MP Forum Tone

Tim Lutz wrote: The only thing better than Nick starting a thread regarding 'tone' is watching an esteemed Administrator lash out randomly like a paranoid pitbull on the thread! My post questioning your bragging that you can do any 13a/b on the front range without training is me being an 'asshat'? I happen to agree that 13a isn't necessarily that hard, but I train to do them. Look at the tick profiles of most on here, I would guess those people think you are the asshat.

A few thoughts:

1) I misspoke and mislead Hank when I said that lime-head was Stich. My fault. In know who Mark is and I know who Tim is and ai said the wrong name because I had just read Tim's post. I screwwed up. But since all parties involved were not dicks, it ended up OK. Had one of them actually been a major jerk, it would have ended differently, 'cause that's the difference between the jerks and the reasonable people.
2) This wasn't Hank's best moment, either way, I agree, and I've pointed that out to him privately (and now, publicly). We're friends enough so that I know he already knows that.
3) Bigger asshats are the ones that put words in people's mouths. Who said Hank never trains, other than you? Did Hank say that? He puts in his hours.
4) If you have to twist the facts or people's words or history to make a point, you don't have one (a point).

Which comes to the main and final thought:

5) I think people's behavior over time will be the big factor here. Someone who is non-stop a jerk is likely to get fried quickly. Some one who is a jerk 1/2 of the time will probably take more than twice as long to get fried, and I bet some who blunder every now and then on a bad day get away with quite a bit because it's going to be assumed that they had a bad day, didn't mean for it to come out like it did, or at least contribute enough that is positive to be worth the occasional trouble.

I'll try what is "Stockholm syndrome" for $500, Alex.

At least for a few moments, the Proj got classic again.
Been saying it for decades, when big fuck-ups happen, they are usually near/from Boulder.

where did all the females go?

What does the tone of the MP thread on tone tell us about the tone on MP?

The only mistake would be to assume that MP has in any way cornered a portion of the nasty market. It's the same everywhere you go on the internet, except perhaps from certain moderated professional forums, where everyone truly cares about the subject matter and those who don't are quickly eliminated. It seems that those examples are special cases and are quite outside the norm.

As a long-term participant in a number of internet climbing forums, I've learned to coexist with all kinds of "tones." Even if you managed to trim off the most egregious bad behaviors, there seems to be little hope of achieving much beyond intermittent oases of civility and relevance. And make no mistake: that's they way many participants want it. The pervasive "let's get the popcorn" comments speak to the pleasure extracted from passively watching folks fight with each other, and it isn't unusual to hear remarks that eliminating an offensive individual would make the forum "boring," presumably because then all that would be left was the sharing of information and stories about climbing.

Sometimes the quest for common decency seems almost Quixotic, and never more so than in this political season. There are clearly limits to what people of good conscience can do. Personally, I concluded long ago that the only tone I have any control over is my own. I have to face my conscience (and ultimately, my god) over how I interact with the world and what, if anything, I contribute. As I've said many times now, the internet has been educational in teaching me about the kind of person I don't want to be, but guidance about what to aspire to is rather less prevalent, so even more appreciated when it is encountered.

Meanwhile, it is what it is. I think it is nice that the site owners want to improve the tone, and wish them luck in finding a way to do that.

I'm just glad that I've rarely (maybe never) witnessed people behaving at the crag as some do on MP. Maybe MP is providing a service in this regard. People bite their tongues and feign decency at the crag, then come on MP and let loose.

Rgold=wise man

Well stated, Rgold

I made a remark earlier about popcorn (in jest), but really don't find watching other people bickering, arguing and dissing each other all that entertaining. I have never liked reality TV, Jerry Springer or other unnecessary drama.

Often, the solution is to just avoid threads like this and to police one's own words, as you pointed out

rgold wrote:What does the tone of the MP thread on tone tell us about the tone on MP? The only mistake would be to assume that MP has in any way cornered a portion of the nasty market. It's the same everywhere you go on the internet, except perhaps from certain moderated professional forums, where everyone truly cares about the subject matter and those who don't are quickly eliminated. It seems that those examples are special cases and are quite outside the norm. As a long-term participant in a number of internet climbing forums, I've learned to coexist with all kinds of "tones." Even if you managed to trim off the most egregious bad behaviors, there seems to be little hope of achieving much beyond intermittent oases of civility and relevance. And make no mistake: that's they way many participants want it. The pervasive "let's get the popcorn" comments speak to the pleasure extracted from passively watching folks fight with each other, and it isn't unusual to hear remarks that eliminating an offensive individual would make the forum "boring," presumably because then all that would be left was the sharing of information and stories about climbing. Sometimes the quest for common decency seems almost Quixotic, and never more so than in this political season. There are clearly limits to what people of good conscience can do. Personally, I concluded long ago that the only tone I have any control over is my own. I have to face my conscience (and ultimately, my god) over how I interact with the world and what, if anything, I contribute. As I've said many times now, the internet has been educational in teaching me about the kind of person I don't want to be, but guidance about what to aspire to is rather less prevalent, so even more appreciated when it is encountered. Meanwhile, it is what it is. I think it is nice that the site owners want to improve the tone, and wish them luck in finding a way to do that.

Good stuff as usual. Keep tilting at windmills. It's as worthwhile a cause as any in this world of ignorance and deception.

A. Michael wrote:People bite their tongues and feign decency at the crag, then come on MP and let loose.

I actually see the same behavior in everyday life. It seems to start on places like MP and spread from there: people who have not earned any kind of "place", who in turn try to tear down others who have earned themselves a "place", and only to be helped out by people who rightly or wrongly feel the person who has earned a "place" is some kind of threat to them and their own existence. Then, all of a sudden, some bullshit at best half-true narrative begins incessantly spewing forth from peoples scream-holes about the person who earned their "place", and any retaliation to this narrative is met by an emotional, irrational, and butt-hurt appeal to some confused version of the "greater good" on the part of the person whining. Typically the appeal is along the lines of that they are trying to make the world "safer", "nicer", or "more appealing to women" i.e. less full of people who they don't like likely for unconscious and biologically based reasons. In my experience, women and people in general prefer to avoid places where this kind of thing happens, and prefer their significant others to avoid them as well.

Thus in my opinion the problem plaguing this site, other web sites, and America in general, is the opportunistic bullshit described above. When this opportunistic bullshit is combined with the management style which rewards the complainers, it fills the management ranks almost exclusively with useful idiot sycophants, which in turn makes for poor management and therefore poor institutions. If big changes are not made, things will get worse, potentially much worse, and for the country in general. This stuff has been getting ready to boil over for years, at least since the whole B.S. started under G.W.Bush with the patriot act (which is legislation for which the drafting process began under Bill Clinton, so thank your lucky starts Hillary lost...), which is when it went from a gentle simmer to a roiling boil.

I can understand that whiners gonna whine, posers gonna pose, and therefore trolls gonna troll, but at the least if people could get past this whole "this total no-accomplishment, appeared from out of no-where, ass-hat, has their undies in a wad over so-and-so for no discernible or rational reason (at least not one they will look anyone in the eye and admit to), therefore I will use this opportunity to come down on so-and-so and therefore validate some sycophants wadded up undies, therefore encouraging more of the same wadded-up-undie-bullshit from the sycophant as well as everyone else" the world would breathe a little easier. Managers and everyone else should tell those people to take their privilege points and shove them somewhere the sun does not shine instead of validating the whole privilege point concept by giving their complaint any validity, and to do it loudly and proudly so they only have to do it once or twice and everyone gets the message: you do not determine the order of the world, Nature does. Even if the sycophant tries to put up a fight, they play a losing hand, and it only takes signaling at a couple of them before the problem goes away. These people are unpopular everywhere, and everyone wonders how they don't just get flicked off the face of the earth like the specks of dust they are.

As for MP, this thread, and the topic of this post, outside of Tom-onator and Tim Lutz making up their own reality, referencing directly to it to try to throw real shade in real life on a well-respected member of our community, and not getting penalized for it by having their posts edited or deleted and their accounts temporarily deactivated...other than that this thread has been good.

Also, anyone who can't handle a little perspective-challenging tongue in cheek trolling, no matter the subject it pertains to, needs to lighten up a little.

How did my post violate rule number 1 any more or less than other comments? I get that people dont always agree with the content of my words or my perspective but I guess there is some serious flagging against me?

The tone of this site is not good because of the leadership here.

JNE wrote: I actually see the same behavior in everyday life. It seems to start on places like MP and spread from there: people who have not earned any kind of "place", who in turn try to tear down others who have earned themselves a "place", and only to be helped out by people who rightly or wrongly feel the person who has earned a "place" is some kind of threat to them and their own existence. Then, all of a sudden, some bullshit at best half-true narrative begins incessantly spewing forth from peoples scream-holes about the person who earned their "place", and any retaliation to this narrative is met by an emotional, irrational, and butt-hurt appeal to some confused version of the "greater good" on the part of the person whining. Typically the appeal is along the lines of that they are trying to make the world "safer", "nicer", or "more appealing to women" i.e. less full of people who they don't like likely for unconscious and biologically based reasons. In my experience, women and people in general prefer to avoid places where this kind of thing happens, and prefer their significant others to avoid them as well. Thus in my opinion the problem plaguing this site, other web sites, and America in general, is the opportunistic bullshit described above. When this opportunistic bullshit is combined with the management style which rewards the complainers, it fills the management ranks almost exclusively with useful idiot sycophants, which in turn makes for poor management and therefore poor institutions. If big changes are not made, things will get worse, potentially much worse, and for the country in general. This stuff has been getting ready to boil over for years, at least since the whole B.S. started under G.W.Bush with the patriot act (which is legislation for which the drafting process began under Bill Clinton, so thank your lucky starts Hillary lost...), which is when it went from a gentle simmer to a roiling boil. I can understand that whiners gonna whine, posers gonna pose, and therefore trolls gonna troll, but at the least if people could get past this whole "this total no-accomplishment, appeared from out of no-where, ass-hat, has their undies in a wad over so-and-so for no discernible or rational reason (at least not one they will look anyone in the eye and admit to), therefore I will use this opportunity to come down on so-and-so and therefore validate some sycophants wadded up undies, therefore encouraging more of the same wadded-up-undie-bullshit from the sycophant as well as everyone else" the world would breathe a little easier. Managers and everyone else should tell those people to take their privilege points and shove them somewhere the sun does not shine instead of validating the whole privilege point concept by giving their complaint any validity, and to do it loudly and proudly so they only have to do it once or twice and everyone gets the message: you do not determine the order of the world, Nature does. Even if the sycophant tries to put up a fight, they play a losing hand, and it only takes signaling at a couple of them before the problem goes away. These people are unpopular everywhere, and everyone wonders how they don't just get flicked off the face of the earth like the specks of dust they are. As for MP, this thread, and the topic of this post, outside of Tom-onator and Tim Lutz making up their own reality, referencing directly to it to try to throw real shade in real life on a well-respected member of our community, and not getting penalized for it by having their posts edited or deleted and their accounts temporarily deactivated...other than that this thread has been good. Also, anyone who can't handle a little perspective-challenging tongue in cheek trolling, no matter the subject it pertains to, needs to lighten up a little.

LOL

You're missed over on your garbage Woodson thread, btw

rgold wrote:What does the tone of the MP thread on tone tell us about the tone on MP? The only mistake would be to assume that MP has in any way cornered a portion of the nasty market. It's the same everywhere you go on the internet, except perhaps from certain moderated professional forums, where everyone truly cares about the subject matter and those who don't are quickly eliminated. It seems that those examples are special cases and are quite outside the norm. As a long-term participant in a number of internet climbing forums, I've learned to coexist with all kinds of "tones." Even if you managed to trim off the most egregious bad behaviors, there seems to be little hope of achieving much beyond intermittent oases of civility and relevance. And make no mistake: that's they way many participants want it. The pervasive "let's get the popcorn" comments speak to the pleasure extracted from passively watching folks fight with each other, and it isn't unusual to hear remarks that eliminating an offensive individual would make the forum "boring," presumably because then all that would be left was the sharing of information and stories about climbing. Sometimes the quest for common decency seems almost Quixotic, and never more so than in this political season. There are clearly limits to what people of good conscience can do. Personally, I concluded long ago that the only tone I have any control over is my own. I have to face my conscience (and ultimately, my god) over how I interact with the world and what, if anything, I contribute. As I've said many times now, the internet has been educational in teaching me about the kind of person I don't want to be, but guidance about what to aspire to is rather less prevalent, so even more appreciated when it is encountered. Meanwhile, it is what it is. I think it is nice that the site owners want to improve the tone, and wish them luck in finding a way to do that.

My sentiment, exactly, rgold, and well stated!

Having been able to dismissed some men's crudeness as "boys will be boys", allowed me stress free participation on a number of male-dominated forums over the years. I was, however, pleasantly surprised to find an atypically respectful tone on MP. So, I really appreciate the effort and all for making it more so, if it can be done!

Logo still sucks.

JNE wrote: I actually see the same behavior in everyday life. It seems to start on places like MP and spread from there: people who have not earned any kind of "place", who in turn try to tear down others who have earned themselves a "place", and only to be helped out by people who rightly or wrongly feel the person who has earned a "place" is some kind of threat to them and their own existence. Then, all of a sudden, some bullshit at best half-true narrative begins incessantly spewing forth from peoples scream-holes about the person who earned their "place", and any retaliation to this narrative is met by an emotional, irrational, and butt-hurt appeal to some confused version of the "greater good" on the part of the person whining. Typically the appeal is along the lines of that they are trying to make the world "safer", "nicer", or "more appealing to women" i.e. less full of people who they don't like likely for unconscious and biologically based reasons. In my experience, women and people in general prefer to avoid places where this kind of thing happens, and prefer their significant others to avoid them as well. Thus in my opinion the problem plaguing this site, other web sites, and America in general, is the opportunistic bullshit described above. When this opportunistic bullshit is combined with the management style which rewards the complainers, it fills the management ranks almost exclusively with useful idiot sycophants, which in turn makes for poor management and therefore poor institutions. If big changes are not made, things will get worse, potentially much worse, and for the country in general. This stuff has been getting ready to boil over for years, at least since the whole B.S. started under G.W.Bush with the patriot act (which is legislation for which the drafting process began under Bill Clinton, so thank your lucky starts Hillary lost...), which is when it went from a gentle simmer to a roiling boil. I can understand that whiners gonna whine, posers gonna pose, and therefore trolls gonna troll, but at the least if people could get past this whole "this total no-accomplishment, appeared from out of no-where, ass-hat, has their undies in a wad over so-and-so for no discernible or rational reason (at least not one they will look anyone in the eye and admit to), therefore I will use this opportunity to come down on so-and-so and therefore validate some sycophants wadded up undies, therefore encouraging more of the same wadded-up-undie-bullshit from the sycophant as well as everyone else" the world would breathe a little easier. Managers and everyone else should tell those people to take their privilege points and shove them somewhere the sun does not shine instead of validating the whole privilege point concept by giving their complaint any validity, and to do it loudly and proudly so they only have to do it once or twice and everyone gets the message: you do not determine the order of the world, Nature does. Even if the sycophant tries to put up a fight, they play a losing hand, and it only takes signaling at a couple of them before the problem goes away. These people are unpopular everywhere, and everyone wonders how they don't just get flicked off the face of the earth like the specks of dust they are.

Incoherent adolescent faux philosophical wannabe Ayn Rand borderline social Darwinist view from nowhere ranting.

Your privilege is showing. And you've got a lot of points.

;)

City Dweller wrote: Incoherent adolescent faux philosophical wannabe Ayn Rand borderline social Darwinist view from nowhere ranting. Your privilege is showing. And you've got a lot of points. ;)

Perhaps you could go into detail. Otherwise, perhaps you are an "idiot sycophant" with a "scream-hole" who is a "no-accomplishment, appeared from out of no-where, ass-hat" who "has their undies in a wad over so-and-so for no discernible or rational reason (at least not one they will look anyone in the eye and admit to)".

Seriously, this is the second time you have accused me of privilege in these forums, with nothing to back it up. There is a tounge-in-cheek troll, and then there is harassment...

JNE wrote: Perhaps you could go into detail. Otherwise, perhaps you are an "idiot sycophant" with a "scream-hole" who is a "no-accomplishment, appeared from out of no-where, ass-hat" who "has their undies in a wad over so-and-so for no discernible or rational reason (at least not one they will look anyone in the eye and admit to)". Seriously, this is the second time you have accused me of privilege in these forums, with nothing to back it up. There is a tounge-in-cheek troll, and then there is harassment...

Beware the ellipses!!!

noun: sycophant; plural noun: sycophants

a person who acts obsequiously toward someone important in order to gain advantage.

synonyms: yes-man, bootlicker, brown-noser, toady, lickspittle, flatterer, flunky, lackey, spaniel, doormat, stooge, cringer, suck, suck-up

A little ironic that a post about tone turns in to a silly flame war.

Glad to hear admins are doing something about it. Toxic members of the community should be booted.