From: billw@ace.mentorg.com (Bill Wright)
Subject: Re: Reasons for using chalk
Originator: billw@ace
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:52:46 GMT
Reply-To: billw@sjc.mentorg.com
Organization: Mentor Graphics 
Keywords: let's be reasonable
Followup-To: 


Unbelievable!  The stupidity is amazing!
In article <20195@drutx.ATT.COM>, rgo@druhi.att.com (Ron Olsen) writes:
|> 1. Climbing is a set of games, each with its own rules:
|>    free climbing, aid climbing, red point, pink point, etc.
|>    Each climber has the choice of which game to play, and which rules
|>    to follow.  Trying to enforce one's rules on other climbers is a no-win
|>    proposition.  
Certainly this is true.  As I have stated numerous time, but Ron still can't
seem to read English, is that I am NOT trying to change the climbing community 
to not use chalk.  This is futile.  How many times do I need to say this??
Damn it, Ron, if you can't read call me! (408) 451-5557.

|>    Is it OK to yard on pro when a move is too hard to do free?
|>    Or should one who is "free climbing" be required to back
|>    off or fall if the move is too hard?
|>    Bill's posts show that he chooses to yard on pro to
|>    get up climbs that are over his free-climbing limits.
|>    Should I tell him to stay off those climbs until he is good enough
|>    to do them free?  That it is just his desire to tick off a famous
|>    route that leads him to climb in such an impure style?
|>    That he should "just climb a lower grade?"  Of course not.
I am NOT trying to tell people how to climb!!!!  I just want to leave as
little impact behind as possible.  I couldn't possible care less how you
get up your routes.  I just would rather you did paint the rock as you
did it.  But I am not trying to stop this practice.  It is futile.  But
can't you see a difference between an ascent that leaves no mark and 
as ascent that paints it??  

|>    Other climbers playing the free-climbing game, however,
|>    consider yarding on pro to be "failure" or "cheating"
|>    when one is attempting a free ascent.  They will lower
|>    off or downclimb rather than get up the pitch by any means. 
The "free climbing" game, Ron?  Is that the game you play?  Get off your
high horse and look at reality.  You don't play the "free climbing" game
any more or any less than I do.

|> 2. Bill argues that all climbers who use chalk just do so
|>    to climb a higher grade.  
And I notice that you don't deny it.

|>    Of course,
|>    most modern climbing equipment "lets us climb a higher grade",
|>    not just chalk.  Advances in shoe, protection, and rope technology
|>    have all contributed to making many of yesterday's test pieces
|>    accessible to less-than-expert climbers today;
|>    chalk should not be singled out.  Perhaps some climbers
|>    are offended by the "unsightly" black marks left on the rock
|>    by sticky rubber shoes.  Where does one draw the line between
|>    acceptable and unaccepatble climbing technology?
It is precisely this point that prevents me from trying to stop people from
using chalk.  It is a matter of degree.  I rarely every see black marks from
boots, but I do see them.  I have never seen them from hundreds of yards 
away and I have never heard non-climbers complain about them as I have with
chalk, but it is still a question of degree and therefore I don't push for
everyone to stop using chalk.  Are you getting this?

|> 4. I don't blindly trust guidebooks, and I don't favor suing
|>    anyone for my actions while climbing.  I agree with Bill:
|>    responsibility and judgment keep you safe, not your equipment.
|>    But ALL your equipment (not just chalk) helps you to climb
|>    more safely at harder grades; see #2 above.
At least we are in agreement about some things.  If fact, we really agreeing
on about everything.  I think you just misunderstood my post (and maybe I
wasn't clear) and got emotional about the use of chalk.  The one difference
chalk has that is different from other methods to keep us safe is that it
is painting the rock.

|> 5. Bill is offended by the visual appearance of chalk on the
|>    rock.  I and many other climbers are not.
|>    This is purely a matter of opinion, not fact.
|>    No one in one camp will convince anyone in the other camp
|>    of the correctness of their opinion.
I have a very hard time believing anyone can go and look at Smith Rocks
or Eldorado Canyon and see all the walls painted with chalk and HONESTLY
say they think it looks just as good as without the chalk.  Do you really
believe this?  If you really do, then we don't have any argument, just a
difference of opinion.  But what I think is that you convince yourself not
to mind so much because you use it.  I have recieved numerous notes from 
other climbers since this started and they universally say the following:

	1.) Yes, chalk is ugly
	2.) I will still use it.

At least these people are honest.  And maybe you are too, but it is just
do difficult to precieve this chalk as not be detrimental to our view.

|>    Question for Bill: are you offended just by the visual appearance
|>    of chalk, or also by the performance-enhancing aspects?
PURELY visual appearance.  The performance-enhancing aspects are fine,
of course!  I thought I had stated this, but obviously not clearly enough.

|>    How would you feel about an invisible method for inhibiting
|>    hand perspiration that didn't leave a residue on the rock?
I would LOVE IT!

|>    How would this differ from other technological advances
|>    in climbing equipment?  What about Spider Mitts? Taping?
Mitts and tape do not leave the marks.  That is the difference and my point.

|>    We, as custodians of Mother Earth,
|>    should live in harmony with nature and keep things looking
|>    good while we do it.  I pick up broken glass, beer cans,
|>    cigarette butts, and litter that I find in climbing areas and
|>    hiking trails, as I'm sure Bill does; but again, this is
|>    an aesthetic issue, not an environmental one.
Very glad to hear this and once again it appears we agree.  It is this 
attitude that makes me wonder why you don't find the painting of rocks
offensive also.  But if you honestly think it doesn't damage your view, 
then you are being consistent with yourself and I have no argument with you.

|> 7. Let's try to keep this forum one for reasoned debate,
|>    not foaming-at-the-mouth ranting and raving.
|>    Provocative, vitriolic postings do tend to draw more response,
|>    but they don't lend credibility to the poster.
Agreed!  I certainly have been very guilty of the above, as I feel Ron
has also (while he is much subtler with his personal attacks), and I will
try and better control myself in the future, but some issues are just
logic and not opinion.  My argument is entirely based on my OPINION that
chalk is ugly.  From that opinion, my arguments follow LOGICALLY.  Of course,
if the first OPINION isn't shared, then it will not follow.  I have been
truly shocked that some people consider chalk attractive.  Truly shocked.
I guess some people might think strip mining is attractive also then.  This
just hadn't occurred to me.  I stand enlighted.
-- 
             Bill Wright / bill_wright@mentorg.com

                  "When in doubt, run it out!"