overheard at the crag: post it

The other Forums have "Over heard at the MP: post it" threads going lol.

Nathan Doylewrote:

The other Forums have "Over heard at the MP: post it" threads going lol.

There's other forums?

Connor Dobsonwrote:

There's other forums?

yeah it's r/climbingcirclejerk

Crimpin Ain't Easy wrote:

And from wikipedia:

"The Bloods street gang feature a network of individual chapters, which are known as "sets". These sets are often loosely connected, having their own leader(s) and operating independently from one another."

Don't get me started on folks and people

abandon moderation wrote:

You guys are all just jealous that you can't climb the nose with a single set.

Heard at another crag: someone calling cams "grippers." That's right, a single set of grippers.

"spreaders" is a term i am more familiar with :)

the only folks i have heard refer to a set of cams as a rack of cams have been complete gumbies.  like  "how heavy is your pack? why do i have to carry two racks of cams"?  ....on their way up to cat wall.

It takes a Set to lead a climb.  It takes a bigger set to solo it.

TBlomwrote:

It takes a Set to lead a climb.  It takes a bigger set to solo it.

I've seen some amazing racks on lead.

ETA

If we're going to argue about pointless sets and then move on to juvenile jokes, we have to do it right.

Matthew Jaggerswrote:

But no one does that. Commonly heard would be... "Let's both bring a single rack and we'll be set." No one says... "Let's both bring a single set and we'll be good."

Who is commonly bringing a single rack? That idea makes me want to vomit. Rope or rack only, for the love of Pete.

Colonel Mustardwrote:

Who is commonly bringing a single rack? That idea makes me want to vomit. Rope or rack only, for the love of Pete.

Who climbs with people that leave from the same domicile? That sounds disgusting. Lol.

Colonel Mustardwrote:

Who is commonly bringing a single rack? That idea makes me want to vomit. Rope or rack only, for the love of Pete.

Having a rack of Totems friends will often want to use their gear but plus my Totems. I try to convince everyone to use my rack of Dragons as once you get used to them there's no going back, but quite a lot of people have a strong preference for thumb loops and my rack of C4s are loaned out to a random buddy half the time as I don't like the fuckers, so I guess the answer to your question is *raises hand* 

Colonel Mustardwrote:

Who is commonly bringing a single rack? That idea makes me want to vomit. Rope or rack only, for the love of Pete.

Partners who insist on also using their shitty, 20 year-old gear 

Jfc do we need a new “overheard” thread so y’all can keep jerking over pedantic trad terms here? Feeling like the meme thread.

Anyway, i have another contribution after yesterday’s sesh. 

Random climber is spraying about all the V8+ problems he had dialed, then later my climbing partner overheard the guy talking about how he hadn’t finished a certain (non-sandbagged) v4.

Partner: “why haven’t you sent that? That’s literally half your send grade! What’s shutting you down?”

Guy: “well I haven’t actually sent a v8 yet. I’ve done half here, and then the other half separately.”

Partner: “so what do you actually climb then? What have you sent?”

Guy: *silence, no responses.* *slinks away*

Just a reminder, there’s no cheating in climbing, just lying. 

Crimpin Ain't Easy wrote:

You coulda went one step further as a climber. "For the love of Pass the Piton Pete."

Gawldang right, I shoulda. That’s good.

Point is, I don’t want your gears meseginatin all in with my gears, copulating and mixing gear tape and what have you till I’m grabbing up a goopy offset wondering what in the hell kinda hole this thang gone fit, you understand meh?

I can't believe I'm responding to this, but whatever; I'm bored.

If I buy all the Ultralight Master Cams from 00 to 8, then I bought a complete set of UL MCs.

The collection of cams, nuts, etc., I show up with all attached to a sling is the rack.

Permagumby?

Robert Swrote:

I can't believe I'm responding to this, but whatever; I'm bored.

Oh, my dude, if you want to throw down with the semantics I'll throw down with semantics. Let's spar.

If I buy all the Ultralight Master Cams from 00 to 8, then I bought a complete set of UL MCs.

The collection of cams, nuts, etc., I show up with all attached to a sling is the rack.

Sure. My point is that the word set always needs some other context to tell you what the fuck the word means. The word "complete" is the adjective modifying "set" in this instance so it makes sense. A rack can mean a single, double, etc. rack, it can mean all the pro that you own, it can mean the appropriate pro for an area or a particular climb. Adjectives are often not needed with rack, just context clues. "Oh, you're heading up the Salathe? What's your rack for that?" makes sense. "I'm bringing a set of quadruples in fingers and triples in hands" also makes sense, but asking "hey, what's your set for that climb" makes you sound like a foreigner/crazy person. 

This isn't different to how the word is used in any other domain. If you have a set of shoes and you tell me nothing else then I know nothing about the quantity of shoes or why they belong together in some category. It requires explaining that this set are my climbing shoes and this set are my hiking shoes or whatever. The word rack carries more information then the word set.

Permagumby?

Yes, you called?

Do we need to start a new "overheard at the crag" thread while you guys hash this out? 

Edit: lol I unsubbed for so long because of this argument that I didn't realize I'm repeating others with my suggestion when I came back and saw it the thread still on fire   

The real question in my mind is that if you have a set, S, of all sets that do not contain themselves, then is S in S?

J Pwrote:

Jfc do we need a new “overheard” thread so y’all can keep jerking over pedantic trad terms here? Feeling like the meme thread.

Anyway, i have another contribution after yesterday’s sesh. 

Random climber is spraying about all the V8+ problems he had dialed, then later my climbing partner overheard the guy talking about how he hadn’t finished a certain (non-sandbagged) v4.

Partner: “why haven’t you sent that? That’s literally half your send grade! What’s shutting you down?”

Guy: “well I haven’t actually sent a v8 yet. I’ve done half here, and then the other half separately.”

Partner: “so what do you actually climb then? What have you sent?”

Guy: *silence, no responses.* *slinks away*

Just a reminder, there’s no cheating in climbing, just lying. 

I bet he stick clips up 13s

mbkwrote:

The real question in my mind is that if you have a set, S, of all sets that do not contain themselves, then is S in S?

When do we start discussing Goedel's incompleteness theorem and Church's thesis? What about NP-hard and NP-complete?

Belayer: Youre supposed to use your hands and feet, but your head works too.