You can now flag a discriminatory name

Andrew Doumont wrote:

My Boulder Canyon guide does Mark, and on this particular route it’s obvious the author gleaned a lot of information from Mountain Project. And that’s for the better, I say. Why would that be different from the author getting information from one of his local friends?

If there is good info on MP, why wouldn’t you add it to your book? And shifting a few words around like you did in English class doesn’t mean anything to me. The info is what actually matters. And there is only so many ways to write “hand crack” or “left-facing dihedral”

Edit: Mark, how about this whole crag which the developer seems to have first shared in MP and is now in my guidebook that came out years later. mountainproject.com/area/10…

At first you said GB authors were quoting MP.com.
That's what I read Mark's challenge to you to be about.
That GB Authors use MP as a resource to find info and routes I don't think is in dispute.
I've been 'along for the ride' in one way or another (IE: corresponding with authors and publishers who were researching routes, or going climbing with them for that same purpose) for the writing of a whole lot of books, including Eldo, Flatirons, Table, SSV, South Platte, Turkey Rocks, RMNP, & Bocan. In every case, the authors use existing books and the net for info.  I've been contacted by non-local authors about routes I put on MP.com at other areas.  But that is not the same as quoting MP.com.  IE for The Flatirons or Bocan new guide, one of the authors was one of my climbing partners, and he climbed about every route there and described it himself.  If you find it hard to believe, note that heights. bolt counts, etc are not always what they have said in prior books or on the net.  Not to mention that the words simply are not the same...

came here to read a thread about racism. ended up learning some information about global economics.

Im sorry, what I meant to say was "ended up learning people have no clue what they are talking about when discussing global economics."

68% of statistics are made up on the spot.

97% of statistics are pulled from unreliable internet sources.

Not Hobo Greg wrote: Anyone care to explain how “Superman” is offensive? Allowing any route to be flagged by anyone?? Yea, that can’t possibly be abused.

None of this affects any actual change, but it does give ammo to those who will re-elect Trump.

You know what's great about this system? That just because it was flagged nothing has changed.

Unlike, for instance, people that can suffer greatly for false accusations, the rock doesn't know it was accused. It doesn't matter if it's called Superman or Superbad. There is no need to act on the flagging if it's trivial. And in context, although there needs to be enhanced mechanisms to protect people from false accusations, 995 out of 1000 victims of something like sexual assault don't get justice because the system is broken.

The other day I was at a cliff and Mountain Project said there was a peregrine issue, and I didn't see any peregrines! How many call out threads should I make?

So for the people that keep asking me why I care, or that I should find something else to worry about... why does it chafe so much that a little warning is attached to a name that could be innocuous? Are you all lobbying to strengthen laws about domestic violence and Title IX while you're not here trying to protect the names of some meaningless route (keeping in mind that flagging means communication, not execution)?

Andrew Doumont wrote:

The guide does quote MP. It literally has the quote marks in the book.

And no, at first I said “I imagine many guidebook authors get information from Mountain Project actually...” GB Authors using MP was, in fact, what was in dispute if you look up the chain of replies a little bit.

Also, in fact, what was indispute is what you SAID, not what you said you said or what you meant.
And what you said was:
Andrew Doumont wrote: I have read many route descriptions in guidebooks literally quoting mountain project though and see guidebook authors active on mountain project. 

That does not say 'using' that says 'literally quoting' and it says it is true of many descriptions.
You can't later say with any honesty that Mark disagreed with something else.

I'm curious to know what routes and what books, as there are 'many' claimed.  But if it actually quotes and attributes, then it is not plagiarism.  But I'll give you that it is 'literally quoting.'
I'd just like to know of at least a few examples, as I am genuinely curious.  I doubt it is frequent, but I'm not shocked that it could happen.  I'd suspect it would be used if something said were clever, funny, or said by the FA party but in dispute.

Andrew Doumont wrote:

Tony, you are starting half way through, not my original claim. In fact, you are bolstering my original claim.
But yes, I did later say literally quoting. And my book quotes MP on Archangel, which I’m sure is no surprise to you. “Many” quotes might be hyperbole though, certainly. And yeah, this is a bit different from “MP said this was a finger crack”

I never claimed plagiarism.

I never said you claimed plagiarism, but is is what others were talking about.  It is peripheral to the discussion and I don't honestly care and am not arguing about that.

As for 'bolstering your claim' let me boil that down.  You either did or did not say:
Andrew Doumont wrote: I have read many route descriptions in guidebooks literally quoting mountain project though and see guidebook authors active on mountain project. 
(Hint: DID)
And you either can or can not substantiate that, which is what Mark is challenging you on.  And you have not done that yet, as one example is not many.  (Hint: DIDN'T)
The Haas/Weidner book (which is what I was involved in) has no quotes on Archangel, so you must be talking about the D'Antonio or Rolofson books (which I was not involved in nor do I have, but I'll take your word for it) because the Rossiter book is pre-MP.

There.  
Have I clarified that I am not 'bolstering your claim?'  
You seem like a decent guy, and I appreciated the compliment/thanks that was offered, and I don't particularly want to argue, BUT...
You are saying that I said things I didn't, and you are saying you didn't say things you did, or at least saying you substantiated what you have not.
Because all of this does not add up, and I also doubt very much that what you said is true, that there are many route descriptions in guidebooks literally quoting mountain project.

Andrew Doumont wrote:

We are just having fun JRZane, you should try it sometime. I wasn’t hoping to present a thesis defense with my comments here

Not to mention, my main point was citing experts on the subject.

If we aren’t capable of discussing economics, what makes you think we are ready to tackle systemic racism?

ohhh someone has hurt feelings, is "citing experts on the subject" and is "just having fun" all in the same sentence!!  Watching this shit-show unfold IS great fun for me.

just because you're not presenting a thesis doesn't mean you have to spew bullshit on things you clearly know nothing about.

and by the way, I didnt see a single citation.

Andrew, which BC guide do you have?
And would you mind posting a picture of the passage which you believe is copied from MP?
I have the Haas/Wiedner guide and don't see any evidence of plagiarism, either of the Archangel entry or Turtle Rock.

I don't really want to pile on, but the guidebook authors I've met work really hard for not much money and don't deserve to be slandered online.

You know what this type of bullshyt has led too?   NO guides being done.   I can testify for a fact that there are hundreds of routes done in two  states that will NEVER be in guide books because of the shitty little attitudes of newer climbers entering the sport- playing the victim cards where there is no crime.  The bitching whining and rumor bullshyt that guide writers have to put up with has become such a "new normal" that the have said "Screw that" .   What is ridiculous is at the same time, the same bitching and whining climbers bawl over the fact that the "new guides" haven't come out and that they feel "cheated"..   Two former guide writers , Rick Sumner and myself  and others have been involved in doing many fa's in unknown areas and they will never be in a written guide due to the changing attitudes of young climbers.  In another area that has gained popularity, a new guide with 350 more routes wont be published.    And that is a loss for everyone- and the endeavor of climbing itself.   This very thread "now you can flag a discriminatory name"  is just another nail in the coffin for guides.  The "woke" ( absurd word) generation is killing itself- just like wishing socialism does.  We live in the TWILIGHT ZONE  where up is down, and wrong is right.  

Mark E Dixon wrote:

If this is the passage you are describing I don't think it supports your statement above. 

From the excellent Boulder Canyon guidebook by Jason Haas and Chris Weidner-

It does indeed literally quote MP.

ScoJo wrote:

It does indeed literally quote MP.

But not the route description. 

And attributes the quote to Long. 

Perhaps could be criticized for not mentioning that it was on MP.

caughtinside wrote:

Sumner wrote one guide 40 years ago. Not sure when you wrote a guide... the 90s? (Sumners is very good)

In any event, I don’t mind that there are areas and routes out there with no guides. There’s always info to be gleaned and some fun exploration to be done. 

  Exactly my point-- Sumners guide opened up countless climbs for those climbing in the mid to late 70s.   It was a treasure trove of areas.  I was THANKFUL for his efforts.  My guide is still the only one to Woodfords canyon and many other areas that climbers enjoy to this day.  Is been copied and pasted here in this site as well.   Did you know there is well over 300 Woodfords routes that likely will never be published ?   That guide was close to being done- and I had written the intro for it, but it was shelved for the attitudes prevalent today.  Areas in Nevada will remain a mystery that contain some of the best climbing there is..   And picture yourself going out there and after a lengthy and difficult vehicular and foot approach-- you put in hard work getting up a line only to find fixed pieces dangling from the route.  Sort of a "youve been punked" feeling I assure you lol!   Alvin McLane did that to us enough that I know of where I speak.  

RDA wrote: You know what this type of bullshyt has led too?   NO guides being done.   I can testify for a fact that there are hundreds of routes done in two  states that will NEVER be in guide books because of the shitty little attitudes of newer climbers entering the sport- playing the victim cards where there is no crime.  The bitching whining and rumor bullshyt that guide writers have to put up with has become such a "new normal" that the have said "Screw that" .   What is ridiculous is at the same time, the same bitching and whining climbers bawl over the fact that the "new guides" haven't come out and that they feel "cheated"..   Two former guide writers , Rick Sumner and myself  and others have been involved in doing many fa's in unknown areas and they will never be in a written guide due to the changing attitudes of young climbers.  In another area that has gained popularity, a new guide with 350 more routes wont be published.    And that is a loss for everyone- and the endeavor of climbing itself.   This very thread "now you can flag a discriminatory name"  is just another nail in the coffin for guides.  The "woke" ( absurd word) generation is killing itself- just like wishing socialism does.  We live in the TWILIGHT ZONE  where up is down, and wrong is right.  

You're whining about the attitudes of new climbers when your attitude is the one that sucks. And you're wrong. Contrary to what you claim, publishing of guidebooks seems to be growing. Many guidebook authors agree that we shouldn't be publishing discriminatory/hateful route names and are working hard with FAs to come up with better names. 

ScoJo wrote:

You're whining about the attitudes of new climbers when your attitude is the one that sucks. And you're wrong. Contrary to what you claim, publishing of guidebooks seems to be growing. Many guidebook authors agree that we shouldn't be publishing discriminatory/hateful route names and are working hard with FAs to come up with better names. 

Exactly my thoughts; Someone is bragging about a bunch of FAs they haven't published, and blaming the community. Sorry, this is like a kid breaking his own video game because other people wouldn't play it with him due to him being a mean little shit, and saying "none of you can play it now". Except in this case I guess the thing this "author" is getting mad about is not being able to have the N word in their route names or something.

You know what? There's a ton of good climbing in the *many* guidebooks all over the world, and you can bet any good line not already described publicly will make its way into a guidebook or website in the future as new people discover them.

Colonel Mustard wrote: Man, it is hilarious watching a bunch of toddler time aggrieved dudes whine about how we should memorialize their fart noise route names.

I haven't posted anything in this thread because I spent all my time in the Admin version of it...

But in case anyone missed this diamond in the rough I just thought it would be nice to give it a little boost.

*Italian chef kissing motion*

ScoJo wrote:

It does indeed literally quote MP.

Too bad for JL that they quoted him because he comes across as total Neanderthal in that quote (which is sad because he has some great writing contributions to climbing). 

Salamanizer Ski wrote:

While I agree somewhat to your vague assessment of the far radical “woke” left, your vision for progress into the future is so hysterically ass backward and off base, it’s disturbing. So in a round about nutshell, your vision for how to progress forward follows along the lines of Venezuela? Tax the rich out of existence and provide for the poor, which will be literally everyone. 80% of 100,000 dollars = 20,000 a year. So you want everyone to be equally poor? No thank you. It’s not my fault you missed the boat on the easiest ship to catch. Making over 100,000 dollars a year isn’t hard. You just have to put your neck out there and work for it. Or I guess you could just steal it from someone else who worked for it and give it to someone else who didn’t. Historically, that is what’s known as theft. Nevermind that free market capitalism has produced the most prosperous and technologically advanced civilization in the history of mankind in a very short period of time. Let’s tear it all down and move to some form of socialism, which has created “nothing” but bringing out the absolute worst in mankind. Well call it, the National Socialist “American” Workers Party.  Genius! 

So much awesome in that! Thank you.

Salamanizer Ski wrote:

While I agree somewhat to your vague assessment of the far radical “woke” left, your vision for progress into the future is so hysterically ass backward and off base, it’s disturbing. So in a round about nutshell, your vision for how to progress forward follows along the lines of Venezuela? Tax the rich out of existence and provide for the poor, which will be literally everyone. 80% of 100,000 dollars = 20,000 a year. So you want everyone to be equally poor? No thank you. It’s not my fault you missed the boat on the easiest ship to catch. Making over 100,000 dollars a year isn’t hard. You just have to put your neck out there and work for it. Or I guess you could just steal it from someone else who worked for it and give it to someone else who didn’t. Historically, that is what’s known as theft. Nevermind that free market capitalism has produced the most prosperous and technologically advanced civilization in the history of mankind in a very short period of time. Let’s tear it all down and move to some form of socialism, which has created “nothing” but bringing out the absolute worst in mankind. Well call it, the National Socialist “American” Workers Party.  Genius! 

how did you make all of that money when you don’t even understand how marginal tax rates work?

i’m not saying 80% over 100k is the right number or close to fair, but i don’t think your response does much besides get people hot and bothered in a bad way. 

Skipped 24 pages of rants and probably a page of quality discussion (I have little faith in the vocal minority here) to say that I'm glad this is finally in the works. Thank you admin who made this a reality!

petzl logic wrote:

how did you make all of that money when you don’t even understand how marginal tax rates work?

i’m not saying 80% over 100k is the right number or close to fair, but i don’t think your response does much besides get people hot and bothered in a bad way. 

Because that’s exactly what you said. Tax 80% of every dollar someone makes over 100,000 dollars. I know how marginal tax rates work (10% 12% 24% etc.) but I don’t think you know how a prosperous and stable economy is produced. Following that idiot Bernie logic doesn’t create wealth, it only drains it until eventually you run out of other people’s money.