Tonnere Tower Route Descriptions Removed

Mark Cushman wrote:My bad, at first glance it seemed like routes had been removed. I'm for a wiki-style system with recorded revisions for the content of the routes, areas, etc. I think it could be made to work.

A+ Idea, too much drama queen/self interest stuff these days. Keep the old pages, let the mods act as a group and decide if they want to allow the revisions.

Our policy has always been the same. Once content has become "part of the community", a user cannot unilaterally decide it should be removed (or in this case sabotaged).

I define "part of the community" as having content added by other users below it - comments, photos, routes, areas, etc.

If you think about this policy, it makes sense and is basically mandatory.

For example, if someone submits a route, and a bunch of comments get contributed.... we cannot delete the route without deleting the comments, and it isn't fair to all the other contributors of comments to have their work removed at the wish of the original poster. Same concept applies to when a user sabotages or trashes a description since it renders the content below less useful.

This policy is NOT required by our Terms of Service. Our TofS is very clear and states we could choose to keep the content, and perhaps in some extreme situations we might do that. But for reasonable users requesting reasonable removal, we follow the policy outlined above.

When a user has asked to have his content removed.... the content without sub-contributions is removed, and the other content is migrated to a "holding" user.

Peter Beal wrote:I have emailed with Bob about this as he was upset that anyone may have construed the route removal as related to the guidebook. Apparently neither he nor Ron had that motive and I can accept that fully. Before passing judgment, I think we should wait to see if Ron will state his motives. Someone who has contributed so much in terms of routes and MP descriptions should be given the benefit of the doubt and I want to correct the impression I may have conveyed that mercenary motives were behind all this.

What's the reason then? Feelings hurt on the internet?

As they say, it's complicated, but in essence yes.

Beached Nuts wrote: I personally wouldn't mind if all of b-can was deleted from the site and every user from Boulder county was banned.

Langston .. you rock!

sounds like someone realized the intarwebz is a threat to the printing press and the businesses that profit from them. but, what he (or is it they?) didn't realize is that ethics may also affect a business.

even though I use MP for beta, i still buy guide books b/c my printer doesn't fit in my crag bag. but, based on what i've read here, i probably will not be buying this guide book.

Beached Nuts wrote: I personally wouldn't mind if all of b-can was deleted from the site and every user from Boulder county was banned.

Well, you better cross that line and hit Weld County Line Road too if you're coming for me, Langston...
It's still better than getting deported/exiled to Bermuda.
But at least you guys are not bundled up like little "Ralphy's" right now. F-ing cold here lately.

Crag Dweller wrote:sounds like someone realized the intarwebz is a threat to the printing press and the businesses that profit from them. but, what he (or is it they?) didn't realize is that ethics may also affect a business. even though I use MP for beta, i still buy guide books b/c my printer doesn't fit in my crag bag. but, based on what i've read here, i probably will not be buying this guide book.

Exactly! I use both to supplement an area. Often times the info found the the book and what is on MP is quite different. It's also nice to have comment beta as well, but I still purchase the books. It probably only deters people that weren't going to buy the book anyways.

Just to set the record straight, the guidebook author had nothing to do with the descriptions being changed.

To the point, when someone is acting like an asshat, then sure, by all means point it out. But when someone is uninvolved, leave it be. I got no love for certain people, but let's not put someone elses actions on a 3rd party. Let people own their own baggage, but don't load them with other people's.
Knowing the parties involved to some degree, I'm pretty satisfied with the explanations provided that did not involve commercial motivation.

Hey all, I just got an e-mail from Harpo Productions -- they wanna do a show

Buff Johnson wrote:Hey all, I just got an e-mail from Harpo Productions -- they wanna do a show

Ooh...do tell who's casted!

Andy Laakmann wrote:Just to set the record straight, the guidebook author had nothing to do with the descriptions being changed.

thanks for clearing that up. was, as someone said, a link to buy the guide posted in place of the content?

If I couldn't delete my route descriptions in Eldo, because people had added comments, ticks, etc.,
If I wanted to give a snippy:
'I won't help you any more, go figure it out for yourselves.' then I might delete the content instead of the page and just say to "Refer to the book."
That wouldn't make it the guidebook author's (Bob's) fault.

Even if Ron was trying to help out the author, then it's STILL not the author's fault.

I may or may not care for Bob, but regardless I wouldn't want to 'hang him' for some association that wasn't even voluntary.

Make Lunge, Not War.

I think what happened here is a very good example of putting up sport routes on rappel versus doing first ascents ground up. For the most part, doing a first ascent, ground up, is a bit selfish in that the climber is doing it for their own excitement, experience, etc. Yes, the climber is probably thinking about future ascents of the route, but at that moment, getting up that chunk of unkown stone is all that counts.

It is a much different scene when equipping sport climbing routes, top down, on a crag. Many of the climbers doing this, and I think Ron falls into this category, believe they are doing a community service by opening up a new area for climbing. They see all their hard work as being for the good of the climbing community and not a selfish act.

So, when the climbing community, as is the case with both Tonnere Tower and the new crag across from Bihedral, doesn't totally embrace the work put in by the route setter, the route setter can feel unappreciated.

Bruce

Bruce, I appreciate that insight.

Tom H., I don't think the Man of Control can sincerely advocate Lunge. :)

Well I do appreciate the moderate routes put up at these areas, and the recent addition of easier routes on the left of the Canal Zone. It seems the routes get a lot of negative comments here, but also are the ones that a lot of climbers are out on. Maybe they are mostly newer climbers, like myself, that are just learning to lead sport routes, and don't tend to post much here. But one can see that the areas are used and well liked if one actually visits them.

For me the moderate routes (5.7 to 5.9) let me lead something, let me get out with other newer climbers, and let me set a rope for my son to climb. Since I am not a trad leader, this is really appreciated. I expect once I do become able to lead trad routes, I may understand more about the emotion attached to bolting routes protectable with trad gear, but for now it is the only way I can climb them.

We need all types of routes for the variety of people that enjoy climbing outdoors. While I disagree with the removal of the data here, I can guess that it was related to all the negative comments that were made here.

I would like to add my sincere thanks to Ron and the others that have put time and energy into moderate bolted routes in Boulder Canyon and elsewhere.

I like Tonnere Tower. It is not world class but it certainly is not a choss pile. Sidekick in particular was a really fun route.

The setters got plenty of positive feedback too, not just negative.
The last "straw" of which I am aware (and may be only partially informed) is when the retro-bolting of some existing lines on the 'Cascade Crag' ( Across from The Bihedral aka Cascade Crag ) caused a division of opinion even between a few of the developers.

Bruno Hache, who was involved at those cliffs, (but did not knowingly retrobolt any trad lines) stepped up and decided he'd fix the issue by removing certain bolts as agreed by some discussion with the original FA folks... I applaud him for that.

That was all discussed openly on MP.com before.
( "Across from Bihedral" bolt-a-thon )

Perhaps, for those who think that Ron is getting picked on, you could reconsider a little bit of additional history.