On 16/02/2013 crazyjohn wrote:
>One HUGE problem with this retrobolting that has not been addressed much
>is the fact that many of the bolters and supporters of the retro bolts
>are professional guides. Recently, there have been questionable anchors
>installed on trad routes on Mt. Wellington by guides. Initially the bolters
Everyone in this thread, as does everyone in life have hidden agendas. Not making money doesn't mean you ethical, and making money doesn't mean your unethical. It is how you conduct yourself that makes you ethical.
The people arguing against the bolts also have their own agendas, we see it all the time on chockstone, trying to put on a show about how hardcore they are. Reputation is their money, reputation is their hidden agenda... well not so hidden, quite obvious actually.
The people putting in bolts have agendas as well. Maybe the glory of the FA?
Andrew is an easy target, that's why everyone is lining up against him, period.
Of course, having a agenda doesn't mean you're necessarily wrong... but I wish everyone would stop trying to make this into a battle about good an evil. Its ok for everyone to cover the crags with chalk and minimally placed bolts (did miguel chop the bolts on the traverse of the initiation? Did M9 fill the hole on A5 sport climb?) but its an outrage that Andrew has placed bolts on a small boulder no one goes near? For which the bolts need to be chopped and he needs to be publicly denigrated? This only happened because Andrew is not in the "in crowd." Many of the people whinging about the bolts have probably placed more bolts than Andrew.
If you want to make this about good and evil, stop using all bolts (including raps), and stop using chalk.
This thread is not about bolts but rather about egos. And, I must admit, you're all so awesome.
No, I am not nor have I ever been or do I ever plan to guide or make money out of climbing.