/ Bench left on Ben Nevis summit.
Yesterday a group shouldered a wooden bench and carried it to the summit. This was actually quite impressive in a demented sort of way. Somewhat less impressive was their decision to try to cement it into the ground next to the trig point and leave it.
Photo here if you can open it: https://www.facebook.com/glencoeclimbing.co.uk/photos/a.246475548889538.1073741860.189398497930577/2...
Note the carrying batons and the holdall full of rubbish. Not very impressive.
Even less impressive was their behaviour on descent. One of their group became cold and wet as the weather deteriorated. The rest of the group continued downwards, not even waiting for him at the carpark. He was assisted off by a number of better-spirited passers-by, with the unmistakeable symptoms of hypothermia.
The magic of the internet threw up this clue as to the identity of the group:
Perhaps the good people of UKC would consider adding to the comments on this link to try to persuade "Wiretime" that going back to pick up the bench would be a good idea.
Done, its gaining momentum.
One of the idiots that dumped the bench can be found here
I've sent him a message explaining why this isn't acceptable
Scroll down his page.
Leaving it up there is one thing (just saw the comments on Facebook). Trying to cement it in place is another...
Seen it all now :-(
Aha got that. Unfortunately I can't message him and the message I've just sent to his mate will got to his "other" folder and may not be seen.
And what's really adds to the dodgy bench is that that Ramon chap along with Jamie Bell (another name identified from twitter) work as carpenters is seems.
Respect for carrying that up there.
Next time hey go up ,perhaps they can carry some 8x2s ,and use their undoubted abilities to put a roof on the old observatory.
What they did was nothing in comparison to the guy who took a piano up there single handed.
( not that I'm condoning that either as it had to be removed)
I guess the bench will be burned as they have not removed it.
Plans are afoot as we speak to bring the bench back down, possibly tomorrow. Personally I'd sooner see the perps do so, but haven't been able to make contact as yet.
In one, or several pieces?
I can't be arsed with Facebook and the like but if anyone could paste any comments from the perpetrators I be glad to see them - please.
Too right we carried our hand built bench to the peak of Ben Nevis there the now x brawasbaws
What can I say. To them they have made something nice and made an effort to carry it up there to share it with people.
I can see why with our upbringings that we see mountains as special and should be kept natural, but I think we shouldn't be too harsh on them without seeing it from their point of view.
I take your point re the bench, But I'm distinctly unimpressed by the assorted other bits of crap they left there for other people to sort out.
I know what you're saying but I'm more content with the earlier comment about there being plenty of natural benches on ALL mountains. I can't say that when I'm on the hills and need a rest that I have an overwhelming urge to park my posterior on a man made sit upon.
BTW because I can't get Facebook I haven't been able to ascertain the reason behind it. Can anyone enlighten me please?
I absolutely agree that others see mountains from a different perspective, and that naivety is a fair defence. But they lost my support when I realised that not only had they abandoned a toiling team-member, but had driven off leaving him plus girlfriend marooned with wet clothes and no money in Fort William. That's not defensible.
Not for a second do I support benchgate but we should remember that much of the current thinking around the Scottish hills has been imported from elsewhere. Ask some people who don't work in mountaineering but work in the hills all of the time and I reckon you would get a fairly different view. Most likely "who cares?"
Wet clothes and no money in Fort William is perfectly normal. It's happened to me many times!
Our upbringings? What, with learning respect and commonsense and thinking things through.
Do the JMT know?
Don't bring it down, just have an overnight bivvy and burn it for warmth.
They could have at least tried to get it up there in a Model T.
That's the last thing anybody decent would do.
Their logo looks a bit like an arse!
Oh rats. Burn the bleeding thing.
Just to let you all know, those that carrried the bench up have contacted both the Nevis Partnership and The John Muir Trust and apologised for leaving the bench and the rubbish. It will be removed by next Saterday and the bench donated to a charity garden.
If this is not done the John Muir Trust will follow it up.
And can the John Muir Trust just say thank you to the climbing community for taking action on this and chasing the group. Its great to know that we have your support and help in keeping this mountin as free from litter and clutter as we can
Nevis Conservation Oficer
An excellent result and good on the guys for owning up and hopefully resolving this issue
http://web.stagram.com/p/677298046541445408_364567765 they don't seem to have much empathy for the countryside.
That'll be the end of that then.
You threw away perfectly good firewood?
Good that they were going to sort it out. Sounds like they were just a bit naive.
Need to work on their teamwork on the descent though.
its in the bin at Achintee car park if you want it
I might if I was local, but driving up from Bristol for it would be a bit much.
On JamieB's facebook link above the perpetrator has now penned a long reply...
so, was for charity so therefore OK ...
that's a shame, it had a sort of rutic charm - perhaps space could have been found for it in the CIC hut.
I've just read the facebook comments on https://www.facebook.com/ramon.c.valenti?fref=pb&hc_location=friends_tab and I don't think your comment is fair.
They've acknowledged they made mistakes and have apologised for them. I think they've been rather reasonable in their replies and their attitude now they're realised their mistakes.
As for leaving a party member on the hill, there is usually more than one side to a story and they've put theirs on the facebook link. I wasn't there and didn't see what happened but someone independent of their group who helped them has essentially confirmed that the party member wasn't abandoned.
Perhaps we on ukc shouldn't be so quick to judge and abuse.
Wouldn't be UKC then. Anyhoo, they seem to following the tried an tested method of 'it's being better to seek forgiveness than seek permission'. Maybe they should have trained for their little jaunt. Asked some people about it. What would have been more impressive worthwhile and less wasteful, considering the fate of the bench and the effort put in to making it, would have been if they carried it up, took photo's, then carried it down and auctioned off their one-off bench that had been to the summit of Nevis. It was quite a naive and idiotic stunt of schoolboy proportions.
Generally I agree with you. Clearly they should have been more prepared and thought it through more. But to be fair to them they seem to have acknowledged that. What seems to have upset them is the vitriolic reaction and I tend to agree with them. It doesn't show us up well as a community.
I have spoken to a couple of the lads involved and it does seem their heart was in the right place, and there was a naivety about the thing and they honestly figured their bench would have been a welcome feature on the summit. I have since explained about the sheer number of people who all bring stuff to the summit, none of which can be kept up there, and also explained about the many people who give up their own time and money to go up and volunteer clearing up on the ben (which I have done).
The Bench might have been better placed being taken down into the memorial garden thingy afterwards, but what is done is done I guess now. I think the original FB post should be removed.
I spoke to the lads and told them that apparantly (as said on this thread) it has been broken up and taken down, but I can't comment on whether the post above is true or not.
I entirely agree that the original FB post should be removed.
Shame this is over its been a flamin comedy.
Anyone fancy taking a settee up for charity?
Naw youd only be able to get sofa
shame to smash it up .looks like a nice bench. surprised its not occurred to somebody local to just go and get it and stick it in the garden. If I lived a bit closer or was up the way ,I d press gang a mate and liberate it, mind I d probably not let on..........
They were well-intentioned but incredibly naive, not only in failing to consider the impact of what they were doing but in their lack of preparation for the ascent itself.
However some of the reactions to it have been excessive. I think it is a pity that the bench has been destroyed before the lads had a chance to put their mistake right, which they had already said they were going to do. Would it being up there for a few more days really have mattered? They had put a lot of work into creating the bench and it seems a shame that it can't now be put to a more appropriate use.
I am also trying to make sense of my own reactions to this, compared with the recent thread about sculptures in Fisherfield. I find I am fairly relaxed about the sculptures, considering them to be fairly insignificant in the larger landscape, whereas I share the general view that the bench was inappropriate and should be removed. I can see that there is a difference but I'm struggling to decide just what that is. Perhaps it's because the sculptures make use of local materials and are a creative reaction to the scenery.
Once you get your futon the path, it's hard to stop....
I agree - this turned into a bit of a witch hunt where arguably there was no need. It could have been dealt with more sympathetically and all parties left feeling fairly happy with the outcome.
Ah, but the chaise had gone a longue way.....
Did you actually re-read your post before posting? And I'd also direct you to the whole undertaking in the first place if you are seeking childishness. As for the social media issues, maybe they should get their parents to contact CEOPS for advice.
Dammit! Looks like 'Losers' mum has made them delete the post I was replying to above.
Yeah I'd written one too. Too long to try again on the smartphone though. Pity.
But people are springing in to cushion the blow.
Hah, armchair mountaineers!
There are a lot of old faded portraits in the National Gallery how about repainting them as a project, I'm sure nobody will mind if it's for charity!
As long as they settee to it that it doesn't happen again ( is that the bottom of the barrel I see?)
On the plus side, this whole thing has given me the idea for a business running sedan chair rides up Ben Nevis.
Or maybe the Inn Pinn!
What was the charity?
They don't like to talk about it...
I'd be wanting to keep their name out of it too if it was me. Can't imagine they'd be best pleased.
Let me couch it in different terms for you... it's a deepseated problem, but I think I can find some support for what I'm going to table, i.e., put on the carpet.
Before making such an accusation you might need to conduct a benchmarking exercise.
Does it have an RIP Jimmy plaque on it?
They were always going to get slated for having left anything on the summit, but perhaps some of the climbing community might have been more sympathetic if the lads had at least mentioned the charity when posting their photo rather than just a self-congratulatory "look what we done, isn't it great".
I'm still none the wiser what the charity is for!
It is possible to figure it out. Someone else on here has figured it.
The bench? Daft obviously, but perhaps naive is a fair way to describe it.
Leaving their mate behind on the descent? Hm. Harder to forgive, but as someone who seems to know what went on says it was a misunderstanding maybe they deserve the benefit of the doubt for that.
The battens they used to carry the thing up there and the holdall full of rubbish though. How could anyone other than a complete cretin not realise that they were litter exactly? Having schlepped the bench up there it's not as if they could have thought there was a bin wagon around every Tuesday is it?
I saw a FB photo of a sponsorship form saying "Charity to be announced later" on it. Looked a bit fishy to me.
Ah well. If they were genuinely prepared to fetch it down again first chance they had I guess they can't be all bad.
If they really want to raise a bit of cash for their charity maybe someone should suggest a more worthy project for them. I'd chip in a few quid happily enough.
It was a misunderstanding as the guy apparently realised that he was going to struggle from half-way up, but continued to the top and then got in trouble on the way down. They then sent someone down for help. After a while they thought that he was going to be airlifted off. So they left him. He was then escorted off (not sure whether it was by the MRT or other walkers).
Also it's a bloody ugly bench. You'd think they could have at least got a nicer bench. Or built a nicer bench.
If I took a bench into the middle of a football pitch (or indeed anywhere a bench wasn't supposed to be) I reckon people would get pissed off quite quickly. So why are they going 'it's ok, cause it's for charity?'.
Am I the only person who's narked by everyone who's saying 'they've climbed Ben Nevis'? It's just a flipping walk.
"Finally, about me being ditched. It was entirely my fault that I ended up the way I was. I did zero preparation, training, had 2 hours sleep the night before and had practically nothing to eat all day. When my back gave in about a third of the way up the mountain, I should have gone back down, but was too stubborn and wanted to continue for the good cause. Despite my better judgement, I pushed on and it was inevitable what the outcome was going to be. The entire way up, we hadn't travelled as a coherent unit. We each travelled up at our own pace and left at different times. When I started to feel the effects and wasn't able to continue, my friends were already too far ahead, just as they had been for the entire trip up. Thankfully, someone who was with us ran ahead and alerted them about my condition and that I was unable to continue. We're not experienced in these scenarios by any means. I personally thought that standard protocol would have been to be airlifted to hospital since I had no idea how bad I was and for a while that's what it seemed was going to happen. That's also the news my friends got which is why they wanted to hurry home and alert the people who care about me. I'm sure anyone who has been up the mountain knows how unreliable the signal is up there for mobile phones. Had we brought some walkie talkies or something of that nature then it would all have been able to have been cleared in a matter of moments. However, we had not expected anything like this to happen, so we didn't bring anything along to communicate. Everyone was just unfortunate enough to get the wrong end of the stick."
Least he admitted it was his own dumb fault.
Or perhaps help them do something similar, but with a less controversial outcome?
If this story goes mainstream, we're going to look like a right bunch of @rseholes. Even more than usual. There'll be very few positive spins on the outdoor 'community', particularly when it becomes clear that it was for a sick kids' charity.
I'm not on Facebook. Is anybody actually saying anything constructive or conciliatory to these guys?
Yeah a few folk are.
They've also got their friends piling on going 'awww they're wonderful'. They still seem to think they didn't really do anything wrong as it was for charity. I can't be arsed to argue with idiots on the internet. There's too many of them.
To us, yes. But then we also know that Everest is a circus, there's no such thing as 'abseiling E5' and Very Difficult climbs are nothing of the sort. For these guys, it was unequivocal as a challenge - Britain's highest mountain - and they were doing something that they thought was good for other people. Yes, they should have done more preparation; yes, it's a bad idea to put a bench on a summit (just like it's a bad idea to put a whole cafe on one); yes, they left their rubbish up there (actually, this is probably the one thing they should cop to - anybody would have known this was wrong).
But if you can show me a single piece of malice in their actions, I'll hold your coat. And light your torches. Otherwise, a group of young lads organised a charity event, raised money and had their families and friends come with them. It was a major event for them and they believed in what they were doing. Now, it's going to be unforgettable for all the wrong reasons.
They can't even atone, because someone chopped the bench up. Small wonder that they're left pretty angry.
Sorry, but I still don't think that's the right way to have handled the situation. IMO you don't leave a member of your party behind just because you think someone else is on the way to rescue them: you stay with them until you know that they have been rescued. It's not like there was any significant risk to any of the other members of the party if they'd stayed with him.
So in fact, they'd basically abandoned him even before he decided that he needed rescuing. Nice.
>> I'm still none the wiser what the charity is for!
So what is it? Why should people have to "figure it out"? If it's supposed to justify what they did, just tell us!
Is that clear, or did it become "for a sick kids charity" retrospectively?
I really don't care what charity it's for. It seems like a popular thing these days to do stuff for charity. If you want to give money to charity, just do it. Don't make a big song and dance about it.
Of course they can 'atone' if they want, they don't need the original bench for that.
If someone would care to champion them on here they could probably turn their infamy around and use it to generate a fair bit of support for some fundraising effort or other.
Under the circumstances, a small donation to the Lochaber MRT probably wouldn't go amiss either.
In reply to maisie:
Yep... while I too was angry that they'd taken it up there, inappropriately left/fixed it up there and were naively basking in pride at their 'achievement', I'm also disappointed to see someone I know proudly announcing its premature destruction when they could (now apparently would) have collected it themselves or anyone determined to remove it sooner (and, believe me, I didn't want to see it left there for a moment longer than necessary!) could have made a much more constructive point by bringing it down whole and telling them where to collect it if they wanted it back.
Also hugely dismayed at all this horse-whipping and hanging stuff, which quite simply can't be any kind of considered response at all and for which I can see no excuse even as a 'joke' (which it's not)!
They had some kind of fundraiser last month, which they linked to the hospice. I agree that it seems to be a lot of effort to find out what they were about, but then if you're going to have a dig at people, you ought to know what they're about, eh? ;-)
I still think if this gets picked up by the media, 'we're' stuffed. And even if not, 'we' haven't behaved with much dignity or tolerance.
I think you're being uncharitable here....
Brilliant - thanks, hadn't seen that before. Re the High Pike bench (and the Ulrichshorn one, for that matter), it perhaps raises the question of how long these things have been there and how attitudes might have changed, particularly in recent years.
I know Ben Nevis probably counts as a special case, given the charity, clutter and clueless punter overload, but say someone had installed a nice stone bench at the summit 50 years ago, might it now be seen as a legitimate part of the summit furniture and an endearing quirk (as with the High Pike one), or would there be cries for its removal, assuming no one had already taken unilateral action against it?
I agree about the media bit looking really bad for the outdoor community, but there are aspects of this story that really should be publicised:
- Stuff shouldn't be left on the summit of the Ben, or any other mountains.
- When people start talking about hanging, they're talking about real people, it is a very bad way to encourage others to see a different point of view. Also really nasty. Be polite when you criticise.
- Never leave a friend behind when they're in a bad way in the mountains. (Airlifted out is standard protocol? Why would someone thing that? This perception should be fixed!)
Hopefully the group were well intentioned and have learned to research their plan next time to ensure it doesn't cause a problem. Maybe a few people on here have learned not to overreact to everything? A measured response usually is more sucessful I find. Flying off the handle (and saying inexcusable stuff) just gets everyone's backs up which is totally counterproductive.
Yes, the 'airlifting' thing was ignorant/unthinking...
In reply to mattrm:
And, yes, I get that when I too get so tired of seeing things (not least involving Ben Nevis etc.) constantly turned into charity stunts...
But the unfortunate way this whole thing's been 'resolved' has merely resulted in polarised, self-righteous anger when some gentle education could have been so much more effective!
Why are they angry? I'm pretty sure in their posts it was 'mission accomplished'. They had no intention of seeing the bench again. They've been found out to be a bit thoughtless and childish - is this what they are angry about?
Thoughtless and childish? Really? A bit unprepared and naive, perhaps. But weren't we all, once? As for having no intention of seeing the bench again, well that was the point - in their minds they were donating it for people to take a rest on. I'm not suggesting they were right to put it up there, but the exclusionist, damning and destructive response with which they've met wasn't appropriate and was responsible for the bad feeling we're seeing now.
They spoke to the John Muir trust themselves; they arranged to go pick it up. This would have allowed them to wipe the slate clean and demonstrate that they were willing to take it on the chin and move on. Somebody else decided to weigh in. They'd probably have spent quite a bit of time and effort building the thing, so just having it smashed up would be a bit of a gutter.
Why are they angry? With the best of intentions, they did something for those less fortunate. They had families, friends and girlfriends there to cheer them on. The whole group probably looked forwards to it for a long while and the experience would have brought them all closer together. Wouldn't you be proud if your kids did something for charity (and you weren't aware of any controversies)? All they've met with is a wall of negativity and an act of vandalism.
I'd say angry would cover it. We've done very little to avoid or offset that, and quite a lot to stoke it. It was in our gift to act with benevolence and educative advice. But a mob went at it instead.
I'm kind of surprised this hasn't been reported in the Daily Hate yet. Perhaps it has... Any avid Daily Mail readers here that can enlighten us?
"Charity Bench Destroyed by Barmy Enviros!"
"Bench for Sick Kids Vandalized by Internet Trolls"
Not casting stones here.... but it doesn't exactly make our tribe look good.
Skimmed it. .. seems the passport office is keeping them occupied for the moment. And Oxfam are apparently anti-austerity which has pissed the mail off too. I'll let you know if benchgate turns up.
New on site - wow this got a bit heated.
Yes. See my post above about carrying it up and down and the auction it off.
Well now they are spared an unnecessary journey - maybe they can donate the costs that would have incurred to the charity. In fact the costs involved in the original debacle could have just been donated, but
Ignorance is no excuse, however youthful. They made a mistake, albeit a well intentioned one. They should learn from it and move on. The vitriol they have received is another issue. They don't have any right to be angry. Maybe they're just hoping the re-action will give them some sort of moral high-ground and hide their original mistake.
Next time you see someone screaming at a bench before smashing it up you will know its no Basil Fawlty.
Many thanks - I suspect it will emerge at some point (with the appropriate level of moral outrage and insightful reportage).
What with this and the 3 Peaks driving thread, maybe Hilltalk is becoming the new Rocktalk ;-)
What, I'm on Hilltalk?
<backs up nervously>
Erm, can anybody lend me a map and compass to find my way home?
Which is no longer possible, is it? It might have been, but some individual intervened, ironically without checking first with the appropriate bods to make sure it was an OK thing to do on the summit of the Ben.
No, I don't think so. I suspect that, like most groups of young men who are pleased with themselves, their anger would be to do with being unexpectedly deflated - and perhaps a certain loss of face in front of family and friends. In fact, though, it seems that most of the anger is coming from those around them, who are understandably protective. Had they been allowed to collect the bench, a more positive outcome might have ensued, for both sides of the debate.
Named the charity after the event
Left the rubbish up the mountain
Tried to cement the bench into place (OP) - which undermines the "plan to Included a team member who knew he wasn't fit for the walk, but expected a helicopter ride off if he ploughed on
People here have:
Pointed out that the above is inappropriate
Cleared the mess up
Now, remind me what we should be wearing sackcloth over?
No, they were always openly raising money for this charity - I've seen at least one piece of evidence for this, dating from 21st May (I put a link up for it, I'll see if I can find it again). But, perhaps unusually in this day and age, they didn't rely on internet presence for their fundraising.
Yes, they did. And I've already said that this is one thing they should cop to: I'm not buying that they left it there through miscommunication. I think you misunderstand if you infer that I'm apologising for their behaviour here; my discomfort is in the response they've received from the outdoor community.
I don't understand this sentence. I think it may have been accidentally chopped somewhere in the middle.
Yes. And then some. People on Facebook have apparently talked about the need for gallows and/or horsewhipping; apparently they've also had abusive PMs and phone calls. There's a difference between actually pointing out - constructively - that something is inappropriate and the backlash on here and elsewhere. I think you're trying to downplay the abusive nature of much of the response.
Now, this is ironic. We're basically arguing here that there's a consensus over what should get left at the summit. This is entirely correct, and in order to moderate and apply that consensus view, we have a bunch of people responsible for contact with interested parties and for enforcing the rules. So if we want to do something, we contact them. Great. I gather that the young men got back in touch and arranged that they'd put things right. This was agreed with the people in charge of such things.
So, give me your views on somebody who - it appears - goes up there off his own bat and destroys some property, without checking first with the authorities in whom we've put our trust. Are the rules only for outsiders, because we're exempt?
I think you misunderstand the point of sackcloth, and the intrinsic pointlessness of refusing to do something constructive instead. It's not about behaving badly and then doing penance, but about trying to get a more positive outcome than where we are now. You don't feel that it's your obligation to do so and that's fine. That's your prerogative.
Edit: here's the link to one of their earlier fundraising events:
Some of my post got eaten
Undermines the "plan to bring it back down"
The point about helicopter rides was separate
In reply to maisie:
I agree with you.
These lads were trying to do something good, they apologised and agreed to make it right.
Meanwhile there are kids out there actually doing stuff wrong. Like the link above for example.
I think its time to let this alone....
I wasn't aware that they were going to bring it back down originally - but I'm not on social media, so you might have different info.
The helicopter ride debacle was an absolute cracker, yes. Bearing in mind that it takes several thousand pounds to get the chopper in the air, it would have been deeply unfortunate had the amount they raised been eclipsed by the cost of rescue.
It's false logic to weigh one against the other. Quite a few of us will need rescuing at some point - Hamish MacInnes famously was rescued three times (so I believe) - and we'll likely be rescued whilst doing nothing more edifying than going out for our own enjoyment. Is that better or worse? As to their general lack of preparedness, I think we can shake hands on that one - although it doesn't mean that all the harrumphing and hissing are any more edifying.
As someone who spent years in SAR, working on many occasions with the rescue choppers (including taking the decision to call them out), I can say that they don't see it in financial terms, but value the work highly. The costs are a bit misleading as well, as much of the sum is made up of fixed costs which apply whether the helicopter's in the air or not. But that's a different debate anyway.
Apparently, these people were worse. I think it was something to do with coming into our playground without permission. Or something.
But thank you ;-)
You really are posting nonsense now. It was nothing to do with 'coming into our playground without permission'
Where has that been said?
So you're saying you did give permission?
You don't need to answer that, unless you want set the bar even lower than I just did. Although you started it.
But consider this. A group of people who don't know how these things work went to a place which they naturally assumed to be in public ownership. They did something generally agreed to be a bit inappropriate and daft - but with the best of intentions.
Another group of people who do understand how these things work took them to task on this. They felt able to do this because they spend their leisure time in this place. It is, almost by definition, their playground. There is also a definite air of proprietorship, although you'll need to baldly deny this if you wish to argue further. They feel that if the first group had done some research, found out the rules and been officially refused permission for their venture, then they wouldn't have done this thing.
How exactly, without twisting yourself in self-defeating knots, do you suggest that this isn't about people coming into your playground without permission?
Over to you.
Well said well done. You should bill them for your time.
Wow. I'm not often left speechless by people's stupidity, but this lot have managed it.
I genuinely cannot understand how people like this reach adulthood with so little ability to consider the consequences of their actions.
I think that's a little harsh. They appear to have genuinely believed that this would be welcomed by people arriving at the summit. Let's face it, quite a lot of the punters who slog up there every summer might very well have been glad to see it. When it was explained to them why it was inappropriate they understood and immediately arranged to take it down again at the first opportunity and put it in a more suitable location. Instead scottie390 got there first.
My personal opinion is that scottie390's unilateral action was hasty and ill-considered. Just like placing the bench, doing it with the best intentions doesn't make it right. If he or other local climbers wished to help in removing this they could have helped the group to make their second ascent more safely than the first time.
On the whole, I think the Wiretime group deserve to be commended for their efforts for charity. Unfortunately on this occasion they got it wrong, and they deserve to be criticised for their mistake, but not condemned the way they have been. This could have ended with a much better result all round and the bench being used somewhere where it would be appreciated and welcomed.
The words 'definite air of proprietorship' caught my eye – could those words be transposed with the words 'the establishment'.
It would be fun to mess around with history and introduce to this situation the working class crowd that left Clydeside for the hills and countryside decades ago. They didn't bother much about landowners nor the 'established' mountaineering clubs of the day.
Some of that crowd would likely have said, “Aye, well done lads,” and saw them off on their descent, before carrying the bench off to their latest howff as a seat or firewood.
Wow, just got back from 3 days beyond the reach of phone signal and find that "benchgate" has gone mental! I've deleted my photo and all the comments associated with it from my commercial FB page as they were getting abusive and unconstructive.
The whole incident does seem to have provoked a lot of thought and a lot of passion, which is never a bad thing. I'd agree that as mountaineers we don't always grasp that not everyone shares our approach to wild spaces, and that naivety was as likely to have been the root cause as crass arrogance. But it does have to be said that various folk tried to persuade the team not to leave the bench, and that the assurances they were given proved hollow.
Having said that if the team had tried to carry it down they'd probably ALL have ended up hypthermic; their kit wasn't the greatest and the weather did deteriorate...
I'll give them respect for pledging to remove it, but realistically it might have taken ages and another "situation" to achieve that. I think Davie's solution was a pragmatic and efficient one, borne of concern for and empathy with the mountain and that it deserves unqualified praise.
The situation with the hypothermic team member is a confused one, and I'm not going to muddy the waters further. When teams are stretched on a mountain chaos reins, as we've seen time and again on bigger hills. Suffice to say that it underlines that some see an airlift as a given for every mountain situation, which is a presumption that clearly needs challenging. In fact the MRT were in phone conversation with those around the casualty and judged (correctly) that he was walking wounded and were content to simply monitor the situation.
Right, off to buy a Press and Journal!
It's wonderful that you two have found each other.
My first reaction to it was "good work, lads" on carrying a bench up there! No, they should have been messing around with concrete or left the rubbish (and no comment on the tired lad), but strikes me they've had a pretty rough ride and it's got out of all proportion. All it needed was a quiet work from the authorities to sort it out.
To the bloke who chopped the bench up (assuming you did) - hope you're proud of yourself.
Well said Jamie.
Agree that bench should have been removed asap, well done that man. If chopping it up was the safest way to remove it, then so be it.
Shame it all got nasty on social media. Individuals (not the climbing community) come out badly on that one.
The view that a helicopter rescue is protocol is infuriating and widespread. I've worked a few of these charity events ...not 3 peaks, I have standards ;)... and the folk I work with are astonished when they learn that rescue is not a right, and that MRT are volunteers with jobs.
These boys have been singled out for their stupidity, but many thousands make the same mistakes every day on the Ben. I've had one of my own clients deliberately drop litter on the Ben Path, and then refuse to pick it up, because their taxes pay for bin men. On other occasions my clients (slow, descending) have been physically abused and pushed out of the way by 3 peakers (ascending). One occasion in particular involved a mass ascent by the English Fire Service whose members behaved appallingly towards other people on the hill. For charity.
Not sure what the solution is but when I think about it I get very depressed.
Last time I looked there was quite a lot of information at the start of the path about not leaving junk on the summit, either for good causes or as memorials, and explaining the reason why.
I'm not for a moment suggesting they weren't idiots, but there's also a lot of unwritten rules and assumptions about behaviour as well that they wouldn't have known about.
I've come across this sort of thing in other circumstances. Memorials in areas where people are asked to leave no trace, or unofficial events on sites that can't support them, and the answer was always that theirs were "different" or "special" or......"but it's for charity" . Sometimes it takes more than a sign to change peoples minds if they're set on a course of action.
but then look at the fuss when it was suggested putting a sign at the bottom of Crib Goch to prevent idiots getting stuck on the ridge.
It isn't, of course, but there's not much to be done about it.
In this case, there are authorities: the summit and more of Ben Nevis is JMT property and there is the Nevis Partnership. It's not dependent on what the climbing community consider permissible in this case but the trust and I know the trust wanted the bench removed & relocated off the mountain. However it could have been handled better and has got out of proportion (though I cannot get my head around leaving a bag of rubbish behind).
> These boys have been singled out for their stupidity, but many thousands make the same mistakes every day on the Ben. I've had one of my own clients deliberately drop litter on the Ben Path, and then refuse to pick it up, because their taxes pay for bin men.
> Not sure what the solution is but when I think about it I get very depressed.
me too. I have to say when I read this part of your post, it really struck a chord. The whole attitude that someone else has to be paid to sort out your mess, so that makes it ok is far too prevalent - right across society
Similarly those unsightly huts littering the Alps
Rude and ignorant people are everywhere. On mountains, in shops, on the roads... The only solution would be a mass extinction event.
If there's one thing that I've learned over the years, it's that signs don't work unless they're really large, garish and unmissable. I think the Ben will always be littered, and that the local and mountaineering communities simply have to suck that up and manage it, mediated as it is by the tourism, health and holistic benefits.
There seems to be a fair number of instructor/guide folk pontificating about this - I wonder if any of them remember one of their number suggesting that an Alpine type hut be built at the halfway lochan.
Otherwise it could be criminal damage.
Yeh can you imagine the outcry if some hillwalker or climber built a building on the Ben. Oh C**p we already have.
Of course it need to be removed quickly, but they'd already contacted the John Muir Trust and agreed to remove it by Saturday. Was that really too long to wait? The JMT appear to have been happy with that. If they'd failed to do that then chopping it up might have been justifiable, but they weren't given the chance to do that and put it in a charity garden as they intended.
In fairness to scottie390, he may have already been on his way up to remove it when the JMT's message was posted on here. It still seems a bit hasty to me. If any local climbers wanted to assist then helping them get up and down the mountain safely would have been both a better option and a chance to engage with them and help them understand the wider situation better, including mountain rescue. In my opinion.
I'm familiar with the proposal, but can safely assure you that the instructor community is very far from being of one voice on that issue!
+1 (just replied basically the same thing, but you put it better).
I too disagree with dumping stuff on hilltops - rubbish, grolsch bottles, bogroll festooned poo, I see them all the time. A bench is less offensive but still wrong. However I don't believe these guys were being malicious. They thought it was okay to do and they worked hard. We passed them going up as we went down. They were a long way from the top and were all totally knackered. The Ben was overrun with charity walkers of all sorts on Saturday - by the end of the day we were pretty convinced we were the only 3 on the hill simply out for a walk - most of the charity walkers seemed to have no idea what they were doing except that they were doing it for a good cause.
I'm sorry they left their rubbish behind, and I'm sorry they tried to cement the bench to the ground. But really, was it that bad a thing to do? On the other hand their total lack of experience, probably not helped by being too knackered to think properly, could have had serious consequences for their mate, however hard he is trying to defend them.
they may have assumed an airlift was a foregone conclusion as the rescue heli had been out "playing" for several minutes close to the path and waving at the charity team raising money for the RAF Benevolent Fund.
Link to BBC report
Brilliant... Totally agree.
Hats off to the JMT for being a bit proactive on that one: non-inflammatory and generally educational. Despite what some of us seem to think, they've saved our bacon a bit on this one.
Thanks for the link
Another related link :http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-27810760
I remember the piano one I'm sure some had to rescued due to exhaustion. I remember reading it in the SMC journal at the time.
Maybe I'm heartless, but I think if you abandon a bench on the Ben, you really have no longer got any say in what happens to it!
To Ann65: I'm not sure what you are implying. Instructor folk have differing views just like other hill folk. They don't claim to have the monopoly on truth, nor do they speak with one voice.
I'm implying nothing - what I wrote in my last post is a simple statement that Jamie B responded to - that's fine.
PS - for info, a Land Rover was driven up in the late 50s or early 60s.
Hear, hear. Or indeed any public place. If I dumped a bench in the middle of my local cricket pitch, I reckon they'd get pretty shirty about it. I think they'd be even more annoyed if I dug a hole and cemented it in.
The folks who were talking about harming these plonkers were taking it all too far however. Especially as they managed to put themselves in harms way with out help from anyone at all.
Definitely a sorry incident. I can't see that scottie has done anything wrong by removing it. If it was local to me and I was free I would have given him a hand.
I think I took umbrage at the word pontificating, and as one of those pontificating instructor folk, I felt compelled to pontificate further!
Well, it's hitting the papers now - Scotsman, Herald, Press and Journal. These are publications traditionally sympathetic to the outdoor community; it'll be interesting to see which slant it takes if the rags get hold of it.
yawn..... give it a rest will ya.
Sorry about pontificate; but I do think some people are expressing opinions and judgments in a dogmatic way.
On UKC? Surely not...
I hate it when people leave stuff on the mountains. Someone left a bloody cafe on the top of that Mount Snowdon. Crazy!
I hate it when people leave stuff on the mountains. Someone left a bloody cafe on the top of that Mount Snowdon. Crazy!
What sort of benches has it got?
This topic appears to be drying up but a quick last comment.
I was thinking about you're reply, also Jamie B's, and wonder if you think those with a professional or commercial interest should identify that interest when posting.
Some will be aware who everyone is but not all, and as with politicians, it's always informative to know where a point of view is coming from.
I can't speak for others here but I did ID myself has having worked some of these charity events in my first post, and my status as an ML is in my profile for all to see.
I don't pay UKC for a commercial profile.
All seems a bit harsh seeing as there is already a bungalow on the mountain. Maybe someone could saw it up and take it back down?
The inhabitants might have stopped befouling the collective water supply but it is still an appaling construction. Give me a bench anyday...
Eh! From what?
Maybe twenty years ago, maybe more, there was a lot of fuss about cairns and benches.
A celebrity promoted the idea that there should be a bench every few hundred metres along the path so that weary walkers could rest. I wasn't very happy with that idea.
I wrote at the time (High? Climber?) "There should only be two cairns on Ben Nevis. One to mark the summit and one at the top of of Gardyloo bearing a plaque: 'This marks the spot where the mountaineering clubs of Scotland threw James Saville down Gardyloo Gully.'"
Oh how I regret we never managed to make that happen.
Well, the fact that you don't know suggests it's worked.
I've got some tiger-repellent cream I can let you have cheap, too.
Took me a moment to work it out, but I got there...
It was a good effort: perhaps if you'd thrown him a bit harder. Is there still a plaque there, saying that? More offensive than a ruined building or a small wooden seat, anyday.
This thread tells me that 50% of UKC posters are reasonable people who can remember being young and foolish themselves (I'm definitely in that camp). The other half are a bunch of self-righteous and pompous old farts who are, apparently, paragons of virtue; the kind of people who shake their heads at the newspaper and sigh "The country's going to the dogs I tell you!"
Catch a grip, it was a bit of wood, nobody died and it's hardly the precursor to garden centre style displays of outdoor furniture springing up all over Britain's peaks.
The most sensible thing posted in this whole thread.
Ok. Thanks for your efforts. I'll sleep well tonight.
Speaking as someone whose piss boils at the sight of dropped litter in the hills, (or anywhere else), I actually agree with you. There was no malicious intent, they were a bit daft and unprepared and clearly didn't think it through. Yes they did dump rubbish, (which does piss me off), but by the sound of it things were going to ratshit as they were beginning to get out of their depth in terms of fitness and being unprepared for the weather. Is that any different from abandoning kit and abbing off tat?
Oh FFS, it's "PEAK"!
Oops, sorry, force of habit. Carry on. :o)
On a slightly more meta note, I reckon those who are making a fuss about how much others have made a fuss about the bench are really making far too much of it.
Get a grip! This is serious thin end of the wedge stuff!!! :-)
Errrrrr are you dovetailing in with the other 'wood' puns?? (Excuse my stupidity. I'm tired after working hard making a bench to put on top of Froggatt Pinnacle - it'll be there by sundown tomorrow!!!)
I wasn't particularly bothered too much by the initial stupidity of the bench and didn't bother getting involved, what really infuriated me was when I read the lads responses and so called apologies,
"each and everyone on that day I would class as my brother, oh yes but we left one of our brothers and his bird up there with hypothermia because an heliciopter was supposed to be coming for him" WHAT?
Just doesn't ring true for me.
So. At which point during this period of righteous indignation did you decide it was OK to insult young women about their looks?
And again, how do you feel that helped the situation?
Take your time.
What part of give it a rest don't you get?
You read it mate as did most so you know at which point! Right at the point she started swearing and mouthing off at me I thought it was a fair comment it really wouldn't cost that much supplemented by the nhs.
As already said- the most sensible post on this thread. by miles. good for you
For anybody who felt that the response from the climbing community was a model of proportion and restraint, I give you Wesley. Or Princess, as they fairly effectively nailed him.
Princess saw a bad situation developing and waded in with the express intention of being abusive. And part of this abuse was to draw attention to a young woman about her appearance. Some people might feel a degree of contrition about a comment like this, but Princess feels it worth glorying in. What a man; what an ambassador for the climbing community. So when these people talk about abuse, they're not making it up.
Note also the bemusement of Princess when someone who he's told to go away, hasn't.
Princess, it's not OK to say these things. Doing so exposed a side of your character which you don't even have the wit to realise is hopelessly negative.
Take all the time you need.
don't give them ideas- i wouldn't be surprised if this is allowed with biodiversity offsets..
give it a rest eh, you are starting to look like you have a bit of a problem.
That's brilliant, Princess. You actually just created a new account to give yourself some support. Priceless!
As I say, take your time.
(I'm sorry, that's really tickled me)
I have to say that your comment appears to be the most sensible thing I have read on here.
We'll said mate.
My tuppence worth
No one should be judged on a mistake alone it should be on how they conduct themselves afterwards.
From what I can gather these guys apologised and had offered to remove the bench them selves.
Sensible people can make idiotic decisions.
There's folk out there sellin smack to kids that have not had to endure the abuse that these guys received:
Sorry, Im not wesley and dont agree with how he went about things anymore than I agree with the bench being left up there. The thread was dying nicely but your constant goading is starting to grate a bit.
Yes, you are, Princess. That you see a challenge to your repellent behaviour as goading betrays you, Wesley.
Again, take your time, Princess. How do you feel you've helped in this unfortunate situation?
Just got back from 3 hours on the bike mate over Longeddale and whinfell what you done with your night apart from sit on here typing about something quite irrelevant. Get a life mate and get out some time.
Oh, that's priceless, Princess. Judging from your behaviour so far, you're struggling to run one personality successfully. Are you REALLY going to try to pretend to be two people now? Is that wise? Will they both indulge in a bit of casual misogyny, or are you going for Good Princess - Bad Princess?
It's your own hole you've dug here, you know. I realise it's mean embarrassing you like this, but you put yourself out there.
Welcome to UKC it gets better in the winter, sorry you have had to be accused of been me.
Ha ha ha.
Today the bench gate culprits were apparently redeeming themselves by taking a wheelie bin up Ben Nevis which they were filling with litter.
Sorry Martin but your definitely deluded and perhaps mentally unstable too. Good evening.
On another note the sky is absolutely amazing tonight.
Can't argue with that. Good on them.
You are really funny though I have had a real good laugh at this enjoyed it more than the ride and the beautiful sunset this evening.
Good princess bad princess amazing who could of thought of it love it you really could be a comic if you aren't already
> Sensible people can make idiotic decisions.
Nah all their mates and family were drafted in to back them up on facebook and shout at the "do gooders" and how the fact they raised money for charity made them immune from everything afterwards.
Oh, Princess. Don't you wish you'd actually gone on that bike ride now? I've had a very dull - but necessary - evening of reviewing papers and your antics have really brightened it up.
You'll be pleased to know that I won't be around for a few days, so both of you can rest your heads. I fear you were starting to lose track of which one you were meant to be at any given time, in any case.
(BTW, while you were 'out', someone kept refreshing your log-in. I bet it was that hwm character.)
Check strava getting bored now one more time give it a rest. You do have some mouth and talk some complete nonsense.
I can confirm this, they have definitely learned from the experience and I now feel a little guilty for having unwittingly prompted what was by all accounts some pretty nasty personal messaging. Some folk on here haven't exactly covered themselves in glory either.
Mrs Num Num has always said there should be somewhere decent to park your arse on top of Ben Nevis. There is on Snowdon.
Your right particularly that Scottie390. Someone should have a word with him about segregating his rubbish. Does he not care a jot about the environment.
Fair play to the guys for making an effort. Especially after the abuse they took.
Just a pity hatchet Harry aka Scottie390 could hold the reins in on high horse long enough to let them actually bring the bench down
Are you referring to yourself or the guys who carried it up there? ;)
im referring to anyone who isnt/wasnt actually directly involved in the event itself and is therefore a critic.
Jeez. Talk about blowing yer own trumpet!
Was it really all about attention seeking?
Scottie390, The Man in the Arena! :-)
"Someone who is heavily involved in a situation that requires courage, skill, or tenacity (as opposed to someone sitting on the sidelines and watching), is sometimes referred to as "the man in the arena." wiki.
Holy cr*p. Are you actually trying to use the 'Citizenship in a Republic' speech to justify your actions? Do you even know what that speech is about? How a society might benefit from the collective and individual efforts of its citizens? Mandela used it to inspire; Nixon tried to hijack it to justify his toxic presidency. And you think your actions merit a comparison?
What happened here is that some people made a mistake. They received an unnecessary burden of abuse - from people like your new friend, Princess - but despite that they behaved fairly well in the aftermath. They made arrangements with the people in charge of the situation to atone for their mistake. It was sorted. That means it had been agreed as to how the situation would flow. You jumped in. Nobody asked you to, but you couldn't help yourself; you even managed a couple of defiant, self-congratulatory, entirely lacking in introspection, quotes in the newspapers. And despite it actually not being your problem to sort, despite it being amicably negotiated already, you made a bad situation worse, with vandalism, arrogance, condescending conjecture and then a desperate will to cling to this, the biggest shadow to yet fall across your existence.
But it's not all lost for you: some of the speech might have been written for you last week:
"Of one man in especial, beyond any one else, the citizens of a republic should beware, and that is of the man who appeals to them to support him on the ground that he is hostile to other citizens of the republic..... The man who makes such an appeal should always be presumed to make it for the sake of furthering his own interest."
See, Roosevelt understood you after all.
All the best,
> What happened here is that some people made a mistake. They received an unnecessary burden of abuse - from people like your new friend, Princess - but despite that they behaved fairly well in the aftermath. They made arrangements with the people in charge of the situation to atone for their mistake. It was sorted. That means it had been agreed as to how the situation would flow.
I agree wholeheartedly with the above. By his knee jerk reaction Scottie robbed the individuals of their chance to make amends which is a real shame for them and suggests that what he really wanted was not restitution but revenge.
A sad state of affairs.
totally agree with what you say. the guys could have removed the seat themselves and put it somewhere else. it must have taken them a long time to make
Good for you. I read your first post [that you had removed the bench] and thought, well done / good job.
Next time, if I see you on the way up, it'll be an honour to carry your saw for you. And I'll carry beers for us too.
Not at all. I know Davie well and spoke to him before and after his trip up the Ben, and can assure you that he was motivated by nothing more than a desire to restore the status quo. By accident or design he also managed to send out a strong message; that mountaineers care strongly about wild places and are prepared to work hard to protect them. Surely that's a good thing to get out there?
I appreciate that Team Wiretime learned a lesson too, and were prepared to remove their work. But to be frank they lost the right to expect the thing to be sitting there awaiting uplift when they dumped it there in the first place.
Status quo restored, message sent out, lesson learned (without a back-breaking carry). Who exactly has lost out here?
Classic UKC. How has it gone from the people being in the wrong here being the people who carried the bench up there to the people being in the wrong being the ones who took it down? Crazy.
Scottie390 well done. You've done everyone a service and I completely agree with your stance. The only thing you've done wrong is engaging with the trolls on here (that aren't worthy of your time or attention) and I sincerely hope you aren't beating yourself up about their reaction. You don't have to justify yourself to probably most of the people on here.
Maisie- you criticise people for "insulting young women about their looks" then use "Princess" as an insult for the rest of the thread- do you not see the irony?
Looks like it should be case closed here.
I find myself a bit torn here. It is clear that scottie390 acted with the best of intentions to remove what everyone here agrees was inappropriate. It is almost certainly true that he was able to do so more effectively and safely than the Wiretime team might have done, given the trouble they got themselves into.
On the other hand, as maisie points out, a solution had already been agreed which would have resulted in the bench being put to a more appropriate use. I'm not sure where the suggestion that it might be set alight came from, the originators had told the JMT that they were going to take the bench down and give it to a charity garden. However by the time this information was posted scottie390 was probably already on his way up the Ben.
We have been left with a good result ie the removal of the bench, and thanks to the JMT taking control of the story in the press it hasn't reflected badly on the mountaineering community - it might have been spun very differently. We could have had an even better result, with the bench being taken down intact and put to an appropriate charitable use, and with the climbing community possibly assisting Wiretime to achieve this safely: win-win all round.
I still think scottie390 was a bit hasty in taking unilateral action. However what's done is done. His actions had a positive effect whereas Wiretime's actions, however well-meant, had the opposite. He acted in what he believed were the best interests of the climbing community and the mountain environment and I respect that.
I think your answer nails it on the head.
Mr Ed how tiresome it gets with reading comments like "The trolls" just because they don't agree with your ideals.
Just a thought. Do you think Scottie390 had a wee shot on the chair before chopping it up?
Clearly better than you did, as you're still struggling with it. Ironic really. Why an insult - Princesses are lovely.
It was - you just opened it again with an alternate viewpoint. Again with the irony.
Man walks up a path - a path - with a saw and destroys something. Then spends days post-rationalizing his self-righteousness into something pure and noble until he's suddenly the Man in the Arena, and his opponents are small do-nothings. It was a path and a bench and a saw. And an angry, self-important individual who, ironically (you started it), didn't check with the JMT about what was happening on the summit of the Ben before setting out.
Now, in the spirit of the thread, I pronounce that I have spoken and so that MUST be the last word. Because anyway.
What, up there in the Death Zone? I'm beginning to think that far from chopping it up, he actually tore it apart with his tiny fists of rage. There should be a statue erected on the spot to honour the deed.
What if, in tearing out the bench from its' concreted holes on the summit, Scottie390 has unleashed some alien virus from the spaceship which lay beneath the surface undisturbed for millenia after it crashed into the (now extinct) volcano?
So much for altruistic behaviour, eh? Too late now, isn't it?
Hope you can live with yourself Scottie!
The next lot of bench 'guerilla high altitude gardeners' might consider this
Erect a statue of anyone and i'll cut it into wee bits and carry it off. You're just no getting the message here are you princess?
This bench sure has caused some fuss .
I would certainly use it if I had just attacked The Ben.
I also wouldn't mind if there was a Costa or Starbucks up there.
Might happen one day.
You mean Snowdon I suppose, not a climber are you? Are you a friend of the bench constructors on Ben Nevis?
PS. This is a weird thread!
Stop avoiding the question. Did you have a shot scot?
I think you did what you thought was the right thing in removing the bench, and it did need to be removed, but:
a) It isn't your mountain, it's the John Muir Trust's mountain (albeit also to some degree everyone's mountain), and so they should get first shout of what is to be done; if they are happy for a volunteer to remove it that would be fine.
b) Unilateral actions are often unwise; I don't think there was a consensus that the bench needed to be destroyed in the next week or anarchy would break out on the hills. A bit more time and a better solution might have been reached.
PS since I brought it up earlier, I believe you when you say you think that the bench was not going to be brought down and was thus abandoned; for this reason I don't think you were committing criminal damage.
The Bench needed to come down , it came down.
Whats the problem?
Happy to be educated but I don't think there is such a charge as Criminal Damage in Scotland.
Also, whilst the JMT may own a piece of land, it doesn't give them, or anyone else, free reign to do what they like or decide on a particular course of action. The best way is consensus.
Man I can't believe that we are getting worked up about a bench!
I'm a princess!!!!! Not YOUR princess, but a princess nonetheless. Magic.
I think your tiny fists of rage were pumelling the keyboard so hard that the above came out. Honest, but revealing.
It's not up to you. You need to begin to understand this.
Two questions for you:
1) Are you certain that the JMT support your actions above the agreement it had already reached over the bench?
2) Why did you phone one of the protagonists to ask where you should send the pieces and/or the bill?
I did indeed forget you Scots have an independent justice system (unless us Welsh) :P
It's absolutely ridiculous. Everything about this thread is just a little bit sad.
Shut up now it's boring.
Why don't you chalk it up to the best intentions just like you're happy to do with the chaps who brought it up there? What's done is done. He's saved them some effort.
I think it was out of order to cut it up and remove it.
You should clearly have set it on fire and filmed it and put it on you tube;)
Bless you for your sense of entitlement to be entertained by me. And then posting dully.
That's the key word here, isn't it? The intentions of the original group were good. They did a bad thing. They wanted to return it to be a good thing and had agreed with the JMT how to do that.
This Scottie character removed the bench in a self-interested fit of pique. He then spent days coming up with new justifications for his actions, in the hope that one of them could be retrospectively applied. Eventually, he raised himself (in his own mind) to greatness, for walking and vandalism. Greatness.
Now, he's admitting that actually he would just angrily do the same again. Finally honest, but still missing the points of consensus, diplomacy and positive outcomes. The outcome is to be dictated by his own reaction, not through a consensus opinion.
Still interested in the phone calling, though.
Can you try and give an objective view to the readers as to why your views are so diametrically opposed for the "uppers" and "downers" in this?
I feel Scottie should have glued 60kg of lead bricks to the bench so the uppers could redeem themselves twice as much when carrying it down again. As a bonus that might have doubled the risk posed to others by their jury rigged bench porting system, and doubled the number of hypothermic people.
If you cared so much about them bringing it down perhaps you could have offered to get them there sooner after the event, and to explain some basic mountain safety to them?
Personally I feel that "it's for charity" is a motivator and not an excuse, and that the presence of a big company logo on the bench robs it of any slim credibility that it had.
What don't you understand : someone put a bench on OUR mountain without our permission!
What did you do about it? what actions did you take? you obviously feel very strongly about this, so im curious as to what you actually did about it?
To suggest I had one of the 'protagonists' phone numbers in the first place, nevermind to give them a call, is an outright lie.
LOL, oh my god forgive me. I just realised you are the no1 poster on UKC and some of your comments on other posts are as ridiculous as they are here. Its clear to me now that you are nothing but a super troll and an arsehole in to the bargain. I wont take up anymore of your time, you obviously have much typing (and not a lot else) to do. If you ever manage to crawl away from your keyboard and want a conversation, come see me in person. Inbox me for my address.
> LOL, oh my god forgive me. I just realised you are the no1 poster on UKC and some of your comments on other posts are as ridiculous as they are here. Its clear to me now that you are nothing but a super troll and an arsehole in to the bargain. I wont take up anymore of your time, you obviously have much typing (and not a lot else) to do. If you ever manage to crawl away from your keyboard and want a conversation, come see me in person. Inbox me for my address.
Couldn't have put it any better myself, he really is the most irritating person i have come across on UKC.
That would have been more modern.
> Now, he's admitting that actually he would just angrily do the same again. Finally honest, but still missing the points of consensus, diplomacy and positive outcomes. The outcome is to be dictated by his own reaction, not through a consensus opinion.
This paragraph shows a rather odd slide towards dementia.
You must be the only one who is!
You were one of the ones who brought the bench up or their dad?
The bench should not have been there, it was removed, end of story!
> LOL, oh my god forgive me. I just realised you are the no1 poster on UKC and some of your comments on other posts are as ridiculous as they are here. Its clear to me now that you are nothing but a super troll and an arsehole in to the bargain. I wont take up anymore of your time, you obviously have much typing (and not a lot else) to do. If you ever manage to crawl away from your keyboard and want a conversation, come see me in person. Inbox me for my address.
There is no charge of that name, but damaging or destroying someone else's property could be charged as vandalism or the quaintly-named 'malicious mischief'.
Well, the selfish barsteward could've just left it situated above the Indicator Wall area? It would've made those winter 'sitting' belays on the plateau so much more comfortable, and nicer for climbers troubled by the dreaded 'Farmer Giles' !
Is it their property if they've abandoned it in a public area, and in the absent of any agreement transferring ownership to anyone else? I suspect that legally it was closer to fly tipping than property. So perhaps the person who removed it is guilty of transferring waste without a waste transfer licence...
Or just guilty of using common sense and enacting a simple and pragmatic solution :-)
If you fix a bench firmly enough on somebody else's land, ownership transfers to the landowner, so there is actually an argument that it belonged to JMT. Generally, abandoned property belongs to the Crown.
Generally, abandoned property belongs to the Crown.
Does that mean that 'Crag Swag' actually belongs to the Queen?
What about abandoned baby's nappies (used), do they belong to Her Majesty too? If so it's about time she took her property back to Windsor.
Yes - once the original owner has decided not to try and retrieve the gear.I gather her majesty has done a fair amount on grit...
I didn't make it worse. A very small contribution, but not one which seems to have occurred to you, then or since.
If you say you didn't call one of these people with abuse, I believe you. It would have been the action of an abusive moron in any case.
What really tickles me is that you don't seem to have half the introspection or capacity for contrition that the original group does. You're not capable of viewing your actions objectively and you're so desperate to have been right that you can't face any questioning. Compare this to people who were willing to cop to a mistake and put it right, who took a lot of unwarranted abuse and still managed to behave pretty well. I have more time for them because they showed a genuine humility and regard for others - after the event, perhaps, but they got there. You're still vowing to be the masked avenger at the drop of a hat. No experiential learning.
As to being disliked by you, Princess and Mr Ed, thanks. It means a lot to me that you'd come out with it, because I know my worth. And I understand yours. You'll get there, as I say.
Ok Bruce, he should have set it on fire, got 10 virgins to dance naked around it pagan style and then film it and put it on you tube.
( A good mixture of ancient and modern. )
Edit:- I think someone might see a flaw in my suggestion)
Quite possibly. So how would you assess the abuse you threw at a young woman? Are you comfortable with it?
Are you capable of unilateral thinking, or are you destined to always jump in on the coattails of others?
You really do need to take your time
I completely agree: this is a perfect solution and is what should have happened. Positive outcome, good PR which would probably have generated more publicity, and a much kinder response to people who - for better or worse - didn't know any better. I would have liked to take part, but I live a 1,300 mile round trip from the Ben and I was inescapably working all weekend. If a similar thing ever happens in Cornwall, I'll be doing these things.
I'm not diametrically opposed to either side: leaving a bench is dumb as soup but chopping it up in a unilateral act is equally so. People are hardwired to make mistakes, so it's not how they should be judged. Instead, I believe that we should look at how they respond to criticism. In this, 'they've' behaved better than 'we' have. We ought to have more introspection, and just blindly justifying the means through the end - the bench is gone - doesn't do us any service, as a group or as individuals.
If anybody wants to take pot shots because I'm ripping the p1ss out of angry and abusive people, carry on. But using it as an excuse for avoiding introspection doesn't diminish me one jot. Apparently I'm also a princess, and that's just great.
Mobs. Doncha just love 'em?
You did nothing, you are nothing and you will always be nothing princess.
Except a troll, a keyboard hardman, you pretend to have morals and views that you believe in but take no action on behalf of them. You tell lies and are abusive, you contribute nothing to anything and berate the efforts of anyone who does.
you can say anything you want, you've probably said it already, many times but it never occurs that nobody actually values anything you say.
'A wise man speaks because he has something to say, a fool speaks because he has to say something'
I'm not conceited enough to suggest that I'm a wiseman, but you most certainly are a fool.
Oh, what a relief. Thanks for putting that out there, it wrapped up my argument beautifully.
One last thing: if your differentiation for great / not great is walking up a path and smashing a bench, you may be setting your sights a little low. Or not, which is even sadder.
Happy to speak to anyone face to face and have stated this several times.
Im not gonna waste my time with the few trolls on this post anymore. If you have any problem with what I did or want to dicuss it in person, inbox me and we'll sort it out (i predict an empty mailbox).
Cheers for the support guys!
I have a problem with what you did and wish to discuss it publicly. But you keep throwing tantrums, so of course you're going to have an empty mailbox in this respect.
If you take some time and think about both your initial actions and your tendency to lose your temper, you might see a link. I've challenged your sense of accomplishment and it's perhaps natural that you feel aggrieved about this. But this other lot, you did much worse to them and they were capable of introspection and a willingness to put things right. Compare this to your reaction.
Don't hide; discuss.
Pretty please princess let's just give it a rest..... He did us all a favour
So how are you feeling about abusing a young woman?
I thought I had already answered this question for you
Just remind me.
I trust you are not waiting up for a reply.
Very odd thread this one, shows flashes of philosophical brilliance inlaid with childish spats and the occasional rather odd double identity......and a bench.
Not surprisingly it's another divisive event that has got the hackles up and led to some pretty smug and self-righteous opinion along the way.
Personally I think it's within me to accept that the original group were misguided but well-intentioned. It's also within me to accept that Scottie felt/feels that he was doing the right thing - though perhaps being hasty and not expressing himself very well.
The rest has been a bit of an unseemly and unnecessary bit of slanging. Eloquent or not, clever or not, it is still slanging. I've now lost sight of what the point of this thread is other than the feed the spat (troll?) which is very odd when the original event is now long finished. RIP the bench, 2014-2014.
+1, been bad form all round.
Time for the debate to RIP also in my opinion.
But I have nothing else in my life......
Oh, alright, I'm done. But I may start another thread on the prurience of UKCers who condemn threads but are unable to stay away ;-)
I've now lost sight of what the point of this thread is other than the feed the spat (troll?) which is very odd when the original event is now long finished.
Isn't that pretty much standard for a UKC thread?
In fact, you could say that this thread sets a benchmark in that respect...
That's a good one, who said it?
(maybe it applies to this post?)
Maisie created the account a kind of double bluff, to carry on with the princess debate ( slanging match)
Well yeah but we all know that nobody is going to take you up on this 'I predict an empty mailbox' - so it is just more posturing really.
Cheers for enlightening me, he's too good for me.
I think that's what a find so nauseating about this. It seems more an act of attention seeking than anything else. I noticed yesterday we even got the staged picture of him cutting it up posted up. Dear oh!
Elsewhere on the site
This survey is being conducted by the Outdoor Industries Association in order to find out more about how and why people... Read more
Pete Whittaker has flashed the 32 pitch route Freerider 5.12d on El Capitan in Yosemite Valley over three days,... Read more
Nuts, wires, stoppers, chocks, wedges, whatever you want to call them, have been around for a long time. Initially made from... Read more
From a personal point of view, photographing the night sky is one of the most difficult, frustrating yet ultimately rewarding... Read more
The Grivel A&D Ascender & Descender is brand new for Autumn 2014 and incorporates a revolutionary and innovative patented... Read more