surprised when you encounter a reinforced hold at the crags. Moreover, when you do, try to tell yourself that we who climb do it basically for the same reason (because it's fun), and most of us, regardless of differing ethical opinions usually care about our fellow climbers.

In other words, try not to be so quick to label or judge. As long as opinions differ and no law exists that legally defines the ethic, then what is good or bad, or right or wrong, will remain in the gray area of personal opinion and taste.

Cheers,

Ken

Ken Cangi wrote: I am glad that you have resolved this issue for yourself, as long as you understand that your conclusion is no more than your opinion. The issue of replacing severed holds is a gray area for many, and no ethic is written in stone. Therefore, don't be surprised when you encounter a reinforced hold at the crags. Moreover, when you do, try to tell yourself that we who climb do it basically for the same reason (because it's fun), and most of us, regardless of differing ethical opinions usually care about our fellow climbers... ...As long as opinions differ and no law exists that legally defines the ethic, then what is good or bad, or right or wrong, will remain in the gray area of personal opinion and taste. Cheers, Ken

I agree with all of this. Thanks for laying it out so eloquently.

Ken Cangi wrote:In other words, try not to be so quick to label or judge.

I don't think I was quick to label or judge anything. Glued-on holds are something that I've considered and pondered for years now.

Marc Horan wrote: I don't think I was quick to label or judge anything. Glued-on holds are something that I've considered and pondered for years now.

I wasn't suggesting that you were judging, only that you try not to judge, or at least not too harshly, next time you do encounter this situation at a crag.

Ken Cangi wrote: I wasn't suggesting that you were judging...

Ken Cangi wrote:In other words, try not to be so quick to label or judge.

I'd like to see you reconcile this one!

--Marc

Marc Horan wrote: I'd like to see you reconcile this one! --Marc

Here is the entire post, Marc. The judgment comment follows the philosophical comment and is directly connected to it.

I feel no need to reconcile it, as I believe that it is self-explanatory when read in its entirety. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm starting to feel as though you are trying to pick a fight with me.

As the mountain erodes do you pull out your shovel and take the dirt back to the top?

Seems to me that holds breaking off is part of the worlds constant change. You're fighting an up hill battle. I notice a lot of people referring to preserving classics and the character of these routes by prolonging the natural process of erosion. Is it right or wrong is a tough question to answer. I was running flagstaff a while back and needed to take a piss like nothing else. I jumped off the trail and ran over the ridge to relieve myself and then ran back down pushing some dirt and pine needles along the way. Some Boulder hippie starts screaming at me "Stay on the trail dammit, we want this mountain here in the future." He was shaking he was so angry...I laughed at him and went on my way.

From this guys point of view he might argue that climbing is wrong if you're breaking off holds because you are defacing and changing the character of the landscape, speeding up the process of the mountain flattening itself.

I know this is off topic a little but would/could you argue that gluing holds back on is in a sense similar to having trails and keeping people on them? You are attempting to prolong the life of the mountain, rock, cliff...

I myself would never glue a hold back on but I will climb routes that have glued holds...I would prefer not to but if I'm climbing I'm having fun.

As the mountain erodes do you pull out your shovel and take the dirt back to the top? quote>

Nice Jeff!
I agree completely with this statment.
It is part of the change that nature takes. Even if the damage was human caused to begin with that doesn't mean we can do what we see necessary to fix it. Things fall off and over and blah blah blah.
A majority of the time they don't flip with out offering somthing else for the future. So climb that. If it doesnt allow the climbing then don't force it. If someone thinks they have the right to fabricate a hold that once was then why cant we just go drill and chip classic routes wherever the hell we want?
Cause it would be wrong.

Ken Cangi wrote:I hope I'm wrong, but I'm starting to feel as though you are trying to pick a fight with me.

I am definitely not trying to pick a fight with you; I've got my hands full with Captain Retard in the other thread.

I honestly felt that you when you said, "...try not to be so quick to label or judge" you were calling me out for labeling and judging too quickly. I didn't (and still don't) know any other way to interpret that statement. I just wanted to let you know that glued-on holds are something that I've pondered for a long time; I made no snap judgments.

--Marc

Ken Cangi wrote: I wonder what purist and progressive doctors and lawyers argue about.

Ken-

Crystalloid vs. colloid. I can't speak for the lawyers. -Tiffany

Bob D'Antonio wrote:the gloves are off. You just picked one with me.

I never knew the gloves were on.

Bob wrote:Let's get together tomorrow and you can repeat what you just said to my face. I think you are gutless little fuck who neither has the balls or guts to say that to my face. Prove me wrong. I'll be waiting.

I graduated high school a long time ago, Bob. I'm not going to meet up to fist-fight; I'd be happy to meet you to climb sometime.

--Marc

Bob D'Antonio wrote: You are fucking gutless...I am going to hold you accountable for what you say...you took the name calling over the edge and now you are going to to pay for what you said.

LOL

I don't really think that you're serious, but just in case, please know this:

If you threaten me physically (which you haven't done yet) I will have no problem taking this thread to the authorities. All three threads are already saved to my computer.

Bob D'Antonio wrote: Like I said Marc you are gutless little fucking weasel. You Just showed you true colors. Take the tread to any fucking people you see fit.

I can't believe that after all our history you're so pissed off about one off-the-cuff remark.

I don't know how it got to this point; but I acknowledge that I had just as much of a hand in it as you. If you're really that upset about my remark, then I apologize, with sincerity.

The reason that I participate in these threads is to debate the different aspects of the sport of mountaineering--the thing that I've been most passionate about my entire life. I should not have let things get to this point.

Again, I apologize for any comments that I made that offended you.

I wish you enjoyable and safe climbing, Bob.

--Marc

Bob D'Antonio wrote: Ok...you little fucking weasel...the gloves are off. You just picked one with me. Let's get together tomorrow and you can repeat what you just said to my face. I think you are gutless little fuck who neither has the balls or guts to say that to my face. Prove me wrong. I'll be waiting.

you're on the intertubes. of course he won't be saying anything to your face. this is both the beauty and the curse of anonymity; you can say anything you want and never be held accountable.

Bob D'Antonio wrote:Understand??

I understand. I still stand behind my statement.

Don't forget that we let it get to this point.

Just so we're clear, you don't scare me; that's not why I apologized for my remark. I apologized because it's the right thing to do if I really offended you.

I don't really think you're that upset; I think you're just fucking with me. But that's OK; I still think it's the right thing to do to apologize.

Peace, Bob.

--Marc

The Larry wrote:This is fucking awesome!!!111

I wonder how many lurkers we've attracted as this point. Gotta be quite a few out there by now.. :)

--Marc

Bob D'Antonio wrote: Marc...you let get to this point...now you don't have the balls to continue. I am going to expose what a little gutless shit you really are. You are scare...that how little shits like you operate.

:) :) :)

I'm really done this time, Bob.

--Marc

This has been entertaining to lurk over, and I thank you guys for that. I don't know what Marc has done to contribute to climbing in his life, other then tracking up other peoples' routes, reading other peoples guide books, and basically being a follower who poses as a purist, elitist. I really want Bob D to bolt your punk ass.