What happened to the Millbrook, Gunks page

If I were to follow the current logic to its end, I could go over to the Trapps and start top roping a bunch of X rated, unleadable routes. Then I could go back home and flood the MP Trapps page with dozens and dozens of my new entries.

All it would take is credibility, say if I had done hard climbs and had been around the Gunks for a while. It would make people feel awkward to question me. The admins would be stuck in a situation where they are either tyrannical suppressors of free speech by removing my work or they have to leave the Trapps section a mess full of my additions.

I feel like a dangerous precedent is being set.

Maybe I'm alone on this but I liked when the Millbrook page was sleepy. There was just enough on MP to get you interested, the rest was up to you to go out and explore. Same with CFrac's whitecliff site, just enough.

My first trip out there this year was a highlight in my short, little climbing career.

This note is my kind request to leave that page and that place a mystery. Lesser mortals like me can go out there and imagine a still wide open cliff, filled with possibility, and dream up our own crazy top rope problems. Its so much better that way, in my opinion.

brian9 wrote:Lesser mortals like me can go out there and imagine a still wide open cliff, filled with possibility, and dream up our own crazy top rope problems. Its so much better that way, in my opinion.

You could get the same effect by simply not reading the MP page.

I emailed Julie on the side with some opinions. Quick summary of my email.

1. Routes are misleading and confusing because if the way Donald posted them. I don't think anything useful will be taken away from these routes being posted.

2. I think it hurts the overall gunks MP page.

3. I hope they are removed.

There is no way that any one can seriously now be saying that the data collection needs
Censorship
The whole point is that you don't need to look it up. But you can.
the data. The beta, the record of a climbing zone & lines is there.

That is a complete other thing than not clipping A bolt.
The info is and must be included if it has been added.

The adneseator who violates her position at will will
do what she wants with out valid confirmation.

JHS will you be checking out some of Donald's lines?
Donald is right to play by the rules as they are set now .

There are many very hard or very obvious Great lines that are a word Of mouth climb among 5 people then lost.
Ive talked to a few of the old time climbers who banged pins.That would tell me of lines to look for.
You had to know how they climbed to know what to look for.I've banged pins, cleaned a line of holds and placements climbed a few variations And never admitted that it was me.
I have been rebuffed by the Weak sauce admins for adding My routes.Short of doing what Donald Perry has done, laid claim to his legacy,! There is little else that can be done, I know this first-hand,
As proof here in all this long winded bullshjt is this :"Sticky Vicky" was led this year with a nest of pre-placed rps and filed ball nut. It's now called "In Diana Jones".
If that had happened to Donald Perry?

So when that keeps happening, and you have spent 40 years climbing lines, and were throrough
Enough To Have KEPT TRACK OF THEM, you do what Mr Perry has begung to do
You list them to the Data base if you want to !

I think this is almost exactly what Donald was thinking:

I lived & climbed in the Gunks for 30 years
I often did nothing else, but climb.
everyday for three months at a time
.( full moon marathons in 79')
The areas I climbed in at just the Nears Have not been found yet.

((I think that D Perry has every right to think ))

Now 'they' are going to the 'bank'?
And WHAT? They think that they were there first!?
NO WAY!
not that I care about anyone else, BUT
Thinking no one has climbed there?
- No way,-
I've been visiting Millbrook almost exclusively
Since before most of these climbers have been alive.

Donald Perry is right he has added the very important body of work to the data base
do not edit change or censor his additions in any way!

You can ignore guide books and not take any notes,
go out and learn your way around a
Specific climbing zone the same way we have forever .

before the Internet or gyms we sometimes took a long walk to that cliff over there
and climbed it.
You can still do that.
If you want to go and have adventures, go a head.
No one is stopping you it is just Donald and a lot of others were there before too.

I do think that I'm going to take this as a sign and add a few of my climbs that are not published anywhere here

As far as style or how to climb them ?m as 'X' rated leads or in the form of top ropes?

When did others get to tell me what way to label what I climbed ?,
This is going to take some thought on my part.
I do not want any input from others.m
I don't need any input from someone who thinks they know it all and are only projecting the one narrative .

donald perry wrote:Dear Mike, I will never forget those moonlight marathons, I thought that was insane, I remember Darcy was doing that too ... I went to sleep. You wrote: ".I've banged pins, cleaned a line of holds and placements climbed a few variations And never admitted that it was me." I think you mean to say "I Mike have cleaned a line, the holds, the placements, I used a wire brush." I never chipped any holds, however I have done some cleaning of holds, and in the process shit falls out. Some of this stuff between the cracks is some kind of mixture of rock that crumbles and disintegrates when you touch it. On Lost Word in the rotten rock section where the ice climbing is I pryed out some shit out of a crack, someone made a big deal about that ... back in the day Brang left a lot of rocks on Enduro Man because they were trying to keep climbs as original as possible. On the second ascent we just threw off the rocks and sat down on the ledge in the middle of the climb, I think that that block has now fallen off, not sure. I don't like dropping rocks accidently on people. And I do not like getting grit in my eyes and going to the hospital to have an eye doctor remove it with a needle. That's what can happen on a new climb. He has to look at your eye through a magnifying glass after he adds some special fuid, and then you have to keep your eyes perfectly still while he picks at it with a sharp needle. Then you have a scar on your cornea that lasts forever ... unless you get lazar surgery.

Now hold on !
You and I have not spoken in 20 ? Years, we last saw each other. When??
Much to my surprise, I think I'm a lot more memorable than I am!
And that hurts to write,
dang it Donald that is some bullying macro-aggression !
Flashy Foxz, will be to by flying to my defense 2weeks after the topic is dead
I can wear anything I want !

Donald
I've only just begun to chew on some of what you have added.
I have been grasping for what to say, I know the thourogh way that you climb everything.
I stand behind you in this if there is any argument it is not with me.

I missed how snarky that got!
Wait I'm not at all digging up that old BS
&
Yes I remember your eye story and have worn goggles since then (83? )
I never thought one way or the other about you technique,
you have been an unstoppable climbing force. Since
I want to get this right so I was leading climbs in '76 you to I think?
Anyway good on you ! to have stuck to your way!

It is ok that you barley remember me, and that - yes - I was all over that section of the Nears.
I never have told anyone anything about what I did. It is proud, though. . ..

As to the cleaning thing I am a big fan of cleaning ' IT' to code;

Clean enough to eat off of.!

One has to send crap & rock to leave safe lines.(before, moratorium, I've trundled )
I hope that you have too.

Also, after that BS, you were almost careful to the other extent, leaving some crud.....
I have followed some of the things that you were the only one to have ever climbed ?

I think that my sense of humor is miss placed here, so I took it down.

Yes as to the self severing meaning , a slip in the writing maybe,
If the point was not conveyed; it was that the near religious ways that most of us have tried to adhere to in development of climbs should be recognized, - I think for the most part it is.

Personally I would just clear the claimed FAs and keep the routes. Claiming FAs on TR is lame and egotistical, just look at some old traprock guides for CT for examples.

Lets all pray tonight and see what God says.

donald perry wrote:T Roper. You wrote: "Personally I would just clear the claimed FAs and keep the routes. Claiming FAs on TR is lame and egotistical, just look at some old traprock guides for CT for examples. " From Don: So your point is that these kinds of climbs need to be soloed. I can do that on video now, no problem. But I did not do that because I think it is more than pointless. I do not understand or subscribe to the mentality of Mr. A.H. we find in climbing magazines that newbies like to google over. What's the point? Maybe you could explain it to me here, thanks.

I'm having a really hard time understanding your posts, your comments on routes and your route descriptions as well as your lack of being able to use the quote function. Whats up?

There is nothing wrong with TR FAs in this context. There is long historical precedent and often strong reasons (a little squeezed, not wanting to intrude on a nearby classic with fixed gear etc.) Getting so fixated on lead ascents to the point of completely disregarding TR ascents is a modern phenomenon probably born out of sport and competition climbing. In some ways TRs can be a very pure form of climbing, focused on the act itself and not the mechanics of protection. IMO they should just be properly listed as such until somebody comes along and leads them. Calling them X is rather odd though, unless they have been lead or have some heinous pendulum that can't be protected. It is not something to get overly worked up about though. Just use the protection rating that is the most useful and accurate.

I have got to say though, some of the prose and over sensitivity above sounds like it is a result of somebody living in a cave and smoking way too much weed for way too long, lol, and I like weed and am inclined to live in a cave.

Edit- T Roper, using an egotistical CT nutcase as representative may not be the best example. Not everybody pointing out a cool line they climbed is making a huge deal out of it or trying to dominate others.

Donald,

There are a few simple things that are at issue.

1. Safety ratings are generally assigned to routes that have BEEN led. You didn't lead these routes and thus shouldn't be giving them a safety rating. People dont assign safety ratings to Top Ropes. You can assume its X but until you lead it you shouldn't label it as such as it implies it HAS BEEN LED.

2. You are also giving them Apline ratings, 'V', 'IV', 'III', etc. When they are not alpine routes.

Grade I: Normally requires several hours; can be of any difficulty.
Grade II: Requires half a day; any technical difficulty
Grade III:Requires a day to do the technical portion; any technical difficulty
Grade IV:Requires a full day for the technical portion; the hardest pitch is usually no less than 5.7 (in the YDS rating)
Grade V:Requires a day and a half; the hardest pitch is usually 5.8 or harder
Grade VI:A multiday excursion with difficult free climbing and/or aid climbing

3. Lastly you are claiming FA's for a TR's at the Gunks. That's a little audacious without some research (which maybe you have done?). Also a little out of style for the Gunks' FAs and thus why folks might take some issue with it.

Leave the routes up, remove the trad safety ratings and the alpine ratings. And suggest the FA as you by using a question mark FA: Donald Perry? That's my suggestion to you. Do that and this pretty much all goes away.

Morgan Patterson wrote:Donald, There are a few simple things that are at issue. 1. Safety ratings are generally assigned to routes that have BEEN led. You didn't lead these routes and thus shouldn't be giving them a safety rating. People dont assign safety ratings to Top Ropes. You can assume its X but until you lead it you shouldn't label it as such as it implies it HAS BEEN LED. 2. You are also giving them Apline ratings, 'V', 'IV', 'III', etc. When they are not alpine routes. Grade I: Normally requires several hours; can be of any difficulty. Grade II: Requires half a day; any technical difficulty Grade III:Requires a day to do the technical portion; any technical difficulty Grade IV:Requires a full day for the technical portion; the hardest pitch is usually no less than 5.7 (in the YDS rating) Grade V:Requires a day and a half; the hardest pitch is usually 5.8 or harder Grade VI:A multiday excursion with difficult free climbing and/or aid climbing 3. Lastly you are claiming FA's for a TR's at the Gunks. That's a little audacious without some research. Also a little out of style for the Gunks' FAs and thus why folks might take some issue with it. Leave the routes up, remove the trad safety ratings and the alpine ratings. And suggest the FA as you by using a question mark FA: Donald Perry? That's my suggestion to you.

That's pretty much the gist.

I think there are several issues at play:

1. Clutter on the Millbrook page: The millbrook page used to be a catalogue of a few fine classics. The new entries outnumber the classics; have very long and confusing names.
2. Quality of route descriptions is inconsistent with the rest of the very high quality ‘Gunks MP pages.
3. TR FAs: Is the style of the reported FA consistent with the local ethics?

I don’t agree with ‘anything and everything belongs on MP if I touched it.’

Link for the lazy

Nick Sweeney wrote: Link for the lazy

even better place to see - mountainproject.com/u/donal…

Mrkb3 wrote: 3. TR FAs: Is the style of the reported FA consistent with the local ethics?

Ethics: Moral dilemmas, Principles, Etc (altering the rock for fixed gear)
Style: Trends of the time (TR or Trad?)

opengate.org/access-fund-bl…

This is so good. The Gnome keeps good company, it would appear.

Burcheydawwwwwwg wrote:This is so good. The Gnome keeps good company, it would appear.

secret govt experiments brah, shhhh

Mrkb3 wrote: 1. Clutter on the Millbrook page: The millbrook page used to be a catalogue of a few fine classics. The new entries outnumber the classics; have very long and confusing names.

Also a lot of Don's routes have 4-star ratings with 1 vote... by Don. Going to make it hard to find the actual classics.

When it comes to the Gunks, there’s a special reverence for the history. And it goes without saying, the ethics.

The routes recorded in Dick Williams guidebooks and now, Christian Fracchia’s Gunks Apps, in my opinion are the best records. It’s clear to myself (and most others) that these guys, along with their contributors, really took to task when putting these guidebooks together.

When looking at route entries on Mountain Project I normally accept them for what they are. But when you see rapid-fire entries with strange and inaccurate grade descriptions of first ascents done by one person, all on top-rope, and over the span of what looks like a few days it could definitely cause a person to question their validity. And that could lead to a lot of problems in the future since many routes and areas exists solely on Mountain Project.

And here's another issue. Despite the long-documented history of Millbrook and its difficulties, there’s all of the sudden this raging new/old guy who out of nowhere has conquered all these routes that nobody over the past how many years would ever bother with. Think about the impression that it’s giving. It seems more ego-driven than for the honest sake of putting up new routes and trying to preserve climbing history. It’s turned the Millbrook page into a cluster of confusion that's clearly irritated people and lowered standards.

Michael C
Donald Perry IS THAT HISTORY THAT YOU SPEAK OF

the history of the Gunks. has more than the one narrative.

I have not read what you said and won't for a few hours.

Just know that you are so out of your depth here that you should stop.

Michael C wrote:When it comes to the Gunks, there’s a special reverence for the history. And it goes without saying, the ethics. The routes recorded in Dick Williams guidebooks and now, Christian Fracchia’s Gunks Apps, in my opinion are the best records. It’s clear to myself (and most others) that these guys, along with their contributors, really took to task when putting these guidebooks together. When looking at route entries on Mountain Project I normally accept them for what they are. But when you see rapid-fire entries with strange and inaccurate grade descriptions of first ascents done by one person, all on top-rope, and over the span of what looks like a few days it could definitely cause a person to question their validity. And that could lead to a lot of problems in the future since many routes and areas exists solely on Mountain Project. And here's another issue. Despite the long-documented history of Millbrook and its difficulties, there’s all of the sudden this raging new/old guy who out of nowhere has conquered all these routes that nobody over the past how many years would ever bother with. Think about the impression that it’s giving. It seems more ego-driven than for the honest sake of putting up new routes and trying to preserve climbing history. It’s turned the Millbrook page into a cluster of confusion that's clearly irritated people and lowered standards.

What a strange set of circumstances. How did I get two identical posts past the filter ?
The topic is a wash with important issues.

if you only have the. Gunks to climb at it has a bit more importance.
The climbs that Donald has listed in the last month or so are the combination of various time
periods that span over the last 25 Y'Rs or so.

I'm sure that some thing motivated this beta drop.
I have also just been told that old lines that I cleaned and climbed in a good style
have been re-led in a differnt style and re-named ,
That kind of sucks for me.

I know that if I were Donald, with lists of climbs , I would do the same thing he has.
I would start to put out some more information. Just as he has, to see if there is an intrest in knowing. What has been climbed.

Going against the The Gospell? That is The Dick Williams legacy?
Are people saying that only Dick Williams can know what has been climbed ?
Why would you believe in only one person's opinion knowing
that he has human failings ?

He was never generous or interested in some other people's climbing.

I and others he did not give him our information anymore after
his "select" came out. (in 91-92? Or when ever.)

I have climbed some of these new routes. They are sustained and some of the best climbing to try out here. However if they aren't done on top rope a slip would be fatal. The only alternative would be to put bolts which would disguste me. I like that some one is finding these new routes for me to try so keep up the good work. Also I don't see the problem with some one getting the credit for doing the work.