Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
How much weight do you give to users tick lists
|
How much weight do you give to users tick lists when considering their input in forum responses? Ex. Users who appear to only climb 5.8 routes explaining that belaying followers with a PCP (micro) is dumb and dangerous vs a user who climbs higher grades in a variety of styles |
|
Engage with the merit, or lack thereof, of the actual argument. Argument from authority (e.g. "I climb this grade which is higher than you, therefore your argument is invalid") isn't a good way to approach any debate. Lots of people don't share their full climbing resume online. |
|
Funnily enough, I might give less weight to somebody who ticks much harder than I do because their risk tolerance and abilities are not that applicable to my situation. I know of at least one sponsored local prodigy who sends 5.14 on gear who was at one time placing shit gear on runout climbs but was getting away with it. So, yeah, purely relying on grades to equate to technical expertise might not always be wise. |
|
Depends on the context. I've had discussions with 5.8 trad dads who say that fixed draws shouldn't exist and things about sport climbing that they have never actually dealt with before because they haven't done the style of climbing they are arguing about. |
|
Skimming someone’s MP ticklist is probably about as reliable as anything else you read on the internet. And sure, a lot of people use the ticklist in different ways, but pretty often you can get an idea about what type of climbing someone’s been up to. Also, I’d regard it as an endorsement of potential experience, but I don’t think I’d use it to discredit someone. E.g. I’ve messaged someone and asked them to climb with me because of their ticklist, but I don’t think I’d avoid climbing with someone because of it.
|
|
There’s lies, damned lies, and statistics |
|
Depending on the context I give a tick list quite a bit of weight, you can definitely tell most of the time if the person actually has the experience to back up whatever they are saying... For example, I'm not taking training advice seriously from someone who appears to be breaking into 5.10, and I'm not taking ice climbing advice seriously from someone who has ticked a couple WI4's, or just appears to climb in the Ouray ice park. There are also things where grade doesn't matter, but trends do, if someone has been ticking moderate grades for 15 years all over the country they probably have a decent overall view of the climbing world, while having nothing but a handful of sport 5.13's in one area is likely a red flag if they are spouting opinions on a trad route on the other coast... TLDR, it's one part of vetting a comment... |
|
I don’t take anyone seriously on this, forum- unless I know them personally, if they don’t have any “ticks” listed. I find the “to do” list to be more telling. |
Guy Keeseewrote: Truth. Although, I prefer rank and surname to better sift sources of repute. |
|
Tics lend a lot of credibility to someone's opinion. I'm not going to listen to a chuffer talk about wilderness bolting ethics if he/she only has tics at Kraft Boulders. |
Bug Boywrote: Read “between the lines” on everything they post. Tick comments can be especially revealing. |
|
hey traddy, you gotta get those ticks WAAAAAAAAY up before you have an opinion like that |
Kevin Crumwrote: I need no introduction. |
|
People with 0 tics or hidden tics, should have their opinions ignored. |
|
Tick lists???
|
|
Tell me your ego is suffering from self-inflicted assaults on your pride without telling me. |
|
It never occurred to me to look at someone's tick list as a way to determine the value of their opinion. I've always been able to do a pretty good job of that by the tone and content of their post. Isn't this a little like judging someone's success in life by looking their car/house/other stuff? |
|
Zero. I literally never look at that info, nor could I care any less about it. |
|
I don't think it's unreasonable to give some weight to people with different experiences, however I fundamentally think that you should examine the points made (within reason) regardless of who makes them. There are all sorts of reasons that people's tik list is not representative of them. I 1) hardest Climbs aren't on MP 3) they spend a lot of time thinking about these issues even if they aren't experiencing them personally- 4) they see things from a different perspective I want to give two examples to illustrate my points that it can be a factor but you shouldn't be disqualified just because of percieved resume I was belaying someone on a project 1.5 letter grades above where I climbed. I proposed an alternative beta involving a jam and a high heel hook. They tried it and found it made it easier. Could I have climbed the route? No. Did I make it easier for the partner? Yes. Outside of climbing, I do a lot of scholastic research; I often have a friend who is a history major proof my International Political Economy Papers, not because he understands my economics but because he doesn't, and that brings a new perspective. TLDR, its okay if people have different backgrounds but sometimes you need to weigh that. |
