UKH

Yesterday I did a new route at Millstone Edge,a variation of Lyons Corner House (HVS 5a).

THUS ENDETH THE LESSON E3 6A,with mats.( I used 2 mats) E4 with no mats.
Start at the left arete of L C House,by the start of the arete direct start.Clip a new peg and traverse right on crimps,crux, at about 3 metres to the obvious narrow groove.Difficult moves into the groove and then up the arete for 4 metres.Traverse left to clip 2nd peg,then exit right via a short layback groove ,to join Lyon's Corner House where it traverses out around the arete from the cave.Finish up L C House.Somewhat of an instant classic.A must for crimp fans.Have just checked the logbooks and it seems there is a route called African that joins the groove from the right.

P Mitchell led,E. Horvath followed.

In reply to paul mitchell:


*Opens popcorn*

In reply to paul mitchell:

Other routes of mine with pegs at Millstone are Freight Train and The Pittsburgh Enigma. Mitch

In reply to paul mitchell:

Sounds more like you've bashed a couple of pegs into an existing route!

In reply to paul mitchell:

Fills a gap for sure, I'm assuming the pegs can't be clipped from Lyons Corner House Direct?


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Peg one is very low.Peg 2 would more than hvs to traverse across and clip.

In reply to paul mitchell:

I've noticed with my routes that the more serious they are the fewer repeats they get.Thus the pegs.
If E3 is your grade,you will enjoy this one.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Funnily enough, that is the exact same argument used by many retrobolting fans.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Have you/anyone checked with Colin Struthers to see if this is sufficiently different from his route African (E3 6a)?

It's quite hard to tell from the descriptions, but sounds like there's at least one peg been added to that line even if it's not clippable from Lyons Corner House (HVS 5a).

In reply to paul mitchell:

sounds like an eliminate that also uses bolts, there will be a long line of people waiting to do this route

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Had a quick peek at this mid run yesterday, the first peg is at face height on the ground, completely pointless. More importantly though, if you are going to insist on placing pegs, why place them in a flake so loose i can almost prise it off with my fingers?

In reply to JamieSparkes:

I'm a little disappointed with the lack of ranting on this thread. I thought it would have been much more entertaining...

Where's all the "scarring the soul of the sacred grit" blah blah?

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I'm afraid it has been established on another thread that the soul does not exist.

In reply to paul mitchell:

I'm going to de-peg this if no one beats me to it .

In reply to jimjimjim:


I was expecting someone to say this soon.

personally I didn't know that anyone still placed new pegs on summer rock routes in the UK.

In reply to gethin_allen:

They don't.

In reply to jimjimjim:

Don't see the point in taking out pegs unless you're gonna have a go after, so make sure you report back on grade for pegless ascent then yeah?

In reply to dr_botnik:

Oh don't you. I don't care what you think mate same as they chap who placed the pegs doesn't care what others think.

In reply to paul mitchell:


No shit.

>Thus the pegs.

Just shit.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):


Oh good, another route-naming squabble with Colin.

In reply to gethin_allen:

Due to the general lack of outrage at someone cracking a new peg into millstone in 2015 I think I may take a few with me for London Wall on my next visit.

Saves having to carry all that gear stuff.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Nope, shouldn't be putting pegs in Millstone in this day and age.

In reply to jimjimjim:
Hi Jim Jim Jim,seems you have done some sport climbing.What would you say if I stripped the bolts out of your favourite bolt routes? I don't approve of bolts.Using your 'logic' I can just go and strip any bolt route I want,just because I don't approve.

As for the first peg being pointless,I rarely place any gear that is pointless.It is close to the crux.If it is pointless,go and solo the route.I reckon I could solo the route,but as I said, the fewer the runners the fewer the repeats.Presumably you think mats are pointless too,and spotters.
Anyone removing the pegs should either return them to me or send me the cash value.Not to compensate me would be theft.Bear in mind that you will have destroyed a route for no good reason.This is a good route.
Shouldn't be putting pegs in Millstone in this day and age? What day and age would that be?If there is going to be a consistent ethic in UK climbing,if there should be no pegs in quarried grit,on a crag that has been heavily pegged and still has plenty of peg runners ,then surely limestone should be debolted also?Why is it ok to bolt limestone but not to peg quarried grit?Hypocrisy.

If the first ascensionist of Africa wants to contact me,that would be good.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


If we all work really hard I think we could get some sort of UKC retrobolting/crag swag ethic/Millstone dry tooling uber thread going. UKC might collapse under the sheer weight of it, though.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Theft my arse, the pegs are abandoned gear. They should have been removed by you second. Using in them in the first place was bad style, leaving them in there even worse.

The route still exists without the pegs - for those willing and capable.

In reply to Removed User:

The pegs are not abandoned.They are there to assist other climbers. I guess,Hardonicus,that you have never in your whole climbing life,ever clipped a peg? I guess the other critics on this thread have never or will never clip a peg as a belay or as a runner? If so,you are either a true hero or you don't mind depriving yourself of a lot of good climbing.

As I said,is it not hypocrisy to support massively bolting limestone,but to criticise a few pegs in a crag where historically they are normal? At New Mills Torrs,quarried grit,there are pegs on Honcho and on Bionics Wall.Is some idiot going to strip those routes of the pegs,just because they personally don't approve?

In reply to paul mitchell:

Are you the one and same Paul Mitchell that sent me a very snotty email several years ago when I replaced the 26 year old peg on Snap Decision (Ilkley Quarry) with an identical brand new one? I don't have the original email any more sadly but you said something about destroying the character of the route and that I had ruined your memories of it?

In reply to paul mitchell:

Paul, it's all about consensus, which currently says no to placing temporary, poor quality fixed protection on grit, on the basis that we are still trying to deal with the aftermath of the last lot and don't want to have to repeat the process in a decade's time.

One thing i am genuinely curious about is what the first peg was trying to achieve? I did mull this one over in depth but couldn't work it out, care to enlighten me?

There is no place for new pegs at millstone, please remove it.

If you are not bold enough to climb something without a new peg then top rope it or move on. Historic pegs from another era are a slightly different matter. If there is any doubt, it is up to the person wanting to place fixed gear to gain the consensus of the community before placing the peg / bolt / stake (which clearly wasn't and hasn't happened in this case).

In reply to Sean_J:

Not me,as I recall.I have never tried Snap Decision.Happy to hear that somebody else on this site thinks that pegs can have validity on certain types of grit.

In reply to paul mitchell:
Hi 'Duchess' So you are saying I should basically solo or otherwise risk suicide on any route where pegs are available?What is your answer to my point on the hypocrisy of extensive bolting of Peak District limestone?I want people to occasionally repeat my routes,thus the pegs on this occasion.Stacks of my routes don't get done because they are too risky.I would prefer to see a few repeats now and again.You think bolting is fine,but pegs are not? There are plenty of people who don't like bolts.As I say,the bolts stay .If you want to strip out pegs,then why not strip out the bolts? Why should limestone be any different than quarried grit?It really is the most blatant hypocrisy to attack one style but not the other.

In reply to JamieSparkes:
Well Jamie,seems I have to state the bleedin' obvious, once again.If there was no first peg,then upon falling onto the mat,there would be a good chance of falling either backwards onto a lot of very nasty pointy boulders,or falling into a nasty hole down right,with yet more nasty pointy boulders.The peg would hold one on the mat.As for 'Concensus',that just means that there is a perception that a so-called majority hold certain views,and a minority opposes those views.
It really is inconsistent to have bolts but no pegs.It is ok for people to lack bottle by placing and clipping bolts,just because a'majority' think so? I think ethics are more complex than what people vote for.If pegs are not valid on quarried grit,then surely they are not valid as belays or runners anywhere ,or any other kind of rock?Why oh why are bolts ethically any cleaner than pegs?Because,let's face it,so many people wilfully blind themselves to the ethical hypocrisy of it,because they would hate so much of their past effort to be supposedly invalidated if those routes were debolted. I repeat the point,have none of my critcis ever clipped a peg?Do they refuse to ever clip a peg in future?
If so,will they also refuse to clip bolts,and if not ,why not? Simply because a certain bunch of other people say that's acceptable,even though a a sizeable group disagree,on a trad basis..So ethics is what other people say is acceptable,or is it more complex and perhaps ,more private than that?

In reply to paul mitchell:

Is some ethical hero going to hammer out the pegs on White Wall and Green Death? If not,why not? Both have been soloed.Hmmmmmm....maybe ethics really are a little more complex than some people at first imagined.

In reply to paul mitchell:

"are saying I should basically solo or otherwise risk suicide"

Nope - I'm saying you should TR or walk on by. Don't damage the rock don't place bolts or pegs without prior consensus. And don't let you big head get over excited by putting you name on a new route and over-ride "get consensus first" rule.

In reply to paul mitchell:

"maybe ethics really are a little more complex than some people at first imagine" - they are certainly more complex than your "I want glory, sod consensus" ethical stand!

In reply to paul mitchell:

Ethics are an attempt to define consensus. Consensus and therefore ethics change over time, as does the style people do routes in.

As I understand the consensus, the ethic, at millstone, at this point in time, is no new fixed gear. You've challenged the ethic, but have clearly not brought the consensus with you on this, which is why the consensus wants to take the pegs out to maintain the current ethic.

By your logic, if your starting premise is about getting more people to do the routes, then bolt everything. I'm sure you don't agree with that as you've accepted that that's not the ethic.

In reply to jimjimjim and others: I imagine that if McHaffie, Robbins, Whittaker or Randall had placed the pegs you'd leave them alone. I imagine if the route was E7+ you'd leave them alone. I remember when Top Loader was done there was none of this fuss, and that has pegs & bolts...but then it's hard and was done by someone famous so it's OK.
Double standards anyone?

In reply to paul mitchell:

I'm not wanting to get drawn in on a peg v. bolt debate, I hear your view that pegs make your new route safely manageable at the grade. I guess my question is where is the line drawn? For example, there are some fairly run out VSs at Millstone - how would it sit with you (or others) if they had a peg or two put in to make them safer? Perhaps this is getting to 'the thin end of the wedge' debate. Maybe a discussion for the next peak forum meeting? Either way, well done on finding a new line anywhere at Millstone, I'll have a look at it tomorrow though won't be attempting a climb just yet...

In reply to Frank the Husky:


But they haven't Martin, because they understand the ethic. They might have done 15 years ago when Toploader was done, but they in all likelihood wouldn't now. Ethics are fluid, and the pegging/bolting of Toploader was part of the formation of that ethic.

In reply to paul mitchell:


You own the route, which is an idea of how to use the rock - you do not own the rock.

In reply to paul mitchell:




Let me know your address and I'll send them to you or I'll put them in the nearest bin.

In reply to John Roberts (JR): But if they *had* placed the pegs they would be left alone, and we all know that. These "ethics" that people are talking about in this thread are applied differently depending on who does the route, and that's how it is. I remember spotting a new line in the Carneddau about 6 years ago that I was going to put a peg into. I was told in no uncertain terms that the peg would be removed. A couple of years later the line was done by a famous local climber - with a peg - and the route was "liked" by many of those who'd suggested they would remove my peg. Like I say, it's a nice set of double standards, but you could say that about many things that go on in life. I'm not getting too het up about this. I imagine the pegs will be removed then replaced a few times and then folk will realise how meaningless it all is and they'll move on.

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Frank clearly you failed to achieve a consensus and the famous local climber did. I suspect being "famous" and "local" added significantly to their credibility when trying to achieve consensus and I'm not sure what is wrong with that - obviously this can cut both ways.

In reply to Frank the Husky:


As I've maintained, ethics can change, it's usually those at the cutting edge that challenge and drive it and achieve the consensus, which you may not have done.

As it is, you're conflating a separate issue, I understand your grievance to be fair, but even if the route at Millstone was E7+ and the peg accepted by the consensus, I'm confident the ethic would have been more considered by any of those you quoted rather than placed in a fairly bullish way. What we're talking about here is a peg that's seemingly close to the ground, and in a possibly loose flake. Then a second one that's quite probably on an established route (African (E3 6a)). I'm guessing none of the climbers you quoted would have placed them, in this circumstance, and I'm expecting you don't agree with these pegs either.

In reply to Frank the Husky:


Thats true ! remember the slagging James Pearson got for walk of life when he had made a very ethical statement in removing all the existing pegs whereas Birkett got a load of plaudits for putting new pegs into a similar line.

In reply to GrahamD:

Off topic, but that wasn't the main reason he got the slagging off. Good on him for removing the pegs.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

I know its not why he got slagged off, but to me he should have received far more plaudits for that ethical stance than Birkett received for his ethically far more dubious ascent.

Seems the grade debate and the personality debate overshadowed what was a very significant (to me at least) ethical stance.

In reply to paul mitchell:

All this talk of the peg damaging the rock is nonsense, its a fecking quarry! the damage was done decades ago! and the second removing the peg would do far more damage than leaving it in.

like others have said if the route was E silly + and done by such and such rockstar there wouldn't be nearly as much fuss as here, sure some would question the ethics but nobody would be threatening to remove the pegs.

retro-pegging a vs would be just as bad as retro-bolting it, as it would at any grade. but a peg placed by the first ascentionist (as long as it doesn't interfere with an adjacent route) on quarried grit is fine. lets not forget that many of the best routes at milstone only exist because of the pegging of the past.

In reply to Webster:



Yes, but now the consensus is not to add pegs and not to open the existing peg scars further with more pegging.

In reply to paul mitchell:

"Anyone removing the pegs should either return them to me or send me the cash value.Not to compensate me would be theft"

To claim ownership of pegs on a route is as bad as lost and found threads asking for stuck gear back. Either that or admittance of littering...

In reply to paul mitchell:

Hi Paul

I'd have to go back to the crag for a look but from your description it sounds like the substance of your route consists of the main part of African except that your start comes in from the left? If that's right is it really a new route or is it just a variation?

When we were looking at African we did do the moves in from the left on a TR but thought they were disproportionately hard when compared to the rest of the route. I decided that, because they were unprotected the route would never get repeated (as it is, when I last looked, it hadn't been repeated anyway). Accordingly I worked out a way of gaining the arete/groove direct with protection from a side runner in the start of LCH. This is still a quite tough little rock over move.

Had I wanted to do the start on the left I wouldn't have placed a peg to protect this section and I'm not sure a second peg was needed because the upper part into LCH seemed reasonably protected anyway. However, I don't have an ethical problem with your first peg, I agree that there is plenty of precedent at Millstone, its just that I don't like pegs on any route because they eventually rot and have to be replaced. Your second peg does appear to be on African and I appreciate that it might have been placed without knowledge of that route but I don't think it should be there as the climbing has already been done without it.

Who's route etc, etc? Not again please! The next guidebook writer can sort that one out.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Pegs and mats what the f*ck is wrong with you?

The reason your route don't get much traffic is because people are voting with their feet.

Who wants to climb something that's been crated by a f*ckwit.

You seem to be wanting some sort of adulation for your good work and now you're not getting it, you think everyone else is in the wrong.

In reply to krikoman:

Go and stand in a corner with a paper bag.

Breath into it until you have calmed down.

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Do you? In your somewhat unlikely scenario I rather think those pegs, like these, would be unlikely to stay there for very long.

In reply to colin struthers:



I'm calm already, I'm just wondering at the mind set of someone who bangs two pegs into grit for what is essentially a variation / eliminate, for an E3.

It doesn't seem worth it to me, surely it's better not to bother. Wouldn't it be possible to find another E3 to put up without resorting to hammer and pegs?

In reply to krikoman:

Millstone & pegs are like peaches and cream. They go together. In fact if it hadn,t been for pegs nearly all the thin crack routes wouldn,t exist! As stated previously on this thread, loads of routes there depend on pegs and some are now so old they wouldn,t hold a fall and should possibly be replaced without reproach.
Some of Paul,s routes are a little esoteric, but that doesn,t invalidate them and he,s been putting up new routes for over 30 years and is as keen as ever, so perhaps he should be lauded ?

In reply to paul mitchell:

I remember a few years ago you tried defending your right to cover a boulder in chalk at newstones. it looked like a boulder used for some pagan festival,but you said it was needed. you seem to have no care for ethics of the game or you just seem to think you are some revolutionary who goes around ruffling feathers, claiming shitty new routes.
if everyone did as they pleased the crags would be a right mess.

In reply to krikoman:


No, I'm guessing it's not that that Colin's referring to. It's this:


There's no need for it. You can make your point without resorting to that.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Nice to see you've not lost your touch for stirring up a bit of controversy in your old age Mitch

In reply to the thread:


that's more like it! Normality is restored.

In reply to rocksol:


That may well be true in the days they climbed with hobnail boots and hemp rope (for most people), but we also used to send kids up chimneys and bait bears with dogs!

Some routes have been made possible by the army using the rock for target practice, but that doesn't mean that was a good idea or we have to continue to impose our will on the environment does it?

I'd like to think we've moved on a bit since the "olden" days of moulding the environment to to suit what we want it to do, and learnt a little more respect for our surroundings.

In reply to krikoman:


You might want to take a look at the history of quarried grit and Millstone in particular, as the pegging that has taken place there is slightly more recent than the era in your analogy.

In reply to paul mitchell:

I'm going to be honest, I'm surprised that you're getting any support after placing the peg. I just can't see the rational behind thinking that it was a good idea (although I'm willing to listen and try to understand).
If it really is just so that you can claim a new route that will potentially be more popular due to the pegs that seems a little egotistical, and knowing that piece of rock I'd be surprised if it even went from no stars to one star. Let's be honest here, it's hardly the next Great North Road. If we all went out and placed pegs on new variations and eliminates the place would be a right mess.
The argument behind the uber climbers placing pegs in quarried grit these days is just bollocks, as it's not happening.

In reply to deacondeacon:


Top Loader? Shape Shifter?

In reply to Frank the Husky:


I also remember when Toploader was done, somewhat before the omnipresence of UKC, and there was indeed plenty of comment and debate about the placement of pegs. Perhaps not as visible as the modern day UKC wittering so, but it happened. As JR has already mentioned Toploader probably encouraged the debate and maybe galvanised people's stances on both sides of (and indeed atop) the fence.


Don't think so.

FWIW I'm in the remove the pegs camp, but I doubt I'll cry myself to sleep each night if they stay in.

In reply to krikoman:


of course, i hope we all agree on that, but again ill point out its a quarry, a whopping great hole in the ground! the environmental damage has been done. the arguement against pegs on environmental grounds doesnt hold water.

In reply to jon:


Toploader is hardly "these days" is it? It was before my time but I'm fairly sure people where objectionable over the pegging of it.
Sorry, I don't know the route Shape Shifter.

In reply to jon:
I've just done a Google search for Shape shifter too and that was also pegged 15 years ago, there's people that climb these grades that weren't even born then.

In reply to paul mitchell:
The issue i have with this is that you are obviously aware that a lot of climbers disagree with placing new pegs, yet you are that arrogant, and inconsiderate that you ahve placed one anyway! I am very suprised that there are still people that believe they can do as they please with our rock, and lets not forget it is all of ours. It is not yours, and only yours to do with as you please.
In future put your thoughts out there see how people feel, if the consensus is against you,then suck it up and don't place them, you might gain more respect with this approach, which might help you in the future when trying to gain the consensus.

In reply to duchessofmalfi:


You don't see what is wrong with that?!

A climber's popularity should not have this much of an effect on the way their routes/ethics are viewed compared to others.

In reply to Webster:

The arguement against pegs and a lasting place to climb might though.

If every Tom and Dick think it's a good idea to hammer pegs into grit willy nilly then climbing would soon suffer.

In reply to deacondeacon:


Maybe but the first ascent was 2008 and still used the pegs (as far as I know). Regardless, there are so few new routes being done on Millstone that anything after say 2000 seems a relatively modern route to me! A better argument against Mitch's route is whether he put a peg in Colin's route - knowingly or unknowingly.


I'm not sure that is really the criterion to judge whether a pegged route can be accepted or not?

In reply to paul mitchell:
I've been to thinking about this. Is it some elaborate troll or some climbing ethic experiment?
Claim to have put up a new route that's hardly an eliminate.
Whack a few pegs in on a gritstone crag, one near the ground and the other near a previous decent route.
Come on ukc with a post headed 'brilliant route' and claim it an 'instant classic'
Then argue when people start to question what gone on.
Hmm?
I'm still going to whip the pegs out. Got my old pegging hammer ready for the delicate extraction.

In reply to Webster:

So what? Dynamiting entire faces is clearly out of bounds now, even though that's how they were created. More recently it's become clearly unacceptable to alter the holds with mere hammer and chisel. And more recently still a fairly clear consensus was established that placing 'fixed' gear at Millstone (as with the great majority of the grit) is not on. Good grief, even "dry tooling" there is a lynching offence, just ask Calum whatsisface.


There *is* no argument against pegs on environmental grounds, that has bugger all to do with climbing ethics.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Am I special, or have other people also been receiving emails from Mr Mitchell?

In reply to Chris Harris:

Ha...Not got one yet, I hope he's been polite?

In reply to paul mitchell: Placiing new pegs at Millstone doesn't seem acceptable in 2015, it seems at odds with the current ethics, when was the last time new pegs were placed there? Placing them just so that a route becomes popular seems a bit bizarre. As Paul states in the opening post, he could have led this without the pegs, that would have been a better course of action.
I am a little surprised by some of the support for leaving the pegs, particularly from some posters whose opinions I normally find myself aligned with.
I doubt this is likely to be the thin end of the wedge, I think it will be seen as a mis judgement on a minor route and of little significance... except on UKC.
I'm also a bit confused about different grades given with or without mats

In reply to deacondeacon:



Sorry, Frank is right. if the route was E9 and the climber famous, no one would give a shit.

Boggy.

In reply to deacondeacon:


Egotistical? Surely not. After all, climbers only put up new routes on 15m high rocks for the general betterment of mankind.

In reply to Bogwalloper: the only E9 at Millstone is Pure Now, which is very serious, has no pegs and was done by a "widely" known climber in 2014.
If he'd placed a peg to make the route more popular I think he would have got plenty of stick about it.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

"You don't see what is wrong with that?!"

Let me clarify that for you:

If someone with an impeccable track record famed for their climbing prowess and local chips in then I would expect this to have a positive influence on their credibility when trying to gain a consensus. That cuts both ways - if they say "don't peg" then that will be influential, if they say "it is right to peg" then that will alos be influential.

If a famous non local knob head with a track record for flouting agreed bolting and pegging conventions says "peg" or "don't peg" I would expect their influence to be diminished.

As I said it cuts both ways - someone's reputation counts in these arguments. Being local also counts. I don't see owt wrong with this, I mean who would you be more swayed by when it comes to bolting a classic VS in the lakes? me or Dave Birkett?

In reply to Bogwalloper:

One of the arguments that is influential when it comes to bolting or pegging is, "is the climb possible with or without the fixed gear".

This argument clearly holds more sway at the top end (because below the top end it is clearly possible to climb it without the gear).

One of the OP's arguments for the peg is getting more repeats by making it less bold which more or less undermines the "it is necessary" by replacing it with "it is necessary for it to have more repeats". Increasing traffic is not, as far as I know, a winning argument in these debates.

In reply to duchessofmalfi:


Neither

In reply to jimjimjim:


What he said was:

"Hi Chris,superbly argued intellectual comment re my latest route on
Millstone.I guess you have never clipped a peg in your life,nor would ever
clip one in future?Mitch"

To answer the questions:

1. No, I've never clipped a peg.
2. The future? Depends on how the shoulder operation goes on July 6th. Probably still won't be clipping any pegs.

In reply to Chris Harris:

What a very strange fellow he seems to be.

I'm not sure which I'm less impressed by: placing the pegs or the weird line of justification given for having placed them.

The sooner somebody removes them the better.

In reply to victim of mathematics:





Hopefully have it done this weekend. I've asked for the op address so I can send his metal back to him but no reply.

In reply to paul mitchell:


Paul - as your are a very intelligent person you know damn fine well that this statement is a load of crap. It is beneath you.

In reply to Chris Harris:


Haha.. no, I've had two from the petulant child for daring to criticise his placing pegs

In reply to jimjimjim:

If you feel you must take out the pegs, so be it. But why not have a moratorium of a few weeks, so some people could go out and lead the route in its current state while others (with the requisite ability) could solo it? I accept this wouldn't prove anything, one way or the other but, if people reported back on here, we'd get some 'from the horse's mouth' opinions as to which version might constitute a better route.

[To people generally]

I'm not mad keen on more pegs at Millstone either but... we've come through the bolt wars because, in the end, most people adopted a spirit of co-existence, maybe bold routes and clip-ups on the same crag. Sometimes it's nice to have a bit of yin in yang and yang in yin.

Over the years, Paul's done a fair number of FAs in The Peak. (I was fortunate enough to do some with him.) Generally they don't get repeated much. Why? Often they're hard and scary! I can completely understand him wanting some popular ones. (It's a nice feeling seeing people enjoying routes you've put up. I don't think it's necessarily egotistical; for me, it's pretty altruistic.)

The problem of course is that, in The Peak, there's very little left. If it's going to be popular, it's probably going to be a mid-grade, safe micro-route - or else an easy sport route in somewhere Gary's not found yet (tricky!)

Whether this route is a nice little addition to Millstone or a mistake, it's not The End Of Life As We Know It. Paul's been utterly honest. Most people disagree (fair enough) but he's also had a bucket of vitriol (not fair at all). The person most likely to be aggrieved is probably Colin Struthers who has been a model of restraint and an example to all of us.

These car-crash threads do us all a disservice. Simon Lee got flamed on here for removing the chockstones from RE. (As it happened, he was right.) Tony Walker, the most harmless person ever to end up on a crag, got flamed on here for mistakingly retroing one of Paul's routes on Stoney West. (Paul, to his lasting credit, although clearly miffed, was utterly restrained.) I've had some doses of shit (but let's not revisit 'em!) And now Paul. Who's next?

The pegs may or may not be a good idea. But some repeats, clipping 'em and soloing past 'em, would give us more perspective. And some restraint on here might be a good thing.

Mick

In reply to jimjimjim:

Coda to the last post. Will have to go and do some work (the curse of the climbing classes!) in a minute, so won't be able to reply (if needed) until much later in the day.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:



Some restraint or consensus BEFORE knocking a couple of pegs in might have been a good thing too!

In reply to krikoman:

Well maybe so. I can't really argue with you. But surely it's best if we move forward in an amenable manner?

Paul has been typically unfront and honest from the off. British climbing is littered with dodgy deeds. In 41 years, I've never known Paul engage in dodgy deeds. That's not bad going.

And dodgy deeds should not be confused with mistakes - which we all make.

(Skiver!) Mick (definitely off now)

In reply to Mick Ward:

Sound, sensible and measured comments as always Mick, though I suspect you could be banging your head against a brick wall regarding your last sentence

G.

In reply to Webster:


The argument in favour of pegs because they don't damage the environment is just as spurious. Chipping holds in a quarry won't 'damage the environment', are you in favour of that?

In reply to Mick Ward:

Surely the main issue is the peg has been placed in an existing route. For that reason alone it should go.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Well I had thought you had made a grave (though I'm prepared to accept, totally well-meaning) error in placing the pegs, and that really they should come out.


But then you've asked all of us who oppose: have we never clipped a peg in our lives? And, my gosh, I have. Several in fact.

I have now seen the light and follow your logic that I can never criticise any peg in whatever context ever again. It is indeed, as you point out, just sheer hypocrisy to think there can be differences of appropriateness of pegging, given that I myself have, in a different time and place, clipped a (different) peg.

Thank you.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Dear Paul,

I have no interest in engaging in an email debate with you. If you want a debate, do it here.

I note you describe yourself as 'Fiercely individual' as if that makes you somehow different to anybody else. That suggests a rather curious lack of empathy. I doubt anybody would describe themselves as a sheep who never exercises their own will and opinions. The trick in being a decent human being is knowing where the line lies between doing your own thing and being a selfish arse. If everybody in climbing did their own thing all of the time we'd be in a mess, with Stanage getting grid bolted and chopped every 5 minutes. That's why climbers operate on a consensus basis when it comes to this sort of thing. Placing new pegs at Millstone is clearly against the prevailing consensus, so why did you do it? The history of Millstone and/or comparisons with sport climbing are utterly irrelevant and you make yourself look foolish by claiming otherwise. Wanting somebody to repeat your routes is also a bit of a non-argument. I'd love to put up some 3-star mega-classic routes at Stanage, but that isn't going to happen and I just have to deal with that. If you have the eye and the ability to find new routes in this day and age on grit then I doff my cap to you, but vanity is no justification to go disregarding local ethics (however understandable it may be).

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


have you seen the route - Moronic chippings (VS)? so there is precedent for that as well!

No i wouldnt be in favour of chipping holds, but mainly because there is absolutely no need to chip holds as there is barely an inch of unclimbed rock in milstone so doing so would be utterly contrived. im not against it on an environmental ground or on a climbing ground as there are many chipped holds in milstone.

to clarify im not in favour of peging, im merely opposing tho opposition (in a devils advocate kinda way) to provide some balance to the arguement as that is clearly needed, its not a clean cut yes-no debate

In reply to Just Another Dave:


Have you ever clipped a bolt?

If yes then by your logic (if indeed there is any) we might as well set up a Peak bolt fund and just put bolts everywhere.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Thanks for the personal emails, Paul, but I really don't need them thanks.

Subject: in the wrong
"The worse your language the more in the wrong you are.I do listen to what people say,even if I don't agree."

I don't think my language makes what you did any better.

Subject: grades
"I AM actually working on several dangerous projects at the moment.Needless to say,they will get very few repeats.Amusing to think how people simplify a person's philosophy from a few known facts.You DO know my climbing history? Mitch"

I don't know your climbing history, and I'm not really bothered either. Sir Edmond himself could bash a couple of pegs in and I'd still have to wonder why he thought it was worth doing. The fact you are climbing on several dangerous problems again does not interest me. I'm glad I amused you.

The fact that someone is so keen for people to think he can do as he wishes to existing climbs, then expect people to be in awe of him or praise him, says more about you, than your ability to climb hard and dangerous stuff.

In reply to krikoman:

I think you've missed the irony in that post - seems to me that's precisely the point he was making.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Dude, seriously? Emailing folk off the forum to snipe is not cool. If you want to reply to someone it's done out in the open, same as when the original comment was made, please say what you gotta say to me here.
I know you aren't open to opinion but if I were stood in your shoes I'd get back to millstone, re climb the route (like you keep saying you can) with the pegs removed, rename it to HERE STARTED A LESSON, and try and move on. You'd get kudos for making a mistake and then putting it right afterwards. Folk who push ethical boundaries in the peak don't tend to get forgotten for quite some time.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Yeah please stop with the private emails. Calling me a 'fool' is not going to do any good. I'm assuming you'd like me to keep your peg then?

In reply to:
Wow, it must be getting pretty crowded up there on the moral high ground by now. Did all the people fulminating over this ethical transgression march on Pembroke (and other sea cliffs) when our top climbers put pegs in their new routes (which rot to useless stumps in a couple of years) or go along to dry tooling venues to fill in the many drilled and chipped to placements? I guess not but then if there's no audience for your righteous outrage then its not worth bothering about. Far more important to show how much you care in front of a bunch internet acolytes than think for yourselves and act on real ethical transgressions.

FWIW I think the pegs should never have gone in but most of what's written above is just parochial nonsense (Oh mercy me, wont someone please think of the gritstone)

In reply to wilkie14c:


Agreed, but then neither is posting the contents of private emails back on the forum. I don't think anyone is coming off particularly well out of this.

In reply to Tyler:

"or go along to dry tooling venues to fill in the many drilled and chipped to placements?"

Yes. Denham tooling incident 5 years ago. Went 2 days after my vasectomy to abb and photograph the damage (so more than just a pain in the arse!)
Photographic evidence provided to the NW BMC area meet and posted to this forum.

Interestingly, at the BMC meet it was agreed that any interested dry tooling party's in the area would be given the floor to propose sutable crags for discussion. Not a single person made any approach to the BMC concerning this and the matter closed.
Although it didn't happen in this case, it demonstrates that ethics can be changed to suit the times and participants.

In reply to wilkie14c:

You missed my point, I'm talking about the actual creation of chipped and drilled new routes in places like the Works and Crafnant for the purposes of dry tooling. But well dome on the Denham stuff, that place seems to get a fair amount of abuse what with one thing and another

In reply to Tyler:

Strawmen and ad hominem everywhere.

Here Endeth The Thread.

In reply to paul mitchell:
http://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/t.php?t=423422&v=1#x6009653

a man with an ethically poor history.

In reply to Tyler:



Beautiful ^^^^^^^

Boggy

In reply to deepsoup:


Thanks, but it was actually sarcasm. I thought I'd been far too heavy-handed, but unbelievably, actually too subtle for some.

In reply to Just Another Dave:


ha ha, I wasn't surely, you never can tell by reading text, especially on UKC. Where's the smiley face?

Keep up the good work.

In reply to :

Christ, all you neo nancy peg phobics had better not climb round Bristol way, you'll have a seizure!

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
Let's face it, climbers bred on 3* grit tend to have seizures when faced with the gorge regardless of the pegs

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

The gorge... that benign place? Surely not.

< flashback to 'the good old days' >

"Oh God, I'm gonna die!"

Mick

In reply to planetmarshall:


That depends on the content. Email with content of a personal or sensitive nature should definitely be kept private. On the other hand I've been sorely tempted to copy and paste back into the forum before when I've received abusive or threatening email otherwise devoid of content in lieu of a public response from UKC'ers... Never I hasten to add from Paul.

jk

In reply to jkarran:


Fair point.

In reply to Mick Ward:


I can see you're a fellow Avon climber......

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

F8ck the Gorge, not talking about that god awful place!!

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:


FTFY

In reply to remus:


FTFY

In reply to wilkie14c:

Hi Wilkie,you asked me not to snipe.here is your response,then.You are not in my shoes.I will not be doing as you suggest.The reason I often reply individually is that if I am a bit scathing,there is no need for Joe Public to see that.Some people might just agree with what I say in public,join in,and further ridicule you,sincere as you feel you are. Mitch

In reply to krikoman:

Hi Krikoman,I assume you noticed I agreed to remove the upper peg,on or near Colin's route?
No pleasing some people,which is why I will continue to follow my own counsel.People need to understand that if they have a go at someone in public,it is reasonable for that person to try to explain themselves. Mitch

In reply to victim of mathematics:
''local ethics''.Good phrase.They are not as clear as some on the site seem to think.
The concensus is NOT clear.What is 'Trad'? Who decides when it supposedly evolves? A few shouters on this website? I think not.A few people get together in a room and decide the 'concensus'.I have been at some of those guidebook meetings on grades and ethics,It's nearly always the same old faces.That is not what I call concensus.Nor is the shouting of the loudest and most bigoted what I call concensus. I put the pegs in the route to give a line to the climbing public that most of them would otherwise be unable to climb.My motives are not always selfish.I do get rather bored of being accused of stupidity and selfishness.

You still can't resist calling me a selfish arse. Why do so few people nowadays exercise self control? I called one person a 'fool' as I think if he strips the first peg that will not only annoy me but a lot of other people.That is a pretty mild term.I wanted him to think about the consequences of aggressive action.

In reply to paul mitchell:


That's reasonable but should perhaps also prompt a pause for thought.
jk

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

I don't have my own computer,so I have not had time to read all your contributions.I wonder if anyone has yet justified ther retrobolting of my trad routes,and those of other people? That is far more of an offence than my placing 2 pegs on a crag plastered with them. Why is it that 2 pegs can't be added to Millstone but the wholesale bolting of existing trad routes is OK? A tad hypocritical. If ethics is not consistent across all rock types,why should I take your arguments seriously for this rock type,quarried grit? For me,codifying ethics nationally is the important isssue,not these few pegs.
That could be a very contentious issue,though it is the elephant in the room,so people stick to what they think is a more easily regulated 'local' issue.It is not just a local issue.It is 'concensus' that my routes get retrobolted, and concensus that allows trad projects to be ruined by bolting.Why no noise about that? Double standards.

In reply to paul mitchell:

If you think that ethics should be consistent across ALL rock types, why on earth should anyone take you seriously? That's quite obviously nonsense.

We don't need to place pegs on grit anymore. Standards have improved. You new route reeks of ego.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Retro bolting is completely irrelevant to your argument. And so what if some of "your" routes got retrod, nothing to do with the new pegs at millstone. That's a separate argument all together.

You are quite obviously angry about this incident, but fingers crossed you calm down and reflect. You are old enough to know better surely...?

In reply to paul mitchell:

I think the only real difference between your pegs and bolts is that one is good quality, and the other isn't. As far as I'm concerned, you either place good fixed gear or none at all. What is the point in intentionally placing bad fixed gear, designer danger?

In reply to paul mitchell:


You appear to be suggesting that two wrongs makes a right? Personally I'm not happy with either of these, but accept that I'm on the losing side regarding retro-bolting.

In reply to paul mitchell:

How is removing that first peg going to annoy people, it's substandard and its intended purpose couldnbe readily achieved by a side runner in Lyon's corner house direct or even by fixing a belay over near eros (i think?).

In reply to paul mitchell:

>...... Why do so few people nowadays exercise self control? I called one person a 'fool' as I think if he strips the first peg that will not only annoy me but a lot of other people.That is a pretty mild term.I wanted him to think about the consequences of aggressive action.

Oh! the irony.

People got along fine without the route being pegged, so I assume people will go back to being NOT annoyed as they were previously, before the pegs.

You make it sound as if there's a horde of people who've been just waiting for the chance to climb this route, "If only someone would bang a couple of pegs, this would complete the Peak district and we could all live happily ever-after."

I would suggest that bashing in pegs on other people routes could also be considered an act of aggression.

While I sympathise with the retro-bolting of your routes, the old saying two wrongs and all that still stands true.

If your saying you bashed a few pegs in because someone bolted your routes, then that's something different altogether.

In reply to JamieSparkes:

I different debate to the one most on here are having... but I completely agree.

I could understand the counter argument when old bolts left a stubby mess, but now we have sustainable bolting it should be a no brainer.

In reply to paul mitchell:

I think the main mistake is thinking that these new routes aren't getting repeated because they're dangerous, whereas in fact the most likely reason is that they're just not that good. There's tons of high quality, spicy routes getting repeated week in, week out, and certainly no shortage of girls and guys with the ability. If you want people to repeat your routes, do some good ones, and for goodness sake don't go smashing new pegs into classic grit crags. It's just basic common sense.

In reply to Gus:

Fixed your last line for you:

don't go smashing new pegs into crags. It's just basic common sense.

In reply to JamieSparkes:

Amen brother

In reply to paul mitchell:



You just don't get it do you? None of those determine consensus with an s.

I think the majority (consensus) would agree that the best place to get a feel for the ethics and consensus would be an official guidebook. I think the wide ranging contributers will have a) an understanding of the history of a crag, and b) an understanding of the local ethics, both past and present, and so are best placed to collate that knowledge and arrive at an objective recommendation.

Certainly, if I was unsure, I would consult a guidebook (the clue is in the name)

From the BMC guide that covers Millstone., 'Fixed protection, - bolts, pegs, threads or hammered wires - is considered unacceptable on natural grit....historically it has been tolerated in the quarries, although placing any for a first ascent is still to be avoided if possible, and is considered unnaceptable on an established route."

Personally I believe that is the consensus, as the people who arrived at that are a lot more knowledgable than me.

In reply to paul mitchell:

>Why do so few people nowadays exercise self control?

What, like the kind of self control that stops people randomly whacking in pegs wherever they fancy?

>I do get rather bored of being accused of stupidity and selfishness

Some people might reflect on this that perhaps there is a reason they keep getting accused of stupidity and selfishness.

In reply to paul mitchell:
Guidebook committees, BMC open meetings, internet forums and the like may not be as definitive a way of establishing consensus as forcibly getting everyone who ever goes climbing together in the same place and talking through the issues, but they do get a sight closer to it than one person doing what they want to do and then ignoring anyone who doesn't like it.

In reply to JamieSparkes:


I think I saw this now infamous peg this morning when I was belaying my mate on Lyon's Corner House and I did wonder if it was clippable from the arete of Lyon's Corner House Direct? Has any body done the Direct since Mr Mitchell put the peg in?

In reply to paul mitchell:

Definition of classic:

"judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind"

So for the OP to describe it as "somewhat of an instant classic" is an oxymoron.

What drew my attention to this post was the title which contained the word "brilliant" I think that would best be judged by others.
A bit of puffery really.

Good luck everyone with the peg war.

In reply to Fredt:

There is a certain irony in that suggestion, given that the OP is credited as co-author of a BMC definitive guide to Millstone. (Not the current one - the one before last.)

In reply to paul mitchell:

Pegs now all gone. Did you want them back?

In reply to JJL:
Please don't give them back, he'll only do it again.

I say stick them up for sale on here and donate the money to Mountain Rescue. If the OP wants them back he can put in a bid.

In reply to deepsoup:

Good shout, they'll be a notorious peice of climbing history, like Simon Yates knife or the stanage scissor Jack

In reply to JJL:

Good work but I was looking forward to getting them out myself half hoping the op would be waiting in the bushes to beat me up. My idea of fun! Hope no more damage was caused and we can move on now.......dry tooling anyone?

In reply to jimjimjim:

Why?

Why?

Christ

In reply to deepsoup:



Even if the pegs don't get returned, I have plenty in my gear store he can have. I might have even sold him these "offensive" ones in the first place.

In reply to jimjimjim:

And you were surreptitiously asking for Paul's address? Was that to go round and assault him? You quite frankly sound like a nasty piece of work.

In reply to dr_botnik:

Eh? Think you've jumped to conclusions a bit there. Let me know your address and we talk man to man about it.
You're right though, I am nasty.

In reply to jimjimjim:

Sat behind a screen wearing your cape and mask you are patrolling the Internet looking to make wrongs right. And you just found your cause. Someone just put some fixed gear in an old quarry. Well now, you're ready, you've been training for this. Perfecting your ability to argue on other threads, you've sought out dog muck threads and spoke up for the chihuahua's. You even once went on a dash cam thread and casually dropped in that you own a road bike. Well clear a space, cause this caped up wannabe is ready to punch some noses. He's here to champion the quarry's as they should be. Left in the exact same pristine state as they were in 1998. That's history, and he's gonna defend it. Ever ready, he patrols ukc endlessly putting wrongs right. What a champ.

In reply to dr_botnik:

Very funny. Well done. Have been on a creative writing course or are you just a natural?

In reply to jimjimjim:

Great. It strikes me that what would really help resolve the issue here is a bit more aggression from all sides.
D.

In reply to Fredt:


Perhaps he didn't realise the second peg was on an established route. As for 'avoided if possible', what does that mean? By the sounds of it, to make the route 'reasonably safe' a peg was required. Does that fit in with 'avoided if possible.'?


Anyway, the more this thread goes on the more I'm in support of this guy. Not because I think what he did was right, but because of the way so many people have responded. The elitism/purism/narrow mindedness displayed by so many is quite sad and detracts from what climbing is for me.

As you were...

In reply to JJL:

JJL? Like so many on this site you don't use your full name.That about sums it up.Mitch

In reply to NottsRich:



Seriously ? your climbing ethical standpoint comes from how one or two people come across on the internet ?

The elitism/purism/narrow mindedness displayed by so many is quite sad and detracts from what climbing is for me.

This isn't climbing, its an internet forum.

In reply to NottsRich:
As I said,as soon as I knew the top peg interfered with another route,I was willing for it to come out.I have no computer.Therefore I don't rush to UKC to check before I climb a new bit of rock. A sympathiser emailed me to say ''the haters have won''.What a nice chap. I regard this as a war of attrition. If my views on Trad predate yours,that does not make them invalid. MODERN TRAD. Contradiction in terms,wouldn't you agree?

Standards have improved? maybe in the top 1%.Go to Stanage at a weekend and see how few people try Dangler,E2. Most people don't climb above E2. Highballing with mats doesn't mean standards have IMPROVED.It just means styles have changed. Just because you see a few sponsored heroes doing amazing things on the net doesn't mean that you can infer that standards generally have gone up.If we look at what people solo on sight,no mats,then I'd say that standards are just what they always were.I had a look at Gus'profile.Pretty good climber.Nice pic on Life Assurabce at Burbage South.Did you use mats?If not,then you must be a REAL trad climber;even better.

It seems,according to some that I have done no new routes that people are scared to repeat.Seems some people are so young and inexperienced that they haven't tried enough of my routes to get a balanced view. Hmmmm......
Maybe I was imagining all those routes,in guides,with 2 or 3 stars, with bad landings and little or no gear? Some of you need to get out more.Curious the acceptance of bolts but not pegs.I call it bigotry.I have a friend who loves to place bolts.he offered to put a hefty resin bolt in for me.See,really,ethics are a complex business.I turned him down. A guidebook for ethical guidance? A guidebook is often written by only one person,or a section of that guide. '' Here is my bible,and I believe! Whoa yeah!'' How very sad.

In reply to GrahamD:


One or two? Come on...

Perhaps I'm being too kind, but I assumed that the comments made on here would be the same as those made face-to-face if everyone met up. In which case being an internet forum has nothing to do with it and the same nasty conversation would take place in any other location. If the comments are not the same as what people would say face-to-face then as far as I'm concerned their comments are worthless.

In reply to paul mitchell: You and jim^3 should meet up for a day long 'paper-scissors-stone' tournament. It's the only way to settle this.

In reply to NottsRich:

As a proportion of the total climbing population ? yes one or two is about right - and obviously only the self selecting group with a particular ax to grind.

In reply to paul mitchell:
Ok we get the point. You are a hard man who does bold routes, and therefore makes your opinion more valid than everyone else's, blah blah. Us young guns know our place. Yawn.

Opinions are like a***holes. Everyone has one. As soon as you realise this, the Internet will stop winding you up, like it has done here.

In reply to paul mitchell: I won't be having any discussion with you on private email. Ask the question on here and I'll answer it. There's google too.

In reply to paul mitchell:


Rubbish. Of course attitudes change over time, what was accepted becomes unacceptable and vice versa. All sorts of shit that was just peachy in the '60s and '70s is considered unacceptable now. Casual racism, polyester flares and tank tops, new pegs at Millstone...


And knowing, as you and he surely must, that the bolt would be chopped instantly that would be an unforgivable act of vandalism. Nothing complex about that.

In reply to NottsRich:



Why should how people respond, change your mind about the way someone else has acted???

You seem to have very little moral conviction, because some people choose to speak there mind over what they see as vandalism.

What ever happened to freedom of speech?

In reply to krikoman:

Luckily we have freedom of speech, the crux is using it to say something useful on UKC.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Paul, was the peg you placed one of those silvery ones with eye at 45 degrees to the blade? Something like this http://www.camp-usa.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/0152-12-UNIVERSAL-SOFT-P... ? Because I could see one like that when belaying my mate on Lyon's Corner House yesterday. Maybe if you used a black cro-moly one instead it would get much less attention as they are much harder to see from a distance. The one left of LCH glints rather and looks a bit like a bolt hanger!

In reply to paul mitchell:
Well Paul it is clear to me that you are very passionate about the current ethics used at this location, but i have to say i'm not sure what exactly it is that you are trying to achieve.
If you are trying to justify your position i find it unethical.
If on the other hand your intention was to provoke a debate in order to challenge the consensus, then you have succeeded.
Perhaps your intention is only to publicise your routes, or yourself.
Unfortunately i find difficult to ascertain what it is you are trying to achieve. Your immature, and frankly childish arguments are not persuading me to change my ethical stance.
I personally believe that it is good to have open, and honest debate about the ethics in all areas of climbing. Wether you engage in this at wall, the crag, or online via and open forum is your choice, but I would encourage you to have some humility when approaching a contentious issue, i am certain you would find people are far less hostile to you from the outset. You will not win someone over with arrogance, and condescension, it will only undermine your argument.

In reply to JJL:

Wow, you must have done that late on, they were still there at 20:00 when we walked past them after doing Billingsgate. When we viewed them my concern was that removal would damage the rock even more. I do hope the rock wasn't damaged in the removal, the lower one looked like it would scar when removed due to the position of the eye. The top one looked (from afar) like half the flake would come with it.

In reply to paul mitchell:

What a strange argument and what hubris! Why does it matter how many repeats a route gets?

All that makes it your route is the fact that you climbed it first and bashed the pegs in. You don't own it and it will be around long after you are dust. It's been said the first peg was at face height, if I can piss that high up the rock will it become my route for me to do with as I wish? It's not so very different.

In reply to paul mitchell:
So,the rock/route will be there long after I am dust.Amazing,really?Wow!Well spotted! I knew that 40 years ago.
Some of you really do think I am pretty unaware and philosophically undeveloped.Seems you get a hate figure and just keep on piling on the comments.You extrapolate from a few simple actions and comments that you have some profound understanding of who I am.Hmmmm.

Yes,the rock will be there long after ALL of us are dust.What a relief.Let's hope that by then people have learned some manners.LONG after we are all dead,if there are guidebooks,people will be asking why some of my routes are so named.That was one of motivations,even though I will be dust by then.Maybe one day I will be as perceptive and philosophically aware as all of you who have so kindly offered to lead my tortured soul back to the 'true path'.I am grateful.As someone once said,those who seem so offensive to us can serve as teachers.I try to keep my heart and mind open,despite what some of you delightful folk may think.Hubris? Me? Yes,sometimes;but really,pot calls kettle.I suggest you try the same,keep mind and heart open.

In reply to paul mitchell:


I don't think I have an understanding of who you are. I'm commenting on your actions and comments which you yourself put on a public forum. You're probably a great guy but IMO those actions and comments demonstrate hubris. If you weren't ready to hear negative judgements on your actions then you shouldn't have committed them or gone public with them.

In reply to Jim Walton:
Ha!

;¬)

In reply to dr_botnik:


Nasty? Na just a cock.

Boggy.

In reply to Bogwalloper:

Don't be so wet, Mr Pegger said if his pegs were removed then he wanted them returned, so jimx3 asked for an address.

In reply to paul mitchell:


Well, it won't be if every egomaniac that comes along bangs pegs in it.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

Indeed. It now seems that people think that I wanted to go round his house and do something?
I said I'd remove the peg ( someone beat me to it) and the op said if I didn't return it it was theft so I asked for his address.
All sounds a bit silly. Being called a cock is interesting though.
I'll be at millstone tomorrow anyway guys, come say hello, you'll recognise me because my pictures on my profile.
Happy climbing people

In reply to jimjimjim:

Ah... thats you! Your old profile pic made you look 20 years older. BTW the etymology of cock often relates to cocky maleness... agressive posturing, which is an image you seem to promote.

In reply to paul mitchell:



Oh the irony

In reply to jimjimjim:

Never mind all this peg stuff, and who said they'd do what to whom. What I really want to know is which of the contractions of your moniker is the most correct: Jim to the power of 3 (Jim^3) as one responder believes, or Jim multiplied by 3 (Jimx3) as preferred by another. Personally, I'm inclined to the latter.

In reply to Willi Crater:

Finally, something worth arguing about.

If we use mathematical notation it's jim^3, or jim cubed. Makes most sense too, I firmly believe jim is unique, and jim cubed is jim (1^3=1).

In reply to Offwidth:

In which case it's a fair point.
Yes that old picture was put up when I was messing about with my first laptop and it's taken me this long to work out how to change it.

In reply to jimjimjim:
As you're not at millstone I take it it's wet over that side too?

In reply to Willi Crater:

What I want to know is, is it "jimjimjim" as in "The songs, Jim! They'd melt your face!"

In reply to Mike Stretford:



Dunno about that, if you convert "jim" to ascii hex (for example), then to decimal, then cube it, convert it back into hex then into the ascii representation then you get b&#1500;££T - which looks nothing like jimjimjim. Mind you, jimx3 doesn't really work either. Maybe we need a whole new jim based number system? Bit like imaginary numbers, with it's own arithmetic rules.

In reply to Mike Stretford:
For what it's worth I like jim^3 but I think I'll leave this up to you guys!
I'm off to posture around the peak.

In reply to Willi Crater:
Well, sqrt(-1) in Engineering is j and i in Maths.
So jimjimjim is actually -m^3

In reply to Lusk:
Conclusive!

I'm not quite sure yet what it means yet though! Negative cubic metre?, Negative mass cubed? Negative man cubed!??

In reply to Mike Stretford:


But the point is - is the moniker a millstone around his neck ha-ha?

Signed
AbseilAbseilAbseil

In reply to abseil:

maybe that's how he wanted to wear the peg

In reply to Lusk:
i and j are separate imaginary quantities in quaternion algebra, so if m is an unknown variable then jimjimjim represents a triple rotation of arccos(m) radians about the i and j axes.

In reply to paul mitchell:

The peg is still in. Ridiculously low. I'll add a photo later. Not got my peg hammer as I thought someone had outed it but obviously not. See what people think....

In reply to jimjimjim:
Photo on my profile. I'm not going to take it out as it will no doubt chip the surrounding rock. There's already a big chunk that's been broke off right next to it that I found on the floor. The low peg would only protect the first few moves and wouldn't be the difference in doing the route or not for me.
Let's see if it's any assents.
thoughts?

In reply to jimjimjim:
Incredible position, almost like it's a joke!

Please tell me your at least 8ft tall?

In reply to ashtond6:

The whole thing is like some sort of joke as you say. The comment "bit of an instant classic" is hilarious. Oh well, what's done done.

In reply to jimjimjim:

Did you climb it, Jim?

In reply to jon:
No. Rain stopped play. The initial right traverse looks good and the moves above look too scary for me ground up without a few mats.
Ruined by the pegs though imo.

In reply to jimjimjim:


Where did it break off from? I can't see any signs of something coming off the near the peg in your photo.

In reply to NottsRich:

The bit just behind my hand so you can't see it, just left of the new peg. Obviously a new break as it's still clean and I found the chunk on the floor below.

In reply to jimjimjim:

As much as I'm offended by the peg, what on earth are you wearing? Ronhills will zip off shorts over the top? Its like some Ramblers fetish outfit.....

In reply to jimjimjim:

Is there a silver peg about 5 mtrs or so up though also? That's what I saw last thursday, it was shiny so quite visible. I didn't notice the one in your picture.

In reply to jimjimjim:


Maybe the second one, but for me only because it's on Colin's route. The first one as you show can be clipped from the ground... or not. It's probably one of the very few examples of where the comment 'well if you don't like it simply don't clip it' is appropriate. If that doesn't make sense think of it this way; if a peg or a bolt is halfway up a route it's something to go for and its presence reduces your commitment whether you intend to clip it or not. Paul's peg however is clipped from the ground and protects (to some extent) the rightward traverse. If you choose not to clip it, once you're embarked on the traverse there's no way you can change your mind and give in and clip it (or so it appears from here). Paul has already said he'll remove the second peg. So what are we left with. A fingery direct start to Africa finishing up Erb at E3 or 4 depending on mats. Sounds brilliant - oh wait a minute, that's what Paul said in the first place! Mitch's African Erb!

In reply to galpinos:

Ha yeah. My mates had a right laugh about that too. It's the perfect combo, try it.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Well 12,000 hits, 200 comments and yet seemingly nobody has actually bothered to repeat either African or Paul's line. Come on folks, its not that hard. From what I remember of my route the side runner does protect the starting rock over (I took a little fall when I was working this out) and there are a couple of very good runners as you climb up the arete/groove thing - I didn't think it was particularly run out.

So jump to it rock cats! I'm still curious to know if anyone thinks its any good.

Colin

In reply to colin struthers:


Indeed - I'd have been tempted to have a look over the weekend, had I not bust my ankle last week. So, with a bit of downtime I wrote about it instead.

https://johnroberts.me/outdoors/2015/06/whose-ethic-is-it-anyway-a-climbers...

In reply to colin struthers:

That's exactly my problem with the integrity of critics on here - especially in the car-crash, witch-hunt threads such as these. Somehow the keyboard warriors can't seem to leave their keyboards long enough to go out and have a look for themselves. They might change their views; then again, they might not. But, for me, their views would have far, far greater authority.

Fair enough if you live at the other end of the country - or in another country. Getting to Millstone isn't really viable. And fair enough if the route grade is a bit high. I certainly wouldn't want anyone hurting themselves. But even if you just go and have a look from the ground, such as Jim (squared?) or Toby A has, well, at least that's something.

You Colin are undoubtedly the person with the greatest reason to take offence. And you've behaved in a civilised fashion throughout. I think there's a lesson we could all do with learning. It might be a bit late for this thread but what about future car-crash threads? They really are horrible and it would surely be better for all of us if we could put them behind us once and for all.

Mick

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

Excellent informative article. Thank you.

In reply to jimjimjim:

I'l take your word for it. My fashion crimes have been relegated to my youth (well, I've just bought a red pair of softshell trousers so maybe not....).

It's certainly a strong look.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

Really good article, good points well put.

In reply to Mick Ward:


Mick - you make it sound like I had a particular interest in this debate. Honest, I don't! To all the old Peakies this will sound funny, but I'm still happily ticking my way through the *** VSs and HVSs so we just happened to be at Millstone last week. I was belaying my partner on Lyons Corner House when I noticed the peg and remembered this discussion! I do think it might be a soft steel one though from the colour - aren't they designed to deform and then get left in the crack? As opposed to the cro-moly ones many of us are familiar with from winter climbing.

Having moved back to the UK less than a year ago after a longtime living somewhere where even most of the trad routes have two bolts on the top to lower off from (to stop cliff top erosion), my main thoughts about Millstone ethics are that rather than clambering over rubblely slabs then walking 20 metres back to belay of some dodgy old fence posts, a couple of sympathetically and well placed and camouflaged bolts would be way more sensible solution. But I suspect Jimjimjim might explode at even the mere thought of it!

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

That's a really nice article, ta for the link.

In reply to TobyA:
I think you were on the money when you posted a link further up.
(this one: http://www.camp-usa.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/0152-12-UNIVERSAL-SOFT-P... )

I vaguely remember there was talk about putting bolted lower-offs into Yarncliffe a few years back, to protect the top of the crag from erosion. Much stronger justification than the lower-offs you're carefully not quite proposing imo, but still didn't happen in the end.

FWIW, I consider the sometimes slightly dodgy top-outs and fence-posts belays an essential part of the Millstone experience. If you don't fancy the fence-post belays you could always untie, thread the ropes through the fence, retie and keep walking until your second tops out.

Incidentally, nobody on this thread has thus far mentioned Erbivore (E5 6b). That seems from the description to take the same line at the bottom.

In reply to deepsoup:
That route has only just been added to the database.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

The plot thickens.

In reply to galpinos:


Action Man Vicar?

In reply to John Roberts (JR):
It has? How recently?

(You're not just inferring that from the "This newly updated climb is waiting to be checked by the crag moderator" are you? Depending on the moderator, that doesn't necessarily mean it's all that recent..)

In reply to deepsoup:

I spent a fair amount of time in the database yesterday writing that blog and certainly since I checked the description of African last week. But would need to ask Gary.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

Hmmm, I hadn't noticed it either! Funny how you tend to remember things...

In reply to John Roberts (JR):
You're probably right then. Maybe it's this very thread that prompted GG to add his new route to the database. I imagine having a new route that he's not got around to telling folk about yet is quite a routine experience for him.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):


Nice article but you missed out the whoo ha over the replacement of bolts on Wall Street Crash with pegs which is relevant and shows how nuanced/ multi-faceted this fixed gear debate can be

In reply to Tyler:
I did, thanks. I asked a couple of people to check it but I had a feeling there was another one. I'll add it when I get chance. That was pre Top Loader correct?

In reply to Mick Ward:


Don't see your logic there. We know what he's done, and we know the prevailing ethic. I'm not sure how a coachload of us going up to Millstone to see said pegs is going to render our views on the topic suddenly more valid.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):
I thought it was more recently than 2001 but, being an old git, everything after 1996 is one amorphous mass to me (rather like films and music).

In reply to Tyler:

OK I updated it - it was October 2001, same year, but just after Top Loader. It doesn't change the argument, but certainly adds value to the history. Thanks for pointing it out. Amusingly you used exactly the same phrase hoohaa in 2004 in the London Wall thread (http://bit.ly/1dZvlOh) - the wall street crash obviously made an impact on you!

Updated here: https://johnroberts.me/outdoors/2015/06/whose-ethic-is-it-anyway-a-climbers...

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

Wow that is weird, I doubt I've written that word more than a handful times in my life (I also have no recollection of that debate either)! I also still have aspirations to climb London Wall but I'm probably further away now than then

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

And it is pre-dated by African which I did in 2012 - so get yer hands of my route Gary you old swindler!

(actually I quite like him really)

In reply to ashtond6:
You still up for pegging the embankment slabs next week? Lost the hammer drill battery so it'll be down to us and a claw hammer I'm afraid.

In reply to Tyler:


I'll come and belay you Tyler, now I'm local! I watched Grimer take a good lob off the top many years ago, so will be ready if you follow suit.

In reply to colin struthers:

Having spoken to Gary about Erbivore (E5 6b), I've updated the blog: https://johnroberts.me/outdoors/2015/06/whose-ethic-is-it-anyway-a-climbers...

"His focus was the direct finish on the wall between Erb and Lyon's Corner house and named Erbivore, E5 6b. He described the lower wall as around E3 5c and protectable with wires above a start which was safe enough with a good spotter, this may have been either African, or the line described by Paul."

In reply to colin struthers: no Colin, the bottom wall is definitely yours, although someone did a line called Lyons Corner House Direct in the late 70s early 80s which was given E5 6a. I remember it quite clearly although it has somehow been lost in the mists of time: not sure of the line. The upper face still needs finishing direct as I couldn't reach it! I've also got my date wrong as my computer has crashed. It was 15th April 2014. Just checked my diary.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):

So are we now to conclude that after all the kerfuffle there wasn't even a new route done?