Cochise route chopped, take 2

I don't usually like variations that cross other routes, unless they are obvious lines that might use a bolt or two to get well away from the route being crossed. If not, they get a chop vote.

Could chop a few of the bolts on the Varitions or maybe all of them.

I don't like spineless chopping by anyone, for any reason. If you chop it, at least take responsibility for your actions. If you are called out about your actions, be it moving, adding, or removing bolts from some route, you should have an explanation available for anyone who needs one.

I don't like it either.

I don't like "big dog" bullshit at the crags where one guy or a group of guys think they control all the new rock. Everyone owns the rock and should have an equal opportunity to develop ie: drill and establish new routes. If you put a crappy route, or botch the job the "community" should decide what to do with your mess, as in chop it, deal out a reprimand, or maybe even educate the offenders on just what is expected at that area.

Me neither.

Eric Rhicard wrote:That is what I am asking you guys to do. Take a stand and say to Scott that despite what Eric may or may not have done to you, chopping a route is not the solution. I don't go after Scott for the fun of it, I go after him because he is out of line. If you guys don't have what Jon said to stand up to him and insist he quit saying one thing and doing another then I will. That's why we have this very long but interesting thread.

This is right on the money! The climbing community polices itself. As Scott has yet to pubicly respond, I encourage everyone who is concerned about this to contact Scott directly. I have done so, and was very clear that I wanted the route restored to the way it was when Eric put it up.

Eric Rhicard wrote:THIS IS IMPORTANT, I WISH I HAD TYPED IT FOUR PAGES AGO. You guys can Quote this. If Scott puts the original camo hangers you couldn't see from the ground, back on those variations and replaces any bolts he may have chopped, and if he promises not to go messing with other peoples routes even a little, and he promises not to tell everyone what and where and how they can climb and bolt, then Scott will never hear from me again. If Scott posts these promises on a thread here on Mtn. Project, I give you my word Scott will only hear from me on this and other sites when I comment on the routes he puts up.

Ditto. How about it, Scott?

Eric Rhicard wrote:Hey Philfell, I am pushing this online so that there is a record of it. Scott has a habit of saying one thing then doing another when it suits him. I think that is why he gets such a hostile reaction online, people don't like that sort of behavior.

I sure don't like it!

Dan remarked earlier that Scott is not popular on MP.com. Why??? Because he doesn't stand up and take responsibility for his actions here. Online forums are here to stay, and like it or not they are a huge means by which climbers shape their local ethic with a permanent record. I am impressed with people like Jon, Daryl, Dan, Eric, Rick, Mike, etc: all of these folks stood up and said what they believed knowing it might not be popular and that they might take their lumps for it. And Jon, it took balls to say that you preferred not to take a side.

It would have been great if Scott had the courage to do the same before he messed with that route ... or when he did and was caught ... or over the last few weeks.

Ian F. wrote:Since, Rick inspired me to chime, I might as well state. That Scotts actions speak louder than anyone on here's words. He F-up, he keeps silent, and that too speaks volumes to the character of the man, knowing full well what is said here. If it was me, I would have manned up by now. Keep em honest down there.

Well said, Ian.

Dan Cohen wrote: Jon, there is obviously a rift between our perceptions of the whole situation. I don't want that to effect my relationship with Geir. I did consider us friends and am totally open to being friends again, not that I personally dislike him now. The day I climbed with Geir on the sheepshead, I had a genuinely good time and learned some racking techniques that I consistently use. But I do think Geir is trying to rally this issue against Scott for personal reasons. My posts to Geir have been an attempt to call that out. It's not because I'm friends with Scott. It's because I really care about the Tucson climbing community. I have repeatedly said I don't approve of Scott's actions. He openly admits, at least to anyone who cares to ask, he has made mistakes. If he wouldn't admit it, I would call him out too. With that said, I am not on this thread to make friends at the expense of my dignity. So Geir, (and Eric, who I have been critical of too) I would love to be friends and climb with you guys (I offered to talk about all this over a beer, I would still do that), but I think the climbing community is bigger than my friendships with you guys or Scott. I think this is a record for number of posts by one person in an hour, or at least it feels like it.

Dan,

Though I completely disagree with most of the things you are saying, I respect that you're willing to put your neck out there knowing that you're likely to be heavily criticized for it.

What I don't like is that you appear to be speaking for Scott. By this, I mean that you use phrases lke "Scott would show up in a public meeting", "Scott realizes he was being foolish then", and "Scott won't explain himself here".

Scott needs to speak for himself. Your posts about what Scott will and won't do, and how Scott feels, and what Scott realizes come across to me as you speaking for him.

Dan Cohen wrote:Geir, if this is about the community, why aren't you calling out Rickd? Why aren't you calling out Eric's threats to chop Scott's routes? You said you are against chopping anyone's bolts ("a position which actually benefits Scott") but it seems you are only concerned with Scott's actions.

Fair question. As others have pointed out ahead of me, though, there's a huge difference between spraying and chopping routes. I have no time or interest in policing what people say. Eric and I have both said we won't stand for chopping. To this, I would add "without the consent of the community" because I'm sure someday someone's going to bolt a classic trad line.

And with that, I'm off to sleep.

Regards,
Geir

I'd like to take this thread in a new direction. I think we've established that there should be no rogue bolt chopping of any kind in Southern AZ.

Forum threads are a permanent record of people voicing their displeasure, gonad shape & size, etc, but they are obviously not an adequate deterrent. A similar thread comes to mind about a guy in Utah who lied about FAs, chopped bolts, added bolts, etc, etc. Many people, including myself, made it crystal clear that we did not approve. However, our posts & emails didn't do a thing to slow down the meathead's actions. The only reason he finally stopped is because he got jail time for something entirely unrelated. So, what can we do to prevent these things from happening again, short of tar & feathers or actual laws about adding/removing fixed protection? On second thought, I'm for the tar & feathers, but only if they're flamingo feathers.

Off...to the new direction...

One thing I know from past experience in the Boulder region...If we can't/won't regulate ourselves...the local land managers will be happy to step in. This generally begins with a general prohibition against bolting new routes. Then, over the course of time (in some cases over a decade) new drilling may be permitted through some sort of application/vetting process. I'm not sure if this scenario is good or bad, I think this depends on your ethical prospective. However, I am sure of one thing, and this goes for all areas throughout the nation, if we can't/won't police ourselves, the authorities will!

Braxton Norwood wrote:... Forum threads are a permanent record of people voicing their displeasure, gonad shape & size, etc, but they are obviously not an adequate deterrent...

This is the truest statement on here. We hide behind a keyboard and pound our chest, dictate what others should think and do, brag about how big it is etc. The computer is nothing more than another 2 ton weapon. How many of us have gotten cut off on the road just to scream at the other driver, blow our horn and flip them off? And yet they have proven that the only one that effects (think stress and what it does to a person) is the one getting pissed off? I get why Scott won't respond. If anyone has a problem with me and started calling me names in some spineless hide-behind-a-keyboard-in-the-middle-of-the-night computer forum I wouldn't respond either. In fact I probably wouldn't even pay attention to it. The computer, just like a car, is nothing more than a spineless persons weapon. Why not grow some balls and meet Scott face to face. Call him spineless to his face. Tell him he needs counseling to his face. Threaten to chop all his routes to his face. Tell him you hate him to his face ... I absolutely HATE computers. And I'm a software engineer. I gotta get back to work.

Oh, and as far as an adequate deterrent, if someone wanted to mess with me or my routes, meet me face to face. We'll come up with an adequate deterrent.

Mike Diesen wrote: This is the truest statement on here. We hide behind a keyboard and pound our chest, dictate what others should think and do, brag about how big it is etc. The computer is nothing more than another 2 ton weapon. How many of us have gotten cut off on the road just to scream at the other driver, blow our horn and flip them off? And yet they have proven that the only one that effects (think stress and what it does to a person) is the one getting pissed off? I get why Scott won't respond. If anyone has a problem with me and started calling me names in some spineless hide-behind-a-keyboard-in-the-middle-of-the-night computer forum I wouldn't respond either. In fact I probably wouldn't even pay attention to it. The computer, just like a car, is nothing more than a spineless persons weapon. Why not grow some balls and meet Scott face to face. Call him spineless to his face. Tell him he needs counseling to his face. Threaten to chop all his routes to his face. Tell him you hate him to his face ... I absolutely HATE computers. And I'm a software engineer. I gotta get back to work. Oh, and as far as an adequate deterrent, if someone wanted to mess with me or my routes, meet me face to face. We'll come up with an adequate deterrent.

hey mike - i hear ya. i also hate computers.

i hear you're frustration, too. but there's a flip side.

i was friends - good friends - with scott for many years. i heard things HE said about others - things i never witnessed him repeat to the person's face - that make these threads pale by comparison.

and things he's said about me in private that have made their way back to me. and when i subsequently met with him he didn't repeat any of them.

so yeah, people are spraying here. i include myself in that. you justly call us out on it. but scott's no different.

by the way, i know several people who have directly talked with scott about this. speaking for myself only, i talked with scott face-to-face as soon as this became publicly known. i also emailed him and asked him to replace the original hangers.

mike, i'm curious (sincerely) - do you think that replacing the hangers was the right thing to do? and if not, have you asked scott correct this?

braxton, i think trying to find a solution to this is great. as far as deterrents go, though, there isn't a good option other than encouraging people to follow the will of the community.

Mike Diesen wrote: This is the truest statement on here. We hide behind a keyboard and pound our chest, dictate what others should think and do, brag about how big it is etc. The computer is nothing more than another 2 ton weapon. How many of us have gotten cut off on the road just to scream at the other driver, blow our horn and flip them off? And yet they have proven that the only one that effects (think stress and what it does to a person) is the one getting pissed off? I get why Scott won't respond. If anyone has a problem with me and started calling me names in some spineless hide-behind-a-keyboard-in-the-middle-of-the-night computer forum I wouldn't respond either. In fact I probably wouldn't even pay attention to it. The computer, just like a car, is nothing more than a spineless persons weapon. Why not grow some balls and meet Scott face to face. Call him spineless to his face. Tell him he needs counseling to his face. Threaten to chop all his routes to his face. Tell him you hate him to his face ... I absolutely HATE computers. And I'm a software engineer. I gotta get back to work. Oh, and as far as an adequate deterrent, if someone wanted to mess with me or my routes, meet me face to face. We'll come up with an adequate deterrent.

Once again for the record MD I have told him many of these things to his face and so has Jimbo. He really doesn't like it and in fact once threatened to assault me. Do you think sneaking around messing with others routes without talking to them is spineless? Still not answering the questions Mike? Oh, I guess I am being spineless since I didn't call you and set up a meeting to talk about it.

Listen dude I have spent more hours on the phone and in person with SA than I have being spineless at the keyboard, and the results have been the same. He says one thing and does another. So how was that for a rant return.

By the way Mike, I appreciate your standing up for your friend. I am not saying Scott is a bad person in general, just that he acts certain ways when it comes to climbing and "his areas/routes" that negatively affect me and others not to mention his own piece of mind. When he does this his friends should step up and tell him he is wrong. That is what my friends do.

Daryl Allan wrote:Just curious.. Has anyone called to ask him what his reasoning was/is?

Still curious.. and if so, what was the response?

You guys need to give it a rest.

For yourself and for climbing.

Eric, Geir, I don't want to get into my person route setting / bolting ethics on a public forum. I'll end up saying something that gets blown out of proportion and then have everyone mad at me. But if you want to discuss it more I'm always up for climbing and hanging out. Just let me know where and when. I will be at Sweet Rock this weekend setting a new route.

I realized today that in 37 years I'll be 80. That's not many good climbing years left. So I'm not going to waste them on this forum anymore.

sounds fair, mike. see you at the crags some time, and maybe we can get a beer. although i'll probably opt for a soft drink.

i'm off to sleep for now, but have some thoughts to share later.

i've started a new thread which i hope will be a positive outcome of this thread. this thread is to discuss guidelines for removal or changing fixed hardware in southern AZ. for those interested in this discussion, feel free to chime in.

mountainproject.com/v/arizo…

Mike Diesen wrote: This is the truest statement on here. We hide behind a keyboard and pound our chest, dictate what others should think and do, brag about how big it is etc. The computer is nothing more than another 2 ton weapon. How many of us have gotten cut off on the road just to scream at the other driver, blow our horn and flip them off? And yet they have proven that the only one that effects (think stress and what it does to a person) is the one getting pissed off? I get why Scott won't respond. If anyone has a problem with me and started calling me names in some spineless hide-behind-a-keyboard-in-the-middle-of-the-night computer forum I wouldn't respond either. In fact I probably wouldn't even pay attention to it. The computer, just like a car, is nothing more than a spineless persons weapon. Why not grow some balls and meet Scott face to face. Call him spineless to his face. Tell him he needs counseling to his face. Threaten to chop all his routes to his face. Tell him you hate him to his face ... I absolutely HATE computers. And I'm a software engineer. I gotta get back to work. Oh, and as far as an adequate deterrent, if someone wanted to mess with me or my routes, meet me face to face. We'll come up with an adequate deterrent.

The analogy is inaccurate. These people know each other, some of them very well. This is not some anonymous flipping of the bird to another driver whom we would never see again.

I've been following this thread since it started and have some thoughts I would like to express. I don't have time at the moment.
I'll try before the day is out.

NEW DEVELOPMENT!

Obama invites Scott and Eric to the White House for a beer. Stay tuned.

I'LL CLIMB WITH YOUR MAMA!! THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO A SPORT BOLTER IN AMERICA!!!!