A change for MP and REI

I believe that a shadowy cabal of regional climbing organizations controls what is and is not allowed to be posted. 

Luke 2467 wrote:

Huh? You have been talking non-stop about how these routes are yours and and how the FA has full control over the promotion and future of the route. That is a display of ownership. I think we can agreed to disagree on this point so here is a thread where the community can decide if the FA has this power:

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/119011061/can-an-fa-have-their-routes-deleted-from-the-database

What I "own" is the style of the route and all of the hardware I left there. Sounds like I need to start stripping routes that I don't want here?

NOTHING stops anyone from climbing the route and in fact, people are welcome and encouraged to do so.

What should be withheld is for others (ie MP) to profit from the promotion of my labor without my consent..

The FA should have full control over the protection scheme (ie retro-bolting or the adding of additional fixed protection) and whether or not they want the route information published. There is no legal requirement under the law currently...its an ethical requirement to not profit off of other's labor.

If this is a dot com, then MP has an ethical requirement to not profit from the labor of others without their consent.

hillbilly hijinkswrote:

What I "own" is the style of the route and all of the hardware I left there. Sounds like I need to start stripping routes that I don't want here?

NOTHING stops anyone from climbing the route and in fact, people are welcome and encouraged to do so.

What should be withheld is for others (ie MP) to profit from the promotion of my labor without my consent..

The FA should have full control over the protection scheme (ie retro-bolting or the adding of additional fixed protection) and whether or not they want the route information published. There is no legal requirement under the law currently...its an ethical requirement to not profit off of other's labor.

If this is a dot com, then MP has an ethical requirement to not profit from the labor of others without their consent.

We get it, you want climbers to experience climbing exactly as you do and if they don’t then you’ll take your toys and go home. We all hear/see your argument, it’s just that the majority  don’t seem interested in what you’re saying. Why don’t you start a thread or poll or something and see what the actual sentiment is? Or become better at turning people to your viewpoint, I don’t think your current strategy and skill set match up to the task.

Colonel Mustardwrote:

We get it, you want climbers to experience climbing exactly as you do and if they don’t then you’ll take your toys and go home. We all hear/see your argument, it’s just that the majority  don’t seem interested in what you’re saying. Why don’t you start a thread or poll or something and see what the actual sentiment is? Or become better at turning people to your viewpoint, I don’t think your current strategy and skill set match up to the task.

No dude, you don't get it.

And it ain't my fault.

hillbilly hijinkswrote:

No dude, you don't get it.

And it ain't my fault.

You’ve bloviated endlessly, I’m pretty sure I get it. The word you’re searching for is “disagree”.

Dan Daugherty wrote: I, and many others, have said my peace on this issue and it's appears the admins are digging in deeper, unwilling to listen to constructive criticism.

If you're implying that I have any weighted input into this, I can tell you I don't. I'm a regional admin and am expressing my views here as a user of the forum, nothing more. I read your input and stated I don't agree with it. That doesn't mean it's without any merit. 

hillbilly hijinkswrote:

What I "own" is the style of the route and all of the hardware I left there. Sounds like I need to start stripping routes that I don't want here?

NOTHING stops anyone from climbing the route and in fact, people are welcome and encouraged to do so.

What should be withheld is for others (ie MP) to profit from the promotion of my labor without my consent..

The FA should have full control over the protection scheme (ie retro-bolting or the adding of additional fixed protection) and whether or not they want the route information published. There is no legal requirement under the law currently...its an ethical requirement to not profit off of other's labor.

If this is a dot com, then MP has an ethical requirement to not profit from the labor of others without their consent.

If you bolt it, they will come. And they will post it on the internet. Don't like that? Then don't bolt it.

hillbilly hijinkswrote:

No dude, you don't get it.

And it ain't my fault.

Lol how many threads are you whining about this topic on? Go climb some rock! If you need suggestions there are a lot of great routes posted on this website. You can use the near me feature to find something close to home. 

Colonel Mustardwrote:

You’ve bloviated endlessly, .

nice

Used 2climbwrote:

Lol how many threads are you whining about this topic on? Go climb some rock! If you need suggestions there are a lot of great routes posted on this website. You can use the near me feature to find something close to home. 

There have been a few others, at least.

You have to appreciate the sheer repetition, that’s pretty much all he’s got going. It could be a more interesting, nuanced subject since it sustains attention despite the stuttering presentation.

When will the new partnership be announced?

I also think developed areas where climbing is illegal should not be published

hillbilly hijinkswrote:

What I "own" is the style of the route and all of the hardware I left there.

I'd have checked with a REAL GOOD litigation and damages lawyer about your responsibilities as owner of your fixed gear before claiming it as your property. Too late now though.

Jim Tittwrote:
I'd have checked with a REAL GOOD litigation and damages lawyer about your responsibilities as owner of your fixed gear before claiming it as your property. Too late now though.

pfft. If you use my gear then caveat emptor.

And I will remove it if it suits me.

Other than that, thanks for posting, Jim.

Brassmonkey wrote: Was it ever announced who the new partner is? I thought I remembered him saying an announcement would come soon, but I can't find it anywhere.

+1

probably when a new partner is found

the site's just gunna stick to bouldering and some easy slab routes until then, maybe take up running

The OP of this thread says "There will be a big partnership announcement in the next few weeks related to this transition - one which I think will be very good for all climbers."

My guess is the route-naming controversy scared off whatever partner, at least for awhile.

JaredGwrote:

The OP of this thread says "There will be a big partnership announcement in the next few weeks related to this transition - one which I think will be very good for all climbers."

My guess is the route-naming controversy scared off whatever partner, at least for awhile.

My guess is that passionate debaters here on MP care a lot more about this issue than the rest of the planet, including whatever partner.

Franck Veewrote:

My guess is that passionate debaters here on MP care a lot more about this issue than the rest of the planet, including whatever partner.

The master debaters?