Moderators: PeterA, chossmonkey, Stacey, Dom, granite_grrl, Greg, Joe
Adam wrote:anybody wanna fight?
cory wrote:For some reason people tend to confide in me. Others ask me to speak on their behalf. That is why I chose to use the term "they" rather than "I". Only a few of those bullet points actually reflect my position on ascent NB (and yes I have concerns) and on the trail maintenance day. Furthermore, I did not attempt to hijack the thread into an attack on ascentNB. This was already part of the discussion and had not been "put to rest". I was asked to disseminate information, and felt it was appropriate to do so. I understand that by being the messenger I will be seen as rude, offensive, and a dick. I accept that. Can you accept views that oppose your own?
John, you are absolutely correct on all points above. Although the club has indicated that it supports the efforts to launch ANB it does not automatically represent the R&I membership. In the near future, this new organization will be making an attempt to reach out to club members, and offering them a chance to become involved. It's absolutely true that ANB will have to demonstrate some value to individuals in order to have a successful membership drive.john wrote:Rock and Ice Club Members are NOT automatically Ascent NB members. No current members agreed to this with any formal process, it was not voted on by members and there are so many potential issues on the university side of things I cannot imagine it ever happening, even if everyone wanted it.
An ad hoc group of 20 people does not reflect the community as a whole, or even close to the majority, let alone the views of the university or the Rock and Ice Club.
John Bowles
john wrote:Rock and Ice Club Members are NOT automatically Ascent NB members. No current members agreed to this with any formal process, it was not voted on by members and there are so many potential issues on the university side of things I cannot imagine it ever happening, even if everyone wanted it.
john wrote:An ad hoc group of 20 people does not reflect the community as a whole, or even close to the majority, let alone the views of the university or the Rock and Ice Club.
theriault wrote:not to re-open the debate... but no one seems to be freaking out here ...
http://www.mountainproject.com/v/tempor ... /110480285
Leehammer wrote:Hey all,
Long time no see. We need to archive the classic threads like this one, the sticky fingers one, the one about the someone's dog leash being stolen etc etc. Maybe put them into a book or something, they are just so good.
Climb on,
Liam
Shawn B wrote:theriault wrote:not to re-open the debate... but no one seems to be freaking out here ...
http://www.mountainproject.com/v/tempor ... /110480285
Seems to me you are re-opening it. This horse died a couple years ago Marty. And you can't compare the two situations at all. Cathedral is in a State Park and the park authorities closed it to climbing to do their maintenance. As you have seen recently when CFB Gagetown closes the cliffs there is not an issue and most respectful individuals honour the closure without complaining (it is their right as the land owner). However if an individual attempts to close access to something which they do not have the right to do so (as was this case) they receive their rightful backlash. Now let Trigger RIP.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests