| Tradgirl |
Climbing FAQ
|
| Rec.Climbing | |
|
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
Trusting your life to something you read on the
internet is just plain stupid. Get corroboration from a more reliable
source, use your common sense, don't get yourself killed, and don't come
crying to us if you do.
What is rec.climbing? / How can I read it?
What is rec.climbing? / How can I read it? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
Rec.climbing is a Usenet newsgroup. To read it directly, you need 1) access to a news server, 2) a news reader that is 3) configured correctly. Both
Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator have built in news readers. Your ISP can help you get it configured. Yours might even be working already. Try this link: rec.climbing
OK. So what if you don't have access to a news server? You can read and post to rec.climbing with your normal browser through Google Groups
From: Karl Baba
I haven't used it but it might be an answer
From: Kyri Freeman
I'm using it at this moment. It's an annoying format and it seems to miss
posts a lot. It might be better than nothing.
From: Andy Gale
I checked out
several free servers after the demise of deja. I am now paying
$6.95/month for a pay server that is infinitely better than any of the
free servers I checked out. Well worth the price IMO.
UseNetServer
From: Dawn Alguard
The best solution I've found is:
It's free, fast, and accurate. I've been using it for a
couple of months now with no problems whatsoever.
It does, however, require that nntp traffic isn't being
explicitly blocked by your proxy server or firewall. If you
go to that URL there are a couple of tests you can try.
Then you'll need a newsreader, which is easy to get free,
and voila! no more browser-based access.
From: Alex Chiang
I use Nyx Net, which is a
non profit org based out of Colorado. They offer a free unix
shell account to anyone who wants one.
They claim they get a full newsfeed from their upstream provider;
I've noticed a few missed posts here and there, but by and large,
I'm extremely happy with them.
From: Jason
I have been working on this for some time.
It's not all 100% complete yet, but it's workable. If you'd
like, try out:
I'm posting through the web usenet interface right now.
Any feedback would be appreciated. It's text based, has no
annoying banner ads, and can be fast or slow, depending upon
your location.
Is there an official Climbing FAQ?
[back
to top] [FAQ contents]
Eugene Miya posts a series of 8 FAQ panels to rec.climbing
on a rotating basis. Marc-André Giasson has compiled and posted them.
Another place you can look for
compilations of rec.climbing wisdom is Fish Product's Tech Weenie pages. These pages contain
information on webbing strength, rope strength, bolt strength, fall factors and more.
Mike Yukish maintains a compendium of rec.climbing posts relating to climbing safety called Climb Safe
What does this acronym (e.g. HTH or YMMV) mean? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
HTH means "hope this helps" (frequently used sarcastically).
YMMV means "your mileage may vary" (your experience may be different than mine/use at your own risk).
TR either means "trip report" or "toprope" depending on context.
Look up other acronyms at Acronym Finder
Why is Lord Slime being mean to me? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
Because you're giving him the opportunity to be. On Usenet it's considered bad form to follow up on your own post, so if you
don't reply to him, he can't reply to you. Stop answering and the thread will fade away.
From: Lord Slime
My function as Lord Slime is to provide counterpoint it a lot of the unsubstantiated postings that show up here. I was knighted by Eugene Miya (grand old man of the Internet) many years ago. My job is to point-out the stupidity of "what's the weather going to be like in July?" questions in an El Nino year, and the laziness of "I need beta on Yosemite" posts. It is to call Bullshit! when someone claims to have climbed and descended Crimson Crysallis in 3 hrs. when Catherine Destiville took longer than that. It is to dispel the notion that the figure-8 is the only knot to tie-in with, or that you can learn to lead by following.
- Lord Slime, and I like my job.
From: Jim
Byrnes' presentation of the truth more closely approximates the response you will likely receive from gravity - sure, swift and unforgiving.
What the hell is wrong with you people? (rec.climbing culture explained) [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
From: Brutus of Wyde
But a rope with a perfect sheath that never suffered serious trauma is
fine for rappelling only. Just like your 20 year old floor is fine to
walk on but might not hold a hot tub
If after reading Karl's excellent and succinct summation you are still
undecided what to do, post the question to rec.climbing and tally the
results of 14 equally split-but-strongly-opinionated climbers who
have never seen your rope, three people who want to know where
in Arkansas, one with fond memories but no REI points, one
hundred ninety three who had a flamefest (available on Google Groups from
16 months ago) about whether to use static line for toproping,
four who disagree on the cumulative impacts of ozone and radon gas
on organic polymers, seven who respond with varying physics equations
concerning fraction-of-a-second falls, spring constants, and Geoff
"Kilonewton" interpolations, two who saw ropes just like this used
in Vertical Limit by Ed Vestiers to anchor his tent, one smart alek
who suggests you ask rec.climbing, one newbie who wants to know if
the glue from the electrical tape you used to mark the center 20 years
ago may have degraded the nylon at that point causing the rope to fail
at the exact center the second time your son stresses it over a
unwelded coldshut halfway worn through by grit at Owens Gorge, but he
was only three feet off the deck at the time 'cause he was toproping
(which is not recommended through cold shuts at the gorge) and so does
not get credit for a failed redpoint but so fortunately he
didn't get hurt and we're glad to hear that, one fairly new but
accepted climber who somehow relates this thread to the color of her
underthings, another experienced and accepted climber who flames the
first for constantly relating everything to the color and style of her
underthings, one retailer who posts often and requests that you either
send the rope to him for extensive field testing or check the "Tech-
weenie" section of his website and adios, two who somehow work the
size of their male organs into the discussion, and seven who use your
question as an excuse to mention their most recent big-numbers flash
in the gym...
Hope this helps. Some of the above mentioned posts have not yet appeared
on this thread, but trust me they're on their way...
From: Rex Pieper
Rock climbing? What the hell is that? This is the place to CLIMB UP OTHER PEOPLE'S ASS if you haven't guessed by now from the posts. That's why it's called rec(tum).climbing!
From: Mike Yukish
backpedaling snipped
Bill, you've fallen prey to a classic usenet tactic. Your first post about a year
ago in this thread about knots indirectly alluded to an error of a fundamental
nature, i.e., the single point of failure toprope anchor. Someone could have,
1) Politely sent you an email pointing this out
They chose (10). You of course think you are not an idiot and must prove it, but
(and here's the ever entertaining "gotcha", the trap you walked into) you
incorrectly think that to prove it you must convince everyone that your position
(which is indeed wrong) is actually right. Bad logic. Ain't going to happen. In
defending the undefendable, you allow the remainder of the newsgroup to pile on.
It reminds me of "Call of the Wild", where once one dog is down, the rest of the
pack closes in and devours the loser. Hope you speak Chinese.
From: Nate Beckwith
But criticizing something about which you haven't a clue makes you sound really dumb. A reply from someone knowledgeable would be a waste of their time. Welcome to the dilemma of rec.climbing,and the source of its quality.
From: Lord Slime
1) When you ask a question on this newsgroup you are asking for a
favor. So phrase your questions to reflect that. No one here is
obligated to answer your questions or give you good information.
In fact, bad information is rampant, usually because the blind are
leading the blind.
2) Don't ask unbounded questions like "Where should I climb near
Colorado Springs?" If you want the answer to questions like that
you need to do the research yourself, because it's far too much to
expect anyone to type it all in. If you ask more specific questions
you'll get better answers, such as "I'm interested in alpine rock." or
"I want to sport climb."
3) If you have an email address like "hung_like_rhino" you will get
the instant respect 15-year-old boys deserve.
4) If you can't deal with this, get the fuck out of here.
From: Steve Gray
send all flames directly to me. The group doesn't need any more of them.
Translation: "Please don't roast me publicly for being a dickhead. I don't want anybody else to know"
From: Lord Slime
Well I think you're being far too narrow minded. I think we need many,
many new groups to cover all the various topics. After much thought I
make the following proposals.
rec.climbing.I'm.a.newbie.and.*
* how.do.I.start
rec.climbing.how.do.I.*.my.rope
* wash
rec.climbing.anal.*
* fall.forces
* webbing
rec.climbing.I.hurt.my.*
* finger
rec.climbing.feet.*
* stink
...and the always popular...
rec.climbing.I.think.you.*
* should.shut.up
And finally...
rec.climbing.partners.*
* good
Everybody happy??
From: Grant
Don't be confused- this ain't climbing; it's rec.climbing. I'll wager that
you'll find the vast majority of this n.g.'s readers to be kind, helpful, and
excellent partners. What you're seeing is a bunch of frustrated, hard(ly)
working people who would rather be climbing instead of tapping keys on their
computers. It's a game to keep things interesting until the weather clears up,
someone wins the lottery, or the weekend comes.
Don't take it personally. Learn to disregard the threads that have boiled down
to drivel and relish those that bring joy, insight, and knowledge.
From: Al Black
Ever read Tami Knight's Climbing Tales of Terror; Wicked
Wicked Lies and Malicious Slander? Somewhere between the ice climber and
the sport climber lies the rec.climber. Lets put it another way, if the
average rec.climber were a dog, it would be a cross between a beagle and a
lab: Generally genial, occasionally territorial, travels in packs, but
prone to aimlessness, false alarms, rolling around in stuff, flights of
fancy, and random inappropriate behaviour.
From: Stu Hammett
Ironically, this
whole "hi" crisis is happening right on the heels of a first for me - I
started a thread that (to my surprise) took off like a rocket; I got
blindsided by a searing barrage of flames; I hung in there, didn't whine too
much, tried to make my points and keep a sense of humour. Not only did I
survive to trip over my dick again next time, but it was a good thread, and
I felt pretty good about it.
I've popped in and out several times over the last few years. I was kind of
repulsed by alot of the gratuitous abuse that gets thrown around, and was
guilty once or twice of the sin of whining about the nasty insiders. But I
learned - it's just part of the culture. Rec.climbing is a harsh,
unforgiving environment, not unlike climbing itself. It could be different,
all sweetness and light, but it's not. As a result, you learn that you have
to watch your step, read and understand what others have written, write
carefully and precisely, and know what you're talking about, even if you're
asking a question. And if you get slapped, deal with it and move on.
So yeah, if rec.climbing was a warm and fuzzy place, you wouldn't have to
THINK so damn hard about what you say. And it wouldn't be so much fun!
From: Joe Navratil
James, let me tell you something, newbie to newbie:
The ridicule you received for posting about driving spikes in order to
place an anchor was because you did so little research. It wasn't
because you were new. Let me repeat that: It had nothing to do with
you being new.
There are a number of ways you could have received an answer to your
question. Here's a few:
1) You could find a mentor who would show you how to place gear and
set up anchors correctly.
Pros: It's the best way to learn, especially as far as actual
hands-on experience goes.
Cons: Finding a willing mentor isn't easy.
2) You could read a bunch of books, especially the John Long "How
To..." series.
Pros: It's the quickest, and depending on how good an apprentice
you are, possibly cheapest method.
Cons: Nobody's around to tell you you're doing it wrong if you
screw up. Remember, "screwing up" could mean
"unintentionally committing suicide." It's orders of
magnitude worse than emailing your ode to Suzy-Doll to
everyone@yourcompany.com.
3) You could post a well-thought out, well-researched question to r.c
after having read some of the books.
Pros: You'll hopefully sound like you know what you're talking
about when you ask the question, and therefore receive
serious responses.
Cons: You could end up sounding like 'hi', especially if you
debate the answers you're getting by spouting
misinterpreted chapter & verse of the books you've read.
4) [This is the option you took] You could post an unresearched
question to r.c
Pros: You'll more than likely get an immediate response or six.
Cons: Most of them will be accusing you of trolling if you don't
sound like you know what you're talking about. Of the
rest, half will tell you you're an idiot and you should do
(1) or (2). The other half will skip telling you that
you're an idiot, and still suggest (1) or (2). And one
will be from the local troll king, giving very specific
advice that has a better than 90% chance of resulting in
serious injury or death.
Now, the question that follows (for me, anyway) is: "How should I,
James, know that the Long books are the books to read; or how can I
find a mentor; or how do I know who's advice is serious and who's
advice is going to get me killed?" There's a very simple answer to
that one: Lurk. The longer the better. That way, once you start
posting, you'll know who the regulars are. You'll have a better idea
of who comes close to being your source of "expert advice from real
pros" (something, by the way, that you should NEVER expect to get from
ANY Usenet group), who's clueless but sure they're right, and who's
just trolling. And, of course, the best thing that lurking would give
you is a pointer to Dawn's excellent site,
which will give you the answer to 90% of your questions, especially at
the newbie level (like, for instance, how to set up a toprope anchor;
or where to look outside of r.c for more information on how to set up
a toprope anchor).
Don't think that people here are initiating you. They don't
immediately pile on newbies just because they're new. They pile on
newbies because they post about that which they don't understand or
respect. This newsgroup is about climbing, you could DIE(tm), gravity
isn't nearly as nice as Lord Slime, etc etc.
From: Dingus Milktoast
I always like it when the brash newcomer comes riding into town on a
flashy
horse, brandishing his 6 guns, 10 gallon hat tipped ever so carefully,
squinting
in the noon day sun. He tells us how bad it was in the last town he cleaned
up
(what was it this time, Unixville? Yeah, Unixville!). He seeks out the
toughest
hombre on the street, draws a line in the sand and knocks that fucking
battery
right off Robert Conrad's shoulder!
Yee Haw! Get out the beer and the ding dongs folks. It's been a long time
since
anyone's really thrown down on the Lord of Slime.
High Noon at Rec.Climbing.
Why did everyone react like I'm an ax murderer when all I did is ask a simple question about Tiblocs? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
Petzl Tibloc: almost certainly the worst, and quite possibly the longest, thread in the history of rec.climbing. Read the 417 messages if you dare.
From: Stinkwagen, 1/7/2002
The notorious TiBloc thread. Abbridged.
12/30/00. Some Bobby guy starts out this whole mess with, "Hey! What's
up with Tiblocs 'n shit? In reply, Vawter does his best slime
impersonation, "Elevator's closed. Use the stairs." The chorus
begins a slow drone, "Teeth hurt the sheeth! Teeth hurt the sheeth!
Go to sleep! Go to sleep!" The Neuroinformatik starts to build a
reputation. That Bobby guy appears to have been slowly stewing and a
short while after his initial meek reply, he briefly and spectacularly
reappears with a sparkling display of wronged-newbie tirade [search
google using key words "denrod vawter blow me asshole"]. Around this
time we get a diversion of the female scent with a tale of a Catwoman
luring a TradRat. The Catwoman catches only Tibloc munge and she then
announces to the group that she is now charging. Hello Mr. Soul, he
drops by to spray of Herr Messner. Quibbling over experience gets
Ketchup all pouty and he resorts to quoting the dictionary as the
Dingus Cherry express turns on the burn. Meanwhile many
Zaumen-related threadlets have quietly matured and are starting to
coalesce into a horrible ugly cataclysmic event. While the chorus
briefly discusses correlations with 1 year rope expiration and wanker
size, that crazy f**ker nobody@nospam is starting to act like he's on
PCP or something. Bunch of fat guys and a dog all jump on him and
they still can't hold him down!!! He acquires a dozen nicknames and
everyone else leaves the room. Then for like a thousand posts it's
just this dog's jaws sunken into the whacko as he flails while Kastrup
hangs in there tangentially. The thread devolves into like a million
posts in which these three guys are the exclusive contributors and
audience. Catsup, Zoomer and that crazy canine drone and drone and
drone. With grand hyperbole I conjecture that this section of the
thread could quite possibly be the most boring flamewar in the history
of rec.climbing. Near the end Ken Cline drops in for a cameo to
delivers the knockout punch. ZZZZZZZZZZ. Maddog accepts a bet.
Zoomer inexplicably fails to reply and the thread abruptly
ends. 3/14/01
From: Chiloe, 4/12/2002
Tribloc, n.pl. [origin unknown]. rec.climbing thread characterized
by exceptional length but thin content. Often begun by a beginner's
technique question that draws self-confident but questionable advice
from another poster. Continues indefinitely with attacks & defense,
as onlookers experience deepening fatigue.
From: Nathan Sweet, 1/19/2001
Because I know you won't actually read the Petzl Tibloc thread (no one did, not even the particpants), I give you some other highlights. The following quotes are unattributed in the hope of preventing a recurrence.
"30 cm is not much closer to 50 cm than it is to 10, and
30 cm differs from a foot by precisely 0.48 cm."
"The difference between 15 cm and a foot is about 6 inches, and a foot
is 30.48 cm, so "more than 30cm" means about 0.2" more (for the benefit
of any Americans reading this). As to "obviously much closer to David's
50 cm", 10 to 15 cm is 20 to 15 cm less than 30cm, whereas 50cm is
20 cm longer, so "obviously less closer" is pretty obviously a figment
of Jeff's imagination."
"Volumes (capacities) are defined in terms of the meter, with a liter defined
as equaling a cube with sides of 0.1 m. The mass of 1 liter of water, when
at the temperature of ice (0 °C) is used as the model for the mass standard
and this is designated as the kilogram."
"Kilograms force, once considered acceptable, should no longer be used.
In SI, if your weight in kilograms is 75 kg, then your weight (with a
different meaning) on Earth in newtons is about 735 N. If you start
with your weight in newtons, you can get from there to your mass
("weight" as it is normally defined for this purpose) in kilograms by
dividing by the local acceleration of gravity, using your buddy's
method."
"One of the dictionary definitions of "a couple" includes a sense in
which it means "a few"."
"Some sources consider a few to extend as high as 9. Do you propose that a
couple, which traditionally meant two will also have 9 as a limit?"
"Of course you are aware that impact forces don't grow linearly with
weight and fall factor, but just with the square root of them?"
Oh, BTW, good old Webster gives:
1ex-pe-ri-ence \ik-'spir-e^--en(t)s\ n
[ME, fr. MF, fr. L experientia act of trying, fr. experient-, experiens,
prp. of experiri to try, fr. ex- + -periri (akin to periculum
attempt) -- more at FEAR]"
"Moreover, most of these definitions relate to the use of the term
as having a (single) experience, as opposed to being experienced in
some practice or type of task, so it's not surprising that most of
them don't apply to our discussion."
"By '100% of the time' I was refering only to a comparison of two specific
choices."
"In that scenario, his leader climbed a
traversing lead, got solid gear at 10' above the belay, then
questionable gear 50' above and 20 or 30 feet to the side of the belay.
After climbing 10' above the questionable gear, the leader falls and is
injured."
"If it's strength is under 600 pounds minus the loss
due to the knot, minus loss due to wear and age, it is possible that the
situation you mentioned (that you would go to the high piece, intent on
lowering down the rope to your partner) that as you lowered, your
combined weights plus the lead rack could easily be more than the
strength of the weakened 5mm perlon, especially since down-jugging would
add a finite shock load to the anchor itself."
"Assuming a similar scenario with little rope out (say
12') and very little rope drag (one piece remaining, 10' below the #4 that
is about to blow, thus 2' above the belay anchor), a clean (all air - no
rock friction) fall with the rope not passing over any edges to add drag, . . ."
"Oh, and in case you don't know, the TCP/IP transition was in the early
80s, which is 'day one' for the Internet, if you want to distinguish it
from the ARPANET based on the protocols being used."
"Take it to climbers you know and by "it", I mean every post
in the thread."
BTW, although the infamous blueberry bushes/forest debate took place as a tangential thread, it doesn't actually appear in the Tibloc thread itself.
From: Dawn Alguard, 7/27/2001
I think I did the requisite research
You couldn't possibly have or you would know that any post
mentioning the word "tibloc" is forbidden.
So if you really want to know something about Tiblocs, please don't ask. Instead, check out:
What are Petzl Tiblocs good for?
What are the alternatives to rec.climbing? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
If you can't read newsgroups, or if rec.climbing just isn't for you, try these discussion boards:
Other newsgroups:
uk.rec.climbing
Browser-based discussion groups:
Climbing Central Rumor Central
What if my question
isn't answered here? [back
to top] [FAQ contents]
Almost all of these answers were
compiled using the Usenet archives. Try a search yourself by going to Google Usenet Advanced Search and putting rec.climbing in the newsgroup field along with
one or more keywords in the "Find results" fields.
Most of the information in this FAQ was originally posted on rec.climbing. If you would prefer to have something attributed to you removed from this FAQ, please contact us. |
|
|
|