What happened to the Millbrook, Gunks page

Gunkiemike wrote: I would do anything I possibly could to vehemently oppose any such proposal. More bureaucratic regulation is NOT what the climbing community needs. If this draconian, backwards step is how you propose to salvage a win in your sad toprope-in-a-teapot MP battle, you're even more unhinged than I thought.

No, that's just my opinion and I have no idea what other people think or will or will not do. We will have to deal with the majority of climbers, not you not me. It might be helpful if you read the paper first and then understood the situation. I was only talking about Millbrook, not that Trapps.

brian9 wrote: You were the most outspoken opponent of the proliferation of beta on Lost City on this website. I would argue that for similar reasons Millbrook is better left in a "low beta" state. Something closer to Christians website.

True, but with Lost City there were two aspects not present with Millbrook.

1. Almost from the very beginning, there was an almost universal consensus that the area should remain undocumented, and many years when that consensus held.

2. The Preserve subsequently designated Lost City (as well as Bonticuo) as one of their lower-impact zones, meaning that MP-style documentation would have gone against Preserve land stewardship intentions.

Millbrook, on the other hand, has been in the guidebooks since Art Gran produced the first one. And Wiessner wrote up the first-ever Shawangunk route---which happened to be at Millbrook---in Appalachia, so Millbrook routes have been recorded since the beginning of climbing history in the Gunks.

So the kinds of arguments that led to the appropriate suppression of a Lost City page on MP are simply not available for Millbrook.

I still feel that the proliferation of beta has, in general, taken a lot away from trad climbing, and Millbrook is perhaps the "traddest" crag in the country, one of a vanishing number of genuine adventure climbing areas and certainly the most remarkable given its proximity to population centers.

rgold wrote: Millbrook is perhaps the "traddest" crag in the country, one of a vanishing number of genuine adventure climbing areas and certainly the most remarkable given its proximity to population centers.

I understand your point. You know better than I that the "scene" at Millbrook is fragile. It is not such a heinous walk out there--part of what keeps people a way I believe is the reputation, the ambiance. It won't take much to change the place, and so follows the inevitable flood of internet beta, photos, videos. The cliff gets smaller. This process can't be reversed.

There is no precedent to enact what I would describe as a "handbrake" on additions to Millbrook, but I would also argue that the points you make are not sufficient precedents to leave it the way as is. Millbrook is still access sensitive, and the character of the area is sensitive. It is not like the Trapps where a few weird TR or aid routes go largely unnoticed.

The Williams guide book is great but how we document climbs and climbing areas are shifting rapidly to electronic media. I am not out on a limb in my sense that what goes up on Mountain Project is important to forming a consensus on style in an area. If you want precent I would argue that claiming FA of an unled line is not the standard at the gunks except in rare instances, most of them with the anticipation it would be led at some point by someone else.

Perhaps more broadly I caution against the idea that MP is fully open, that one person can add so many entries to an area such that they single handedly change the style to their own liking, unilaterally. Pushed to its logical end, I could do the same thing throughout all the Gunks pages, adding as many new "top rope" lines as I please to any section.

It seems to me after reading this again and sifting through it I have found the underlining problem.
They don't like your names
Maybe because they seem religious in nature.
And they don't want you to have a FA and have those names stick.
Well if Christian climbers can deal with:
10,000 restless virgins 5.10
Wet dreams
Shitface 5.10
Yo mama 5.10 (really?)
G-string
Penis colada
Ect.... then we can all deal with some
Biblical names let's get out of our safe spaces and enter the real world.
He all ready proved toproping FA is a thing.
Now this forum is just going in circles

brian9 wrote:I think MP users want clear, quality routes in the database.

I hear you, but there's already a lot of absolute garbage on this site. For places I am familiar with, I have seen lots of "pages" that are merely one- or two-sentence descriptions copied straight from the local guidebook. If you didn't already know the area or have the book, you probably wouldn't locate a lot of those routes. So Donald is not exactly breaking the standards of MP here.

rgold wrote:I haven't said anything because I think the less said about Millbrook the better. I'd be more than delighted if the entire Millbrook page disappeared. That said, MP is all about beta, and there has never in the past (that I know of) been a notion of too much beta on MP---there are descriptions of which hold to grab on a twelve-foot boulder fer chrissakes. There is, unfortunately from my perspective, a Millbrook page. Donald has given Millbrook beta. Seems like the end of the story to me.

Probably the best post of this thread.

I heard Ondra put a TR FA on a 5.16. Shits legit.

Betaclimber wrote:It seems to me after reading this again and sifting through it I have found the underlining problem. They don't like your names Maybe because they seem religious in nature. And they don't want you to have a FA and have those names stick. Well if Christian climbers can deal with: 10,000 restless virgins 5.10 Wet dreams Shitface 5.10 Yo mama 5.10 (really?) G-string Penis colada Ect.... then we can all deal with some Biblical names let's get out of our safe spaces and enter the real world. He all ready proved toproping FA is a thing. Now this forum is just going in circles

Hey I have no problem with Donald, his religion, or his eccentricities. I have an issue with these Millbrook routes on their merits, as I've already explained. I am not a regular at the cliff but I have been out there several times and I like the fact that it has almost no fixed gear of any kind. I like the feeling of rapping in and knowing I have to have a plan to get out. If I had the kind of free time and the decades of experience that Don has, maybe (just maybe) I would see the appeal of top roping a bunch of lines that are too scary to lead out there, and then I might appreciate this contribution to the database. But I see it as clutter and a nuisance. And though the chances are just about nil that his descriptions will lead to a bunch of top rope maniacs descending on Millbrook, I don't like the precedent.

" I would see the appeal of top roping a bunch of lines that are too scary to lead out there "

How do you lead a climb that has no gear? My FA's provide an answer clear as crystal to that question and make a statement about bolts as do my aid climbs.

What you are asking for is that this clutter be cleaned up by my getting up on there without a rope headon. You have absolutely no clue what your talking about. Have you read the Wonka paper carefully? It's a FA already. What you are proposing for anyone is a lot of close calls and could end up as an unessasary fatality!

The Gunks have been setting the standard from the beginning. Below is an unbiased excerpt from the Art Grand Gunks Guide (The Man with the Hammer) on bolts. Gym climbers have become so used to bolts the bolts have become invisible as they even prefer them even next to clean cracks! This is wrong and completely unacceptable.

Art Grand Guide to the Gunks.

SethG wrote: Hey I have no problem with Donald, his religion, or his eccentricities. I have an issue with these Millbrook routes on their merits, as I've already explained. I am not a regular at the cliff but I have been out there several times and I like the fact that it has almost no fixed gear of any kind. I like the feeling of rapping in and knowing I have to have a plan to get out. If I had the kind of free time and the decades of experience that Don has, maybe (just maybe) I would see the appeal of top roping a bunch of lines that are too scary to lead out there, and then I might appreciate this contribution to the database. But I see it as clutter and a nuisance. And though the chances are just about nil that his descriptions will lead to a bunch of top rope maniacs descending on Millbrook, I don't like the precedent.

Okay fair enough just seemed like the elephant in the room to me. I mean if some one was doing what he was doing and putting up names like swinging cunt. (actual climb there) Then I might be on your side of the fence.

There is a climb that traverses the whole traps that will probably never get repeated. But yet it's considered a great accomplishment. Maybe will do that next.

The 5 stages of grief and loss are:
1. Denial and isolation;
2. Anger;
3. Bargaining;
4. Depression;
5. Acceptance.

I think you guys might be at 3 but it doesn't always happen in order.

Betaclimber wrote:The 5 stages of grief and loss are: 1. Denial and isolation; 2. Anger; 3. Bargaining; 4. Depression; 5. Acceptance.

Remember that the Kubler-Ross 5 stages referred to someone learning of their OWN demise from illness, not the loss of someone or something else.

donald perry wrote:Brian9 is a troll, he is using more then one computer.

You know this...how?

Marc801 wrote: You know this...how?

I think Donald explained it, something to do with 2 different people having the exact same opinions.

Its actually starting to sound like the other Donald we have heard about so much recently, blame to spread all over while getting as much attention as possible.

As far as the clutter goes one can print a mini guide and exclude all TRs so really its no biggy.

Point we'll talen. I will delete that junk I wrote last night, and delete or edit the remaining pages.

donald perry wrote:I will delete that junk I wrote last night, and delete or edit the remaining pages.

Stop doing this in forum discussions. It makes it nearly impossible to follow whatever the hell it is you're trying to say (which is difficult enough) and forces others to further clutter things with quoting you so that it doesn't vanish. Own up to what you originally post; apologize if necessary.

Some people are asking everything be deleted. I am just deleting whatever it is that may be offensive wrong or repetitive. I am concentrating mainly on a few pages in response to everything else. Sorry for you guys having changed my thinking, and realizing where I was wrong or should have stayed silent. The fatal flaw in the thread is most of you guys don't read.

For example I post all 5 stars and Brian says take down all your low quality and keep the rest "Pick out the best of your TR lines...and take down the others". Elsewhere I wrote this is about the rock, not me, I am utilizing only the best rock of what Millbrook offers to make up these lines.

Or I post quotes of every single guide unde the sun old and new all affirming a TR is a FA and the very next posts say no one thinks TR's are a FA! It's all there black and white clear as crystal not only with all of the above but with the logical reasons for it. Josh Janes then writes: "I think that there would be no problem whatsoever if donald perry had just gone about posting these climbs in a slightly different manner. For example: ...If he left the FA info blank and clearly stated, front and center, that he has only top-roped these lines."

This kind of shit forces me to reconsider, condense, repent, correct and delete. In other words people jump on here and read my first post and then go to the end and post incohertly. The tread is repetitive for that reason. My job I feel is to get a single point across and I can't do that when people don't read. On the other hand you are right. So if there was an option to see what I deleted that would solve the problem. If you care about what you are responding to, quote me in case it's deleted. I may edit this and other posts, or delete them. Right now I am using a phone. This technology is not perfect but I'm doing the best I can, I won't chop your bolts but I reserve the right to chop my own.

donald perry wrote:Josh Janes then writes: "I think that there would be no problem whatsoever if donald perry had just gone about posting these climbs in a slightly different manner. For example: ...If he left the FA info blank and clearly stated, front and center, that he has only top-roped these lines." This kind of shit forces me to reconsider, condense, repent, correct and delete.

Josh Janes is right.

Find a guidebook written in the last decade/s that includes TR FAs

"... Josh Janes then writes: "I think that there would be no problem whatsoever if donald perry had just gone about posting these climbs in a slightly different manner. For example: ...If he left the FA info blank and clearly stated, front and center, that he has only top-roped these lines." This kind of shit forces me to reconsider, condense, repent, correct and delete."

T Roper wrote: Josh Janes is right. Find a guidebook written in the last decade/s that includes TR FAs

Wrong Sir wrong, please read the entire paragraph and then the entire post and then the Wonka page. You're both wrong for the same reason.

first
fərst/
number
1.
coming before all others in time or order; earliest; 1st.
"his first wife"
synonyms: earliest, initial, opening, introductory More
2.
foremost in position, rank, or importance.
"the doctor's first duty is to respect this right"
synonyms: foremost, principal, highest, greatest, paramount, top, uppermost, prime, chief, leading, main, major; More

~AND~

as·cent
əˈsent/
noun
1.
a climb or walk to the summit of a mountain or hill.
"the first ascent of the Matterhorn"
synonyms: climb, scaling, conquest
"the first ascent of the Matterhorn"
2.
an instance of rising through the air.
"the first balloon ascent was in 1783"
synonyms: rise, climb, launch, takeoff, liftoff, blastoff
"a balloon ascent"

~AND~

In climbing, a first ascent (abbreviated to FA in guidebooks) is the first successful, documented attainment of the top of a mountain, or the first to follow a particular climbing route.
First ascent - Wikipedia

T Roper wrote: Josh Janes is right. Find a guidebook written in the last decade/s that includes TR FAs

Ur old home place... CT Falcon Guide... ;-) and every other one with Ragged Mountain in it.

Morgan Patterson wrote: Ur old home place... CT Falcon Guide... ;-) and every other one with Ragged Mountain in it.

Right !? I was amazed that T Roper was saying that!
But I'm going to be stuck in Shelton High School on Saturday ( maybe Sunday too )
I decided to let that lie lie ' cause I'd like to get out and climb.
How about it, Morgan?could you show me what's good in Ken territory I've never been!