Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Accidents & Injuries

Report Accidents and Injuries

Author

Relationship advice; how to heal wounded hearts?


Miguel75

5-Apr-2013
9:40:43 PM

I don't know about my fellow chockstoners but I reckon the Neil/Macciza saga is getting a little long in the tooth. I have neither a horse in this race nor a solution but reckon there has to be a way to assuage their collective anguish.

I may be wrong but it seems to be a personality clash; Macciza takes umbrage to Neil's name and game while Neil, as the SCA mod, seemingly has banned Macciza from SCA as a way to get some respite...

My suggestion is to organise a 'chocktagon' for the boys to get into and Graeco-Roman wrestle their happy endorphins to the fore. Any other thoughts?


IdratherbeclimbingM9

5-Apr-2013
9:43:50 PM

>Any other thoughts?

They can get a room together?

Seriously, a bit of two way dialogue would go a long way to solving their angst, as I doubt either party is particularly entrenched in their thinking but have managed to polarise each others thoughts about an issue which is actually resolvable as I do believe that they have common ground!
~> The biggest benefit of their situation for Chockstoners is that it may have caused other people to consider the issues at stake?


Big G

5-Apr-2013
9:49:00 PM

How about everyone just leaves it alone?


Macciza

5-Apr-2013
9:49:42 PM

On 5/04/2013 Miguel75 wrote:
> . . .
>I may be wrong but it seems to be a personality clash; Macciza takes umbrage
>to Neil's name and game while Neil, as the SCA mod, seemingly has banned
>Macciza from SCA as a way to get some respite...
> . . .

Aah - you got that the wrong way around - I discovered I no longer had access to the Safer Cliffs Forum and Niel has refused to give any answers whatsoever!
I imagine that anyone on this Forum would similarly want an explanation of this if it happened to them . . .

I will continue to post until I get some sort of proper acknowledgement . . .
In fact I would like the overall Forum moderators to have a word to Niel about this . . .


Miguel75

5-Apr-2013
10:18:19 PM

On 5/04/2013 Macciza wrote:
>On 5/04/2013 Miguel75 wrote:
>> . . .
>>I may be wrong but it seems to be a personality clash; Macciza takes
>umbrage
>>to Neil's name and game while Neil, as the SCA mod, seemingly has banned
>>Macciza from SCA as a way to get some respite...

I meant respite from previous interactions, not from your SCA access issues.

>Aah - you got that the wrong way around - I discovered I no longer had
>access to the Safer Cliffs Forum and Niel has refused to give any answers
>whatsoever!
>I imagine that anyone on this Forum would similarly want an explanation
>of this if it happened to them . . .
>
>I will continue to post until I get some sort of proper acknowledgement
> . . .
>In fact I would like the overall Forum moderators to have a word to Niel
>about this . . .

I agree with you Macca, I don't think it's right for a mod of a forum to 'ban' you for having a difference of opinion/personality clash. If that's what has happened...


Miguel75

5-Apr-2013
10:32:37 PM

On 5/04/2013 Big G wrote:
>How about everyone just leaves it alone?

If Macca has been banned due to personality conflict I reckon its a real shame. And if it is indeed the case that Macciza has been banned due to personality conflict I reckon that should be a huge issue for everyone.

It may just be an access issue for Macciza, or it may be that Neil has banned him. Either way the (apparent) lack of communication is not too cool.

EDIT: edited my terrible spelling and for clarity.

dalai

5-Apr-2013
11:43:18 PM

Neil - if you have a valid reason for banning Macca from SCA make it public. If you can't provide a reasonable explanation I see no reason why you shouldn't reinstate access.

This has gone on long enough, and without any communication ignoring all requests from Macca for a reply it looks to be just a petty action on your behalf. Please resolve this as it is getting tedious!

rightarmbad

6-Apr-2013
1:20:09 AM

I rekon it's good stuff.
I log on every day now just to see whats going on in the MaccaNiel affair.

Bring it on, and get some more bolt chopping and baddytraddy action happening.

And when is One Day Heroine going to fall off of that bloody climb for us?

TradOminous

6-Apr-2013
5:52:27 PM

On 5/04/2013 dalai wrote:
>Neil - if you have a valid reason for banning Macca from SCA make it public.
>If you can't provide a reasonable explanation I see no reason why you shouldn't
>reinstate access.
>
>This has gone on long enough, and without any communication ignoring all
>requests from Macca for a reply it looks to be just a petty action on your
>behalf. Please resolve this as it is getting tedious!
>
>

+ 1

rolsen1

6-Apr-2013
7:40:37 PM

It is pretty clear that Macca, M9, Damo (also Pastor Gerry Narowitz and Muki who have been silent lately) are trolls and seems like Miguel has now joined them as well. Also TradOm is also a new troll account..

I hope Neil continues to ignore the trolls.

Dalai - you seem like a good guy, I don't know what issue you have with Neil but why should Neil continue to tolerate people who openly attack him. I wouldn't, you wouldn't, Neil shouldn't.

chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia/Victoria it is just a website. If the trolls manage to bring down this website or the safer cliffs section it doesn't mean they are right, this is just a website.

If I was the owner of this website I'd boot all the trolls. Problem solved.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

6-Apr-2013
8:37:08 PM


ChuckNorris

6-Apr-2013
8:43:15 PM

On 6/04/2013 rightarmbad wrote:
>I rekon it's good stuff.
>I log on every day now just to see whats going on in the MaccaNiel affair.
>
>Bring it on, and get some more bolt chopping and baddytraddy action happening.
>
>And when is One Day Heroine going to fall off of that bloody climb for
>us?

ODH is out of action for a while.

What is it with canberra climbers and bouldering injuries?


Macciza

6-Apr-2013
9:01:13 PM

On 6/04/2013 rolsen1 wrote:
>It is pretty clear that Macca, M9, Damo (also Pastor Gerry Narowitz and
>Muki who have been silent lately) are trolls and seems like Miguel has
>now joined them as well. Also TradOm is also a new troll account..
>
>I hope Neil continues to ignore the trolls.
>
>Dalai - you seem like a good guy, I don't know what issue you have with
>Neil but why should Neil continue to tolerate people who openly attack
>him. I wouldn't, you wouldn't, Neil shouldn't.
>
>chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia/Victoria it is just
>a website. If the trolls manage to bring down this website or the safer
>cliffs section it doesn't mean they are right, this is just a website.
>
>If I was the owner of this website I'd boot all the trolls. Problem solved.

WTF??? This is a ridiculous accusation, me, a troll, seriously . . .

And to then go on to accuse Dalai of having an issue with Neil . .
And then to further support Neil in refusing to respond to SCA requests . . .
And as to people attacking Neil, if you actually followed the threads you would see that Niel was attacking me!!! If I decided to openly attack him it would be obvious. . .
Further he has failed to respond to all communications regarding my access being denied to the Safer Cliffs forum on this site. ie classic passive aggression.

And what is all this 'It's just a website' stuff supposed to signify? Serious question there . .
If Chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia then equally the SCA Forum does not represent safety concerns in Australian climbing.

Australian climbing is not a homogenous entity, nor does everybody agree on everything, regarding climbing, bolting or safety . . .
To boot off anybody with dissenting views would make it even lees representative of the diversity of Australian climbing

I suggest that you in fact are the TROLL!!! You are posting inflammatory, extraneous messages to a topic you have not been involved in and obviously have no knowledge about with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Thank Berners-Lee that you are not the owner of a climbing website . . .


Miguel75

6-Apr-2013
9:04:34 PM

On 6/04/2013 rolsen1 wrote:
>It is pretty clear that Macca, M9, Damo (also Pastor Gerry Narowitz and
>Muki who have been silent lately) are trolls and seems like Miguel has
>now joined them as well. Also TradOm is also a new troll account..
>
>I hope Neil continues to ignore the trolls.
>
>Dalai - you seem like a good guy, I don't know what issue you have with
>Neil but why should Neil continue to tolerate people who openly attack
>him. I wouldn't, you wouldn't, Neil shouldn't.
>
>chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia/Victoria it is just
>a website. If the trolls manage to bring down this website or the safer
>cliffs section it doesn't mean they are right, this is just a website.
>
>If I was the owner of this website I'd boot all the trolls. Problem solved.

Interesting food for thought rolsen1. Just because someone doesn't march to the same beat as you doesn't make them a troll. I wouldn't consider myself a troll though will happily have a bit of a think about the tone and point of any upcoming posts. I really enjoy Chocky and feel it is a valuable resource and a fun place (sometimes). If I have nothing relevant to contribute ,which will be 99% of my posts as I usually post to amuse myself:), I'll think about not posting.

I've never met Neil, and I have to say I greatly appreciate his stoke for climbing and all the hard work he's put in over the years; bolting new climbs; dealing with everything here, Crux etc... and just being stoked on climbing. I reckon when you put your neck out and step up to a position 'up front' you'll cop criticism regardless of what you do. Some of it deserved, some not so much. I've also never met Macciza but the same applies, his stoke and desire to keep trad 'real' is cool. My comments aren't meant as a knock to Neil nor Macciza, instead it's a comment on how I feel a Mod should be held to a higher level (that's why they get the big bucks) then a 'mere' user/contributor such as you and I.

This sage reminds me of Superman 3, when Superman gets in touch with his dark side, hits the turps and flicks peanuts through the bar mirror. I'm not sure who is Superman, or the peanut, but I love the fact Superman was able to work through his funk, have a wash and shave, and go back to being a productive member of the superhero community.

So to summarise; I'll try not to continue on the path to trolldom and Neil & Macciza should wash, shave and return to their respective Fortress of Solitude.

EDIT: fixed spelling.

dalai

6-Apr-2013
10:09:59 PM

M9 a troll? Nothing more further from the truth!

On 6/04/2013 rolsen1 wrote:
>Dalai - you seem like a good guy, I don't know what issue you have with
>Neil but why should Neil continue to tolerate people who openly attack
>him. I wouldn't, you wouldn't, Neil shouldn't.

From your suggestion it is obvious you are sitting on one side of the fence and not being objective.

I have no issue with Neil, never have. Just with Neil as a moderator (in this case also the only person who manages the Safer cliff section) it appears to be using his ability to manage access to the SCA section for a personal agenda.

I don't know Macca - never climbed with him like I have Neil. As I have said numerous times before I don't agree with all Macca says but don't deny him a voice to say them just because I don't agree.

Note your suggestion that Macca is a troll attacking Neil - I recall a string of posts (revolving around some trad route Macca was trying in the middle of a new sport area) which I feel was what escalated this whole sorry saga - mud was clearly being flung from both directions! It was a petty display from both parties IMO.

Now the reality is Neil feels Macca is trolling him and I expect he has marked Macca's posts as hidden. So all Macca is doing by posting in numerous topics is cluttering the forum and is being read by everyone else except the person intended.

Given it is a private forum, it is in the power of the moderator to restrict access to anyone they see fit. The fact therefore with Neil being the only one managing SCA that Macca will now not get access.

So I request Macca to desist, as the more PM's he sends Neil and posts here is doing him no favours and will not change his access.

So that's my take on the situation. I believe I have been particularly impartial in this issue and not taken sides. I'm just frustrated I have to read through all the posts and try to manage this mess!

PDRM

7-Apr-2013
11:21:10 AM

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png


Macciza

7-Apr-2013
6:19:20 PM

On 7/04/2013 ratherbeclimbinv9. [Moderator edit for clarification: This username is a troll account and it is NOT IdratherbeclimbingM9] wrote:
>On 6/04/2013 Macciza wrote:
>
>>And what is all this 'It's just a website' stuff supposed to signify?
>>Serious question there . .
>>If Chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia then equally the
>>SCA Forum does not represent safety concerns in Australian climbing.
>
>But it doesn't purport to. Honestly, Macca, you're setting up straw men.
> What are the facts?:
>- Neil kicked you out of his personal forum
>- You posted and PMed more than any sane person could normally be bothered
>to
>- You're still out.
>
>You can argue all you like that Mike has an obligation to the Australian
>community to resolve your issue, blah blah blah, but the facts have remained
>the same despite your arguments.
>
>I don't want to be a prick but the definition of insanity is doing the
>same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Perhaps your
>endless posts are painting Neil the way you want to paint him; they're
>also painting you as pretty frickin whacko... And well worth ignoring.

Although I am inclined to ignore you and simply not respond to your post on the basis that you are a troll, as evidenced by your choice of a User name and lack of any verifying personal data; I am not so infantile, nor do I feel that my position is indefensible and requires my silence, davidn . . . It always amuses me how people bring up the 'straw person (PC term) fallacy' argument incorrectly in an attempt to sound intelligent . . . but use the same logical fallacy in their argument like you have . . .

SaferCliffs claims to be a 'non-profit voluntary organization of climbers who maintain the safety of rock climbing areas' - it does not claim to be Neils 'personal forum' ! Though now it certainly appears that it is, and I wonder how many people are aware of this deception, believing it to be a bit more altruistic in nature rather then merely being the vehicle for one particular rabid bolters personal agenda. I do not think the vetting system for members to the SaferCliffs forum should be based on personal agendas and prejudices. I would not support him banning you from the Forum simply because he disliked you, and I would be concerned if he did not account for those actions if he did . . .

Exactly how much would a supposedly sane person be bothered to post - and if maintaining and expressing a belief is 'insane' then I feel in good company with many who have rallied against tyranny.

Mikes 'obligation', if anything, is that the Forums on his site are conducted with some form of integrity and common decency so as not to denigrate the perception of his site as a whole. I believe Niels behaviour reflects badly on Chockstone.

Yes I am aware of that saying though strictly speaking it is not a recognised clinical definition. And what result do you assume that I am after anyway? Am I expecting to regain access or merely that people see Niel for what he is. How are my posts painting Niel in any particular way? His endless silence as a 'moderator' paints him the way he is - unresponsive and seemingly unaccountable for his actions - he has had ample opportunity to argue his case. And how do endless posts justify him not responding in the first place, that is clearly a logical fallacy. And if you mean that you should ignore me, well maybe on this issue but how does that translate to other things I might have to say . . .

So basically although I am responding I am pretty much ignoring every thing you have said, but at least giving you an account of why ...


Macciza

7-Apr-2013
6:46:26 PM

On 6/04/2013 dalai wrote:
Thanks for finally stepping in with some sort of moderating comments.

>I have no issue with Neil, never have. Just with Neil as a moderator (in
>this case also the only person who manages the Safer cliff section) it
>appears to be using his ability to manage access to the SCA section for
>a personal agenda.

It is good to know that some of the moderators have concerns about Niels behaviour and his use of the subForum for his personal agenda.

>I don't know Macca - never climbed with him like I have Neil. As I have
>said numerous times before I don't agree with all Macca says but don't
>deny him a voice to say them just because I don't agree.

Thankyou for that - I believe diversity of opinion makes for a good discussion - this Forum would be of less value to climbing if everyone had to agree on everything or get kicked off.

>Note your suggestion that Macca is a troll attacking Neil - I recall a
>string of posts (revolving around some trad route Macca was trying in the
>middle of a new sport area) which I feel was what escalated this whole
>sorry saga - mud was clearly being flung from both directions! It was a
>petty display from both parties IMO.

I do not particularly see my posts as 'attacking' Niel - they are simply repeated requests for a response which I feel are justified. I do not think I have been abusive or personalised the matter to the same degree that Niel has.

>Now the reality is Neil feels Macca is trolling him and I expect he has
>marked Macca's posts as hidden. So all Macca is doing by posting in numerous
>topics is cluttering the forum and is being read by everyone else except
>the person intended.

I do not consider that I am trolling and if Niel is hiding and thereby ignoring my comments - then my comments are still being read by the people who I also intend should be reading them.

>Given it is a private forum, it is in the power of the moderator to restrict
>access to anyone they see fit. The fact therefore with Neil being the only
>one managing SCA that Macca will now not get access.

It would be good if it could be more explicitly stated that it is in fact 'Niels Private Forum' - as it appears somewhat more open. I hope he is making appropriate contributions for his own personal space on Chockstone. Perhaps I should contact the site owner and see if I can pay for my own personal space for trad climbers to conduct their own discussions regarding cliff safety . . .

>So I request Macca to desist, as the more PM's he sends Neil and posts
>here is doing him no favours and will not change his access.

I will certainly consider your request and probably limit my posts to my own thread, and not respond to other divergent threads such as this one, or comment in unrelated threads.
I will however probably still continue to try and get some sort of actual response from Niel on this mateer via other methods.

>So that's my take on the situation. I believe I have been particularly
>impartial in this issue and not taken sides. I'm just frustrated I have
>to read through all the posts and try to manage this mess!
>

Again thank you for your impartiality in general and in this case in particular; if Niel had dealt with it similarly in the first place then none of this would have been necessary . . .

Regards
MM

rolsen1

8-Apr-2013
8:56:57 AM

On 6/04/2013 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 6/04/2013 rolsen1 wrote:
>>It is pretty clear that Macca, M9, Damo (also Pastor Gerry Narowitz and
>>Muki who have been silent lately) are trolls and seems like Miguel has
>>now joined them as well. Also TradOm is also a new troll account..
>>
>>I hope Neil continues to ignore the trolls.
>>
>>Dalai - you seem like a good guy, I don't know what issue you have with
>>Neil but why should Neil continue to tolerate people who openly attack
>>him. I wouldn't, you wouldn't, Neil shouldn't.
>>
>>chockstone does not represent climbing in Australia/Victoria it is just
>>a website. If the trolls manage to bring down this website or the safer
>>cliffs section it doesn't mean they are right, this is just a website.
>>
>>If I was the owner of this website I'd boot all the trolls. Problem solved.
>
>rolsen1 - you seem like a good guy, are you on the turps tonight? I don't
>know what issue you have with legitimate Chockstone User-IDs but why should
>others continue to tolerate you openly attacking them as trolls. You wouldn't,
>I might, Neil can speak for himself!
>
>Chockstone does represent some climbing in Australia/Victoria but it is
>just a website. If the trolls manage to bring down this website or the
>safer cliffs section it doesn't mean they are right, this is just a website.
>
>~> If I was a troll on this website I'd say that one of the issues raised
>in this thread is equally applicable to you too, in that you could be booted
>to solve a problem!
>;-)

In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)


Snacks

8-Apr-2013
9:11:47 AM

>EDIT: fixed spelling.

So far the best outcome of this whole thread. Good job Miguel.

There are 22 messages in this topic.