UKC

Some of my climbing club stayed in another club's hut this weekend - some of our hosts were staying there too - lovely people and we all got on great together. Meanwhile, in the bunk-house next door, a university climbing club was holding its freshers' weekend. During that weekend, one of our hosts got 'pranked' by the students. When I say 'pranked', it was probably the most tw*ttish thing anyone else could do to a complete stranger short of physically hitting them over the head with a brick.

What actually happened is (to me) of less significance than the reactions of the various parties concerned. At first, I didn't pay it much attention because I was caught up in my own affairs and it seemed to me that it had been resolved after a fashion. But it so happened that I was the last one out of the hut and I had a couple of my own kids in tow. There's a common driveway between the hut where we were staying and the bunkhouse and in that drive were some of the debris left over from the previous nights' events. At this point, my youngest daughter who was of an age with the students next door started raging about what 'knobs' students were and how this had convinced her, if she needed convincing, that she didn't want to become one. This got my attention and I started thinking about it as I checked our hut.

It occurred to me that our hosts had been extremely forgiving of the students, and that if it had happened to me, I would probably have gone looking for the culprit with a baseball bat. I wondered whether this was because they didn't want to upset the famous climber who owns the neighbouring bunkhouse and who is a longstanding friend of theirs (which is why I'm not naming the clubs involved). But what really stood out was that our hosts actually blamed themselves for letting it happen - they seemed to think it was their fault for not realising that there were students around, and that they had been remiss for not securing their hut better, given who they had as neighbours for the weekend. It occurred to me that they expected behaviour of this kind from university climbing clubs and that given their location, maybe similar things had happened before?

When I was a student, I was on the receiving end of considerable prejudice from working neighbours who were really quite unpleasant to us, just because we were students. Thinking there might be a bit of 'self-fulfilling prophecy' going on here, I decided to wander in through the open door of the bunkhouse and just point out to some of the student club the impact of their actions on our now-departed hosts. I made a point of saying that I had no personal axe to grind as I hadn't been on the receiving end of their attentions, but I also suggested that if they wanted to be seen as a responsible club, then they should really do something about it.

Their immediate response was to deny all knowledge and to say it had nothing to do with them. When I pointed to some fairly incontrovertible evidence, they asked who the individuals were, so I described someone I'd seen in discussion with our hosts that morning. Their response to my detailed description was 'Oh, that could be one of half a dozen people'. I decided there was little point in pursuing the conversation and that my daughter was right in concluding they were 'knobs', so I walked away.

While I was packing my car, one of them came up to me and said that they'd asked around and that the people were nothing to do with them - that they knew who they were and that they had come with them but they were only 'hangers-on' and not proper members of their club. I said
"That's very interesting - how come once the people we're staying with came and asked you guys, one of you was able to provide an answer within five minutes?"
He just repeated that it was nothing to do with them and they didn't condone it.
By now, my internal dialogue was going something like:
"OK, I can see that you're a d*ck, but you're not a d*ck that has anything to do with me, so go away and lead your life and hopefully, our paths will never cross again." But all I said was:
"I'm very glad to hear that" before I turned my back on him.

I'm one of the people in my own club who is probably amongst the most encouraging towards our local uni students when they want to climb with us. I don't mind giving them lifts and letting them use my climbing gear, nor do I mind feeding them from time to time - it's something we talk about quite openly, and I make a point of saying that people helped me out in similar ways when I was a student, and so they shouldn't worry about it. I'm also grateful to them for keeping me in touch with recent developments in climbing, also some of them are really good climbers themselves and are studying it even, so I can learn a lot from them.

When it comes to university clubs, I didn't have an opinion till this weekend. Now though, I think that the next time a university climbing club comes in sight, I shall secure all my valuables and other gear a.s.a.p. and change location just as soon as I can. While I'm about it, I ought to mention that this wasn't any old university climbing club but one from the main university in what is perhaps the top rock-climbing city in England.

So is this just me being intolerant and succumbing to prejudice? Should I, as suggested by another of my children who was also with me at the time, 'chill out, and accept that it's just students having a prank?' - If this is the general attitude of the student climbing community, then so be it. But in that case, oughtn't we to be spreading the fun around, and every time we see a student uni climbing club, shouldn't we be jollying them along by letting their tyres down and nicking their gear, just by way of entering into the spirit of these things?

I'd be interested in hearing the opinions of other UKC forum users on this one.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Perhaps we could better judge the situation if you were more specific about what the insult/damage was.
Additionally you would aid your cause by being a little more succinct.(Most people will not read such a long epistle)

In reply to veteye:

They got in the hut, nicked and trashed someone's birthday cake and hid someone else's car keys where they stood no chance whatever of finding them.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Agreed.
That is pretty thoughtless and stupid.

Meantime I have just come back from a late in the day session at Burbage North, where we met some students around The Knight's Move and they were pleasant and polite. Apart from when they laughed when I answered my phone when I was on the Heather groove route
They seemed a good bunch and were from Nottingham.

In reply to Andy Morley:
I'd have told them that the police had been called and were heading over to investigate the break in and the theft of car keys. I'd then let them sweat for a while.

I wouldn't have called the police but, if it were my car keys missing someone may have needed to call them to restrain me.


Also, is there a prize for guessing the club and location? It seems fairly obvious to me.

In reply to gethin_allen:


Was a bit odd saying wont name the clubs but then naming the student one, for all intents and purposes, further down.
A quick check of their calendar gives the rest.

In reply to Andy Morley:

I know when I used to run a university climbing club if someone did anything that negatively effected out neighbours they would have been told to apologise, replace anything they had damaged and then a discussion would have been made if they were suitable for the club. The trip leaders should have gone to apologise too. These people sound like knobs and the organisers not much better.

In your shoes I would write to their university students union, and possibly the Dean of the university too, stating what happened. They are giving a bad view on university clubs (we are not all like that), and that particular university, so I am sure they would be interested to know.

In reply to JoshOvki:

if I was part of the university club I would probably consider an apology on here and a quiet word with the individuals concerned. I would hope they were new members of the club who perhaps have quite a lot of growing up still to do.

In reply to JoshOvki:

Agreed. In my experience of these things (admittedly a while back now) the universities come down pretty hard on any of their students/clubs doing anything to give them a bad reputation.

In reply to gethin_allen:

There's a famous though possibly apocryphal story told of Gordon Brown (the rugby player).

He was speaking at a rugby club dinner and someone stole his car keys for a prank, apparently there had been a bit of a spate of such pranks. Brown stood up to his full 6'5" and thundered something along the lines of 'If I don't get my keys back in 5 minutes I'll do what I did at Hawick last week'

The keys duly reappeared and as he sat down the guy next to him asked 'What did you do at Hawick?' 'Got a taxi home' replied Brown.

In reply to JoshOvki:


What actually surprised/ shocked me wasn't the behaviour of the individuals who did this but the reactions of everyone else. I'm not in any way criticising the people on the receiving end - quite the contrary, they were warm-hearted, open and hospitable people who were eager to share their birthday celebrations with us - and we had the odd student among us too. However, their immediate reaction when this happened was to blame themselves for not locking up properly, given that they'd known there were students around. I guess that took me aback and I seem to be struggling to take that one on board, though given their hut's situation and the way things panned out, I kind of get the feeling this may not have been the first time similar things had happened. The people in the student club went through the motions, but it seemed to me that they thought the problem was really the people doing the complaining rather than the people being complained about and that for them, the issue was really all about getting us to go away and leave them alone.

As for taking it up with the club - is there any point I wonder? I imagine that most university clubs are run by second-year students, and that if there isn't a complete change in the committee members each year, then the ones who do stick around would perhaps be those who do a masters degree, so they might be involved two or three years on the trot at most. This leaves me with the thought that maybe the only sensible reaction to this is to warn everyone else that when university clubs are around, you really should lock up your valuables and move on at the first opportunity? I would like to emphasise that I don't mean any disrespect to any of the members of student clubs who have responded to my mentioning this incident here in a responsible way. One of my most valued climbing partners over the past year has been someone who's just beginning their second year at uni. However, even if you yourselves run a really tight and well organised club right now, in one year's time or two at most I'd have thought, you will probably have been replaced by an entirely different bunch of people with entirely different attitudes.

In reply to peppermill:


Agreed again.

My experience of student clubs - from inside or outside - has been that they're generally as decent as anyone else and that any messing around tends to involve doing irresponsible things with minibuses and suchlike rather than being dickish to other people.

In general, if you've got a grievance with a student club then it's probably best to take it up with them directly or with the university rather than harbouring a grudge against all students.

In reply to Andy Morley:


Judging by your attitudes on another thread regarding teachers, I'd say this is a given.

Students are young, often drunk and prone to making mistakes. Inevitably they grow up and become older, get drunk less often and make different mistakes.

In reply to XXXX:

umm. if kids down your street walked into your house and did the same thing, would you take the same approach?

In reply to Andy Morley:

Its a nice hut that one. There always used to be a stash of porno mags amongst the pile of old climbing mags a few years ago. Anyway loud parties in the bunkhouse were always a feature whenever we stopped there but we never had anything cross the line like that and its the first time I've heard of it happening.

In reply to pebbles:

I'm not sure that's the same. But if it did happen, I certainly wouldn't hold a grudge against all children thereafter.

As it happens, my own child has destroyed a birthday cake and their favourite hobby is hiding my car keys where I won't find them.

In reply to XXXX:
why isnt it the same? its a couple of youngish individuals breaking into a property while drunk and doing damage, I dont see why it makes a difference if theyre students or not.

of course I'm not suggesting holding a grudge against student clubs in general because of what one club did any more than i'd hold it against a grudge against all climbers in general because one of them behaved badly. But this particular club needs to have a word with the people involved to make it clear that their behaviour wasnt acceptable on a club meet.

In reply to pebbles:

Then we're agreed. Behaviour was a mistake. Bearing a grudge against all students here on is prejudiced.

Out

In reply to Andy Morley:

At the risk of being a pedant, I always thought morons were nobs not knobs.....

In reply to Andy Morley:
My experience (having attended a great many Freshers' meets, including one last year) is that students now are considerably better behaved and more considerate than they were when I was an undergraduate. Some of the things I saw back in the 70s and 80s would simply not be tolerated today and I've been really impressed by the responsible behaviour of the students now using our huts.

Obviously there will occasionally be a few idiots who spoil it, but they do often turn out to be 'hangers on' who aren't members of the club and don't feel any sense of responsibility to the group- this part of the story rings true to me.

What happened in your case was completely out of order and I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of students there that weekend thought so too. I would follow up with a letter to the President of the club involved, asking what they were doing about it and what steps they were taking to ensure it wouldn't happen again. My bet would be you'd get a very civilised reply.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

To be honest I was quite exhausted by the time I'd read to the end of your OP and had lost the plot by then. It seems that you were quite upset that the students had broken into your hut and nicked a birthday cake as well as hiding someone's keys?

Quite understandable that you were pissed off. I would have raised merry hell with them, but what is it you are looking for from UKC?

In reply to pebbles:


My guess is that it would be a feature of university clubs that they have a very rapid succession of people holding office as well as probably an almost 100% turnover of members. That makes taking any individuals to task a fairly futile exercise, however much it might satisfy the person doing it.

If the organisers of this or any other university club want to do something positive with their year in office, my suggestion is that they should draw up some kind of code of practice (if there isn't one already) aimed specifically at clubs of this kind, and then either try to get it agreed nationwide or get it better-publicised if there already is one. Some very basic steps like warning other people when herds of students are likely to descend wouldn't cost much effort but would save innocent bystanders a lot of unnecessary expense and aggravation. Like for example the people who went home early from Boulder Central exactly a week ago today after they'd paid their seven quid, because two coach-loads of freshers from one or other of the Birmingham Unis turned up and completely clogged the place up.

In the Boulder Central example, no-one was doing anything wrong and it's perfectly legitimate for anyone to turn up at any public venue at any time, but all the same, some advance warning would have saved a whole load of other people from quite a lot of inconvenience. It would have been a nice gesture - whether it would have been feasible to put in practice or not, I have no idea, but it would be good if someone at least looked into it. When you account for the fact that whenever you ship large numbers of people around (and particularly if alcohol's involved) sooner or later someone will misbehave, then it seems to me that some kind of nationally-agreed code of practice that gave club organisers some idea of what they should and should not be doing would be a start at least.

Is there any such code of practice already in existence?

In reply to Andy Morley:

It's not so much a code of practice as a generally accepted convention not to behave like a selfish tw*t around people you don't know.

In reply to Andy Morley:

I was quite involved in my uni student climbing club back in the 90s and the first away trip of the year with all the new members was always planned so to be as far away as from other groups as was logistically possible. So we never shared huts, always tried to book places outright or with camping made sure we were in the field far from everyone else. Sadly experience taught us that in the new intake there were always a few twa*ts who would ruin it for everyone around them so we at least tried to mitigate any potential offence. Unfortunately throwing a bunch of 18/19 years olds together who have not long been away from home and adding alcohol always produced interesting results. Generally the trouble makers dropped out of the club within a few weeks and the decent folk remained allowing us to organise trips with less trepidation.

In reply to KevinD:


It's all a bit odd, it's Andy Morley. In this case it's trying to pretend to hold some moral high ground by resolutely refusing to name them, whilst simultaneously giving them away.

I'd be more worried that my daughter saw one bunch of students and decided on that evidence never to get an education. But then if my daughter did that I wouldn't come onto the internet claiming it proves what bastards students are.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Like Dave G I think students these days are pretty well behaved compared to past antics. The views of your hut companions make a lot of sense in that context (irrespective of how bad the students behaved its best to cut their opportunities of doing it in your hut) and its strange you don't see that. I'd be writing to the University SU or AU if it happened to me.

Like others I think its its pretty off to refuse to name names and then make it blatantly obvious who (and thence where) it is...

In reply to Andy Morley:

Would have been more of a result for the rest of us if they had hidden your laptop! x Only joking - they were being tw@ts

In reply to Andy Morley:

Hello, I am the Chair of the University of Sheffield Mountaineering Club. Our Club was in Eric’s Barn this weekend, when the incident happened. We had a great weekend where almost 70 students climbed and walked, and many freshers experienced their first mulitpitch climbing at Tremadog.

Unfortunately the weekend was spoiled by the actions of a few people who were also in the area. These people are ex-club members who left university years ago and have gone on to well-paid, full time jobs, some of which are in the outdoor industry. Despite the fact that these people are not a part of our Club and were not on the trip with us, I would like to apologise personally, on behalf of our committee and our members, that your weekend was affected by this incident.

We are disgusted and ashamed by the actions of adults who should really know better. I have spoken to the ex-club members and if you could provide me with the contact details of those affected, they would like to apologise for their actions.

I would, however, like to point out that at the time that our members were confronted, they were unaware of the situation as they were asleep when it happened, so were understandably confused. In addition to this, neither I nor any other committee members were present in the morning as we were leading freshers climbing and walking, still unaware of the incident. Had you chosen to raise your concerns with me when I returned, I would have been more than happy to discuss them with you at the time, and not publicly on UKC.

I would also like to reaffirm that the incidents that took place were caused by adults who are no longer affiliated with our club, and as such it seems wrong to generalise and formulate a bad view of university climbing clubs. Student clubs are one of the best ways to learn to climb in an extraordinarily friendly and safe environment, where members progress from beginners to experienced mountaineers, and often return years after. The ex-members are aware that they have spoiled this for any future graduates, as unfortunately we will now be forced to forbid ex-members meeting us on our weekends away.

To finish, I would like to say that we have stayed in Eric’s Barn for many years for our freshers weekend, and have always maintained a good rapport with other climbers in the area, as well as Eric’s Barn. The last thing we want is to spoil the climbing community’s view of our Club, and students in general, but most importantly Eric’s Barn and the amazing crags of Tremadog. If you would like to contact me directly, please email mountaineering@sheffield.ac.uk. Thanks.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Your (so long to say so little!) post doesn't appear to have much to do with university climbing clubs, more the apparently poor and bizarre behavior of individuals who may or may not have been part of a uni climbing club.

Enjoy either avoiding students or letting their tyres down, whichever you decide best floats your boat.

jk

In reply to Sheffield Uni Mountaneering:

Well said, and exactly the response I would have expected.

In reply to Dave Garnett:


Given the logistics involved in organising stuff like this, plus the presumed inexperience of the people organising such events, it seems to me that relying on a 'generally accepted convention' doesn't quite cut the mustard.

In reply to Andy Morley:

I'm still not any the wiser to what happened

In reply to Andy Morley:
"OK, I can see that you're a d*ck, but you're not a d*ck that has anything to do with me, so go away and lead your life and hopefully, our paths will never cross again."

I am disappointed that you formed such an opinion of me in the short time we spoke. I also am very sorry that I did not handle the situation better. When confronted it was the first I had heard of what had happened, obviously I was surprised and embarrassed, however I wasn't sure what to do about it I thought it my responsibility to report it to the committee so they could decide on what actions to take, sadly non of the committee members were around as they were all busy leading activities. So I tried to assure you that I would find out who was responsible. As luck would have it, the first person I asked was able to tell me what I wanted to know. Having heard who it was I was relieved that they weren't under the clubs supervision, I also didn't want it to give the student climbing community bad press, as they weren't students, so I tried to convey this information to you as soon as possible.

Sadly it appears my attempts were in vain and you came away not only seeming to dislike me, but also having formed a highly negative stereotype of the student climbing community. It upsets me that the actions of one or two people can cause someone to develop such an irrational dislike and prejudice against a group of people which contains, for the majority, well behaved friendly and good natured people.

As for your daughters education, I think university is a great place, the diversity of people and characters is amazing, and the opportunities to not only learn more, but to experience new things and meet new people are huge. I would not however advise going into full time work because, as we can see from our sub sample of people this weekend, all people who have full time jobs get drunk and play immature practical jokes.

In reply to Offwidth:


Agreed. My club were terrible. But then at the time it all felt very rock and roll and rebellious. Some members even smoked weed and everything. How cool were they!?

In reply to Sheffield Uni Mountaneering:


From where I'm sitting, this has a little too much of an air of self-justification, of sloping shoulders and of failing to engage with some of the underlying issues to impress me much. However, judging from the number of 'likes' you've got, you've made sterling work of creating a quite commendable PR statement and since you're obviously very good at that, I'll leave you to contact the people who were directly on the receiving end.

I should just point out though that if one of the people involved in all the turmoil surrounding lost car keys had not been particularly astute and spotted the missing cake and done some digging, those guys would have concluded that they had dropped the keys and would have had to do four or five hundred miles of totally unnecessary driving and wouldn't have found the missing keys until months if not years later. If that alternative scenario had played out as it easily could have, I don't believe that any of your club would have had any idea that this had happened.

I also think it's interesting that as soon as that one very astute individual did put two and two together and nipped next door, it took him less than five minutes or so to find someone amongst your befuddled, sleepy crew who knew exactly what had gone on. That person then walked straight into our hut, right up to the very specific place where the keys were hidden and pulled them out, then walked right out again pretty much without saying a word. He didn't look very sleepy to me.

You've chosen to identify yourself, the people and the place, which is your call. But the underlying, more general point which caught my attention, and still catches my attention as a largely uninvolved observer is the reactions of everyone else around. The initial reaction of the victims of this 'prank' was that it was somehow their fault for not noticing that students were about and for not locking up securely. Then, the whole demeanour of the people who they asked about it and that I subsequently spoke to was also that this was somehow our fault, and didn't we know that this was just students behaving the way students were supposed to behave? And now, what I'm picking up from your reaction and from that of some of the others around here is that somehow, all of this is now my fault for having had the temerity to mention it.

I'm not going to apologise to any of the other commentators for giving the impression that I was taking the moral high ground - in actual fact, games and contests of that nature don't particularly interest me and having seen your response above, I can certainly recognise someone who's a better spin-doctor than I am, so I'll leave all that to you. But to your point that it's "wrong to generalise" about university mountaineering clubs - I disagree. You are all under similar constraints aren't you? You all have the same sort of turnover of both managing committees and members don't you? I'm really a bit disappointed that you've gone down the path of self-justification and blaming other people, rather than engaging in a more positive way with my suggestion that some sort of code of practice for university mountaineering clubs might help fix this sort of thing in a practical way, since you're all facing pretty similar challenges.

Given that no-one here has come up with any specific answer to my question about it, I think it's safe to assume that there isn't any code of practice for uni clubs of this kind. Don't you think that having one might be a good idea, in the light of all this?

In reply to Andy Morley:


Right, so what exactly did you expect them to do about this thing they had no idea had happened? Seems to me you are targeting the wrong people here. The parties responsible aren't part of the conversation. The people who have been honest enough to engage with you have apologised and it's clear they were not personally involved.


Why do you keep going on about a code of conduct? Do you need written guidance not to steal and destroy other people's property? No? Then don't you think that the average undergraduate, even someone as subversive as a member of a university climbing club, might already know this too? Given that the guilty parties here were not current members of the club, why do you think it would help anyway?

Do you find that people play practical jokes on you quite a lot? I'm starting to understand why they might.

In reply to Andy Morley:

It works for everyone else and when it doesn't there's always the law to fall back on.

p.s. You're coming across as a right petulant prat. Do keep it up, I'm enjoying the spectacle.

Despite not having been wronged yourself you've kicked up a big fuss and had an apology from someone who it seems really doesn't need to be apologising to you or anyone else for that matter yet all you've managed in turn is to insult him and another unconnected person. Grow up!
jk

In reply to Andy Morley:

Ex university club president here (not Sheffield). Given that the facts now seem pretty well established, what difference do you think a code of practice would have made in this particular case?

Strikes me as a classic case of a few dickheads being dickheads and spoiling everyone else's fun. That kind of person will not magically stop being a dickhead because of some written rules, I don't think many people need a code of practice to tell them that the events you describe were unacceptable. They've said that these people can't ever attend their trips again, what more can be done?

In reply to Andy Morley:

I'm not really involved either way but I'm bored at work. You had the moral high ground everyone thought you did. but to still be angry after all this has been said makes you seem irrational:

"I also am very sorry that I did not handle the situation better."

"We are disgusted and ashamed by the actions of adults who should really know better."

"These people are ex-club members who left university years ago and have gone on to well-paid, full time jobs"

"they would like to apologise for their actions."

"I would like to apologise personally, on behalf of our committee and our members, that your weekend was affected by this incident."

"unfortunately we will now be forced to forbid ex-members meeting us on our weekends away"

The committee has apologised the offenders have offered personal apologies and been ostracised by the club, the club members you spoke to had no idea what had happened as they had been asleep so their sloping shoulders seem totally reasonable, and the club has made policy changes that will stop events like this happening again. What more could you possibly want them to do? you first confronted them you thought they were lying and now the more they apologise the more you think they're on a PR campaign. What extra could they do to prove to you that they are genuine?

Do you think that having a club code of ethics (which they certainly have) would have stopped non club members from getting drunk and playing a stupid prank? if you do then why did your own club's code of ethics not stop the incident since they were also not members of your club?

In reply to Andy Morley:
Bloody hell! You are like a dog with a bone.

You have had an apology from the University Club concerned and from an individual.

Why can't you accept them graciously rather than going on and on and on!?

As I said in my previous post what are you looking for from UKC, why are you involving us?

In reply to Andy Morley:
As a member of the club I would like to cast light on a point on which you are confused. In our discussions today we have managed to find out the person who found the keys in the morning was the person who had moved them in the first place, probably as he was feeling guilty and trying to correct the results of his behavior in the night. He and the others involved are not as we already said members of the club or the university.

In reply to Sheffield Uni Mountaneering:
Fair play for holding up your hands.

"Had you chosen to raise your concerns with me when I returned, I would have been more than happy to discuss them with you at the time, and not publicly on UKC. "

This may have been preferable for you but you can't just turn this around at Andy.
There is a lesson to be learned here; in the world of the internet, news travels quickly, especially bad news, and sometimes kicking up a fuss in public gets things moving a lot quicker than otherwise.
Without suggesting that Andy is being malicious, anyone wanting to do so has all the tools to do so.

You raise a point that maybe you need to make sure that you have a representative/contact point more easily identifiable and available for people to raise any concerns with you directly.

As a former club committee member and trips officer (not in your club) I'm amazed/somewhat impressed you manage to pull off such large scale trips (we used to struggle to find 2 minibuses available on a weekend).
Your popularity is obviously a blessing and a curse.

In reply to dom94:


In my view (as an ex-president of a climbing club) is once someone is part of your trip, then you as a club are responsible for them, much in the same way as you are for the other members of the trip. They should be told what is expected of them, and the committee/trip leader should try their best to have them ahdear to that.

In reply to gethin_allen:
I disagree. Its impractical to have a point of contact at all times. It looks like the club did the best they could at the time, have responded now to clear things up, it clearly wasn't them, yet they have apologised for the association and taken measures to deal with things in the future.

As another ex Uni club official who recognises fun can spill into problems at times, I continue to be impressed by SUMC... its impossible to fully control grown adults as a club committee but you can do the best you can about such behaviour afterwards.

In reply to JoshOvki:


Absolutely. They were part of the trip even if they weren't still members.

Wally

In reply to Andy Morley:


Oh come on. You named the club for all intents and purposes. Whilst there are some stalwarts who will disagree with Sheffield being the top rockclimbing city it will be the default option for many. It then took 5 mins googling max to find out the location, the famous climber and the club who own the hut where you stayed.


Most clubs do have a code of conduct although normally it doesnt go much beyond dont be a muppet. The university and SU generally take complaints seriously and will take action. Although in this case they have said they will be banning former members in future so I am not sure what more you want at this stage?

In reply to Andy Morley:

I'll wade in, as another Ex-Student Club President, I'd have done pretty much exactly what they've done in such a situation. Not sure that as an organisation they could do anything more really and the idea that a code of practice would have made a blind bit of difference is frankly laughable.

In reply to Andy Morley:

You've got your ideas about university clubs mixed up somewhat, most people who are keen are members of the club for 3 years and unless they split their studies with an industrial placement are able to remain on committee for 2 or 3 years depending on if they are doing bachelor's or master's degrees, there is plenty of chance for people who have been on committee the previous year to not only help out while people are new to their roles but also to provide a good influence on any young members of the club.
The vast majority of clubs will have a code of conduct which ultimately boils down to "don't be a dick".

In reply to Andy Morley:

Having started the thread I reckon that now might be a good time for you to do the right thing & bring it to a close. You could do this by accepting what many on here think has been a decent, considered response - complete with apologies and some actions.

Should you carry on with what appears to be revealing some kind of underlying ill-feeling towards 'students' you'll become the subject of scorn - even ridicule. Yes, I'm sometimes irritated by noisy young 'uns (and oldies) on the hill. But making the kind of generalisations you have been is pretty pathetic.

So just call it quits - good point made, job done & move on. Nobody physically hurt, no top-roping done, no boulderers insulted. Enough.

In reply to Bogwalloper:


I'd say the above is one of the salient points, and worth noting.

I'd hope that no-one here would want to discourage university mountaineering clubs - I would in fact expect the opposite. However, I find it disturbing that there seems to be an expectation in some quarters that I should collude in a cover-up of behaviour that I can only describe as 'vindictive' - sneaking into a building occupied by complete strangers who haven't done that person any harm at all and then to do something calculated to cause them massive inconvenience. It's not my job to collude in any cover up, nor is it my job to 'out' such people - but I can and will comment on anything that grabs my attention in this arena.

Those of us who have been uni students and who can remember the experience can probably also recall how most first-years don't have a clue about anything but still put themselves out there nonetheless, how most third-years are only thinking about their finals, and how it therefore falls to second-years to do most of the organising of most uni societies - I don't know if that applies to this, that or the other specific club but at a general level, it seems to be what goes on. It's a lot to expect of people who still don't have a lot of practical experience of such things to organise some of the ambitious programmes of activity that they do, and I would second the congratulations offered to those who pull it off. But I don't think that justifies a cover-up when things go wrong.

It strikes me that one way of compensating for the inevitable haemorrhage of experience that happens as each cohort of uni students departs from such clubs would be to capture their knowledge into some sort of a crib-sheet for the newly arriving committees to use as a guide as to what to think about and what to avoid. I'm not suggesting some restrictive or bureaucratic set of rules - just a simple list of obvious points that still might not occur to someone who's new to the game. Very basic things like:
"If you organise a trip, and people come along on that trip, then they're part of that trip whether they're on your society members list or not, unless you formally exclude them."

Maybe some uni clubs do have written guidelines but I'm willing to bet that many don't. Since it's probably the same set of challenges for most uni mountaineering clubs across the land, why re-invent the wheel over and over? Why not co-operate in a joint venture?

Students are often encouraged to go in for committee roles on university societies because it will "look good on their c.v.s." If they accept that challenge, then one very big opportunity arising from that, would be to do something along these lines - it seems like such an obvious need that this episode has highlighted. Self-regulation is usually reckoned to be the best kind of regulation and although a certain amount of prompting might be needed, that shouldn't stop some of the more responsible second-year students, or whoever else from considering this suggestion. If you are about to embark on an academic year at the helm of one of these clubs and if you think that there is a real need here, why wouldn't you do something about it, especially if it might do your future career prospects some good at the same time?

In reply to Andy Morley:

Must have been some cake.

In reply to Andy Morley:

You don't have the courtesy to respond to anyone who doesn't share your viewpoint so quite why you expect anyone to engage with your latest ramblings is beyond me.

In reply to Calum Wadsworth:

Could I suggest that you don't hold such large trips if you have neither the experience or maturity to supervise them responsibly.
Next time you may well find yourself on the receiving end of a well deserved kicking.

In reply to muppetfilter:

Yes, because violence is always the answer.

I don't wish to be rude but are you always such a tw*t?

In reply to muppetfilter:


So, you hold yourself personally responsible for the actions of all adults who join a meet you are leading?


To the point where you would expect to be assaulted on their behalf? That's ridiculous on so many levels, I'm guessing you don't actually do much of this.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

I assume that muppetfilter has the filter bit turned off!

I would like to take this opportunity to say that I was one of the culprits, in particular the one who moved the keys. I will in no way try to defend my actions in the following. I was a dick. I know I was a dick, it was a stupid thing to do, as soon as someone came to ask about the keys I went and handed them over and apologised to the injured party. I will also be contacting the club who own the hut and Eric to clarify that I am not a student, wasn't on the trip with the students, all the students were asleep when the frankly ridiculous behaviour took place and point out to them as well that I am a royal anus.

I can't speak for the other people involved, but personally I am extremely embarrassed by my behaviour and will be doing my utmost to resolve the situation as promptly as I can and hope the actions of someone who has finished university and knew better before he even attended won't be held against the club.

Again, I behaved appallingly and if any of the club affected, particularly the owner of the keys, see this I would like you to know that I am truly sorry.

As for the good gentleman Andy Morely, I don't have an apology for you. I have one for the club who own the hut, one for the owner of the keys, one for the University of Sheffield Mountaineering Club and one for Eric Jones, but I just checked in my sorry pocket and there wasn't one for the person with pointy elbows.

I behaved terribly. If the hut owners had decided to take things further I would have been thoroughly understanding. And by the sounds of it, they were willing to let it go fairly easily. I don't really understand why you got so worked up about it. You even said that it hadn't had any impact on you.

Clearly you do have an axe to grind. If you would like to supply me with your address I will be happy to send you a file, whetstone and a Tupperware box that you can defecate in to send me. You've obviously had some previous experience that has caused you to feel the need to get involved with other people£s concerns after they hav, for all intents and purposes, been resolved.

I wouldn't go so far as to call you a war criminal, but your "not naming names" bit holds about as much water as "Saddam has WMDs" and "we didn't mean to blow up that hospital in Kunduz". Any attempt take the moral high ground has long since gone out the window so I would like to officially welcome you to The Step Of People Who Do Silly Things. Good evening.

If, and I have a feeling you do, you want to continue the conversation please do feel free to contact me directly as I feel my vocabulary could be immeasurably improved by another of your delightful essays. I could also supply you with a shiny gold star that you can pin to your chest so everyone can see.

So, in conclusion. I am very sorry for my actions and will be making this known officially to the people whose keys I moved.

Sincerely,
Fran

P.S, to all those that feel the need to type profanities but are so afraid of naughty words that they sensor them.... willy, bum, poo

In reply to franhammond92:
I'm upset. You can say willy, bum and poo but it censors my tw*t!

In reply to franhammond92:

So it's not called the 'High Peak Club' anymore?

In reply to franhammond92:

That was all going so well

Until it turned out that you were more interested in taking a sarcastic swipe at Andy Morley than you were in actually apologising

And so proved that your assessment of yourself in your first paragraph continues to be a fair one

In reply to franhammond92:

You're not a royal anus - you're a c*unt.

Someone mentioned violence earlier on. Justified I reckon.

Wally

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
Yeah what an absolute wanker. Turned this whole thread on it's head. Well done Fran Hammond.
All the good words spoken by Callum and University of Sheffield Mountaineering Club undone in one post. What a dick.

Wally

Just to clarify, the above wasn't my official apology. I'll be doing that through a more sencible medium than UKC forums. I simply wanted to join in in on what made a highly entertaining evenings read.

Getting to irritate so many people has given an otherwise regrettable occasion a thin line of happiness. I just wish AndyF had gotten involved. Then I'd know I'd made it to the top in UKC!

Night all, I have some actual apologising to do

In reply to franhammond92:
I'm guessing you were born in 92? One of the reasons I NEVER employ people under the age of 30. Too much risk in getting a twat like you.

Wally

In reply to franhammond92:
It's sensible.

In reply to franhammond92:

Well done you.

You must be so proud.

Still, the whole episode has given you a chance to develop as a human being.

Albeit one which you have spectacularly spurned. At least it's all been in public, stops people getting the wrong impression about you...

Cheers

Gregor

In reply to Dave the Rave:

It might be.

He's not though

If that's not a made up name he's using, its probably the most ill advised contribution to a thread I can remember.

In reply to Andy Morley:

All this could have been sorted out with a bit of soft-touch ultra-violence at the time and wouldn't have resulted in the generation of this amount of tedious sanctimonious prose . What's wrong with people these days?

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:




Indeed. I thought that Fran was a girls name though?

In reply to Andy Morley:


Been there, written it (for a non-mountaineering club that I was on the committee for about 10 years ago). Nevertheless, the same mistakes have been made 2-3 times by that club in the intervening time.

Keeping knowledge in a student club for more than 3 years is very tricky indeed...

In reply to Andy Morley:

Hi there Andy, just preserved through this thread and your (incredibly lengthy posts!) and thought I'd try and clarify your points!
Obviously the pranks were not ok and a total dick move on the part of those involved. Their behaviour was totally unacceptable and if I had also observed this I'm sure that I too would be annoyed!
I'm not entirely sure what your daughter's repulsion towards students had to do with your frustration though. If she were to persue higher education there's no obligation for her to join a bunch of graduates being plonkers and to use that as a reason to not go seems strange. Maybe you should address her concerns and misconceptions instead of using them to needlessly illustrate your online ramblings and leaving her opinions open to the ridicule of internet strangers?
Another query I have is concerning what you wanted to happen as a result of your post? You wanted some kind of handover to be instigated to ensure it doesn't happen again? As the prompt reply from USMC and their clarification that the incident has impacted their guidelines for the future indicates that they fully took your criticisms on board. They do in fact have a handover meeting annually, which ensures the club's continual improvement and growth. Does that clear up your confusion a little?

In reply to Sheffield Uni Mountaneering:

A few points:


You can't simply disown people who have met with you and are hanging out at your accomodation with you. They certainly were on your trip, take some responsibility.



I'm trying to work out what you are. Are you a child?


A general protocol would be to not invite idiots, ex-member or not. Ensure that people within the group behave, members of the public do not care about member or alumni status and you shouldn't try to avoid responsibility by using that distinction.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Well that was quite a long thread wasn't it?

I would like to reiterate that you need to be more succinct.
Please don't reply. The moderators need to have a break from checking through so much text.
I think that all respondents have had their fun (and angst) out of this thread so I think that should be the end. A point at which all can reflect in their own time.

Oh well, it's amazing what you can find when you turn over a stone.

But to Calum, who was the only one of those involved who struck me as at all genuine in what they had to say - I'm sorry I misjudged you.

In reply to climbwhenready:

I don’t think it is that hard to retain a core of knowledge within the club, when I was at uni, (pre Facebook and ter'internet) we had a couple of large files that were handed down from committee to committee that contained all sorts of guidelines and advice for those taking up the mantle of running the club. Some bright spark about 10 years before I had joined the club had instigated this ‘book of knowledge’ and it covered everything from how to organise a weekend away (mostly checklists) through to registers of club equipment (age of ropes, history of any significant falls on said ropes etc) through to a directory of campsites/bunk houses that were amenable and suitable to student groups. A strong emphasis was placed on committee and senior members of the club to bring new members up to speed on basic climbing etiquette both at the wall and on the crag. I think if the will is there it is possible to make sure that new club committee members are not starting from scratch when they assume roles of responsibility.

But as it has been alluded to several times on this thread if someone is a tw*t then guidelines or codes of conduct are not going to make much difference to their behavior then it is up to you as a club to bring them into line or expel them from the club.

In reply to Andy Morley:

It seems to me that one person had an incident with a small group of students and they have tried to suggest that all other students are the same?

Your post should be the name of the uni club, if you wanted, even though you have been told that the party involved weren't members, and you should leave the rest of the uni clubs out of it.

In reply to Andy Morley:

That's been a fascinating read. I don't think many people come out of it very well.

I'm in my late thirties and I'm still an active member of my university club; if you can be bothered to do a search it won't be hard to work out which one. I am by no means unusual in this respect - I doubt there's been a club meet for many years that's not had at least a couple of members in their late twenties or beyond present. And I'm quite sure it's a hugely beneficial thing for a climbing club to have members who've been around for a long time, not simply because they will tend to be more mature but also because they remember things having happened before and can offer advice when the same situation crops up again.

I have come into contact with quite a few uni clubs where there aren't any long term members, where the limit of living memory is about three or four years ago, and it's obvious that the store of accumulated experience can come and go, and the whole club ethos can shift in the space of a year.

The reason I'm saying this is to give a simple message to the club concerned: there is no reason to ban all alumni members as a result of this, and I think it would be harmful and counter-productive to do so. They are a great resource and you should be thinking of ways to best use them.

You just need to ban this tosspot who calls him/herself Fran.

In reply to Andy Morley:

It has been pretty hilarious watching the mass exodus of the moral high ground.

In reply to C Chullain:


This sounds like a great system that you used to have, but I'd be surprised if all uni clubs are quite as organised as the one you describe. Also, it would only take one break in the chain for the 'book of knowledge' to actually get physically lost. I kind of think that in a past life I might actually have seen that happen... When I was a student, the uni climbing club met at my student house because a couple of my housemates happened to be members - they also had slide shows and that kind of thing, all very impressive. I never joined formally in any way - I was just a 'hanger on' through sharing the house - they did serious stuff like go to the Himalayas in their holidays whereas I spent my holidays having to earn money. I'm still in touch with one of them - he did a slide-show in my present house only this year; I could ask him but I seem to remember that in some kind of student cataclysm, a bit like the one we've just seen here perhaps, some of them may have fallen out with some of the others or something similar. I think that their club's doing very nicely now but it's no longer a student club, it's based around the local climbing wall and my friend, though a founder member and very active in mountaineering more generally, is no longer active in that club for whatever reason. Sh*t happens, all of the time, what we've seen here is nothing new but it's good to have measures in place to stop it from derailing things completely.

Since established climbers seem to want to encourage student clubs (and rightly so), surely some kind of national-based project could be a really useful way to do that? To your final point, I would have thought that maybe 80% of problems like this are foreseeable and preventable, and with the remaining 20% or whatever that can't be avoided, if people at least have been given at least some basic grounding in how to respond, then they're better placed to limit the damage.

In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I think the presence of a 'senior member' who keeps an eye on the committee is a pretty good idea. Sometimes this is formalised, with a member of staff co-opted onto the committee, sometimes it's a less formal relationship between a university club and an external club, especially if it's their huts that are being used (the University of Birmingham and the MAM is an example I know well).

It also really helps to have some post-grads around to provide continuity (and potential minibus drivers).

And hi, by the way - I've only just clicked who you are!

In reply to Dave Garnett:


It's good to have examples of existing arrangements that work, but the only disadvantage I can see is that what works for one uni wouldn't necessarily work for another. Generally, the long-term trend is for universities to move away from any arrangements involving their teaching staff in anything that looks like 'pastoral care' - that's why most universities have things like counselling services, so that lecturers don't have to do that sort of thing. As for the equally sensiible suggestion that university clubs should draw on the expertise of their past members, that's certainly something they could benefit from but if anyone tried to implement that in some sort of blanket way, all sorts of rivalries and tensions might emerge between the current crop of students who might want to enjoy their oppurtinity to make their mark, and past students who might want to hang on to their cherished club. I'm not for a moment suggesting that the guy who was apologising yesterday is at all typical of recent graduates, but it does demonstrate that tensions and rivalries between past and present students might possibly spill over and cause further problems of one sort or another.

My suggestion would be that some organisation like the BMC should set up some kind of federation of university clubs that specific clubs could affiliate to if they wished. That could provide a basic central set of guiding principles as a starting point - uni clubs could then document their own sets of measures tailored to their own needs and get them vetted and approved by whoever ran the scheme. Something like that could potentially be a win-win solution for everyone. It would demonstrate that established climbers and mountaineers were helping to develop new talent and it could help student clubs to achieve continuity while keeping any potentially interfering third party at arms' length so that they had the space to do their own thing. But it would also give students running those clubs the opportunity to participate in setting up the accreditation for their club and then maintaining it, so that they would get the sort of brownie points on their c.v.s that some of them are looking for when they put themselves forward for running uni clubs.

In reply to Andy Morley:
Christ. The world is being taken over by bureaucrats. Climbing at uni should be about having good times with new friends, maybe picking up a few new skills on the way. Students also 'study', you know - climbing is supposed to be fun, not a substitute for work.

In reply to Andy Morley:


Wow. I was thinking more in terms of having a friendly member of staff available to offer the occasional wise word and, if required, post bail.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:


Good point - the alternative approach; who needs clubs anyway? Get rid of them and the problem that triggered this thread simply goes away as you no longer get herds of people being bussed about to crags or climbing walls and flattening everything in their path.

It's not as daft an idea as it might sound to the traditionalists (who will probably rise up to a man in shock and horror at the idea) - according to one of my friends, he read an article that suggested that clubs are old school and that the way forward is just for individuals to hook up via Facebook or wherever.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Clubs do have practical advantages.

At one end of the scale you have student clubs. You have a bunch of people who are time rich and cash poor, and it makes sense to pool resources for things like minibuses. Bloody awful way to travel but they are cheap and work.

Then at the other end you have people who are short of time but can afford to travel. A predictable meet list is good because they can pick trips they really want to do and plan in advance. I'm really starting to appreciate this as my climbing career is about to give way to sleepless nights and bum wiping...

In the middle I don't think clubs matter. In my 20s and early 30s I could just bugger off and do things. At that point I think a facebook group would have done the job nicely if it had existed. They do require a certain amount of flexibility tht comes with being flush with cash and not too busy though.

Another unrelated issue is that if you have a group of more than 4 or 5 people then you start getting organisational bullshit with car shares and hut bookings. You find yourself doing as much work as you would in a club with no "club fund" to fall back on if you get stitched up at the last minute.

Eliminate clubs and someone will reinvent them.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Are you getting paid by the word? You seem to take a lot of words to say not very much.
Universities and the relevant Student Unions will almost certainly have a code of conduct for their clubs.
However this will not stop people acting like pricks from time to time. It only means that, if reported, they will be held to account. Which looks to have happened in this case.
The BMC does offer some support to student clubs including seminars although I dont know the exact details of what is covered where.

In reply to Calum Wadsworth:
Surely the best name for a climber ever!

Please tell me it's not just a UKC alias :p

In reply to davidbeynon:


I agree. If a student upsets you and he's younger/ stronger/ fitter than you are, all you need is a nice hefty club and a little bit of sneakiness and - sorted. I find a pickaxe handle works for me.

But seriously, what that brings us back to is bureaucracy - when Max Weber invented the term he saw it as being more efficient than the ad-hoc systems that existed beforehand because it was systematic and organised. Those are the kind of arguments you are advancing - economies of scale and that sort of thing. This brings us round in a circle right back to where the conversation was before because if you do have a lot of very similar quite large clubs hiring minibusses and making a bit of a hit on the environment, both the natural environment and the human environment, as they themselves would probably not appreciate anyone else wanting to put any kind of a brake on all that activity, it would therefore make sense if they were to regulate themselves, effectively and consistently on a more general basis.

In reply to KevinD:


You're in a similar vein to that other guy who had attention-span issues. If you don't like it, take yourself off and read something shorter.

In reply to Andy Morley:
Maybe I'm a ridiculous idealist but I think that in the main they do regulate themselves pretty well. It's the same thing you get with any group - 99% of them are invisible because they aren't doing anything stupid.

Same thing with bikers - you are driving along, and a couple of loonies pass you at 120mph on a blind bend. You hardly see anyone else on a bike. Why? Are they all insane organ donors or are most of them are doing the speed limit and you don't pass one another?

Any group of people will have idiots. You can't always spot who they are in advance so you are left with the problem of dealing with them after the fact. Without the force of law then banning them is the best you can do, and it looks as though you got that.

Disclaimer: I'm an old git who still gatecrashes uni club trips 20 years after I should have stopped. I certainly drink too much but as far as I know I have done little worse than wear silly hats and talk bollocks. Cake stealing is not one of my sins.

On the students being younger/fitter side. Certainly all younger, some of them are fitter but I can still give a lot of them a nasty surprise walking up hill

In reply to davidbeynon:
OK David Beynon, I think I like you, so I'm going to cease p*ssing about or pretending that I'm writing a student essay, because you're making some sensible points here. Think of me as if I were some kind of a travel writer. I mean, I'm not, but like Andy Warhol said, we're all famous for 15 minutes, so in my 15 minutes, I'm a travel writer. As such, I can write about being in my student house and I'm visiting the room next door... Cool, those really are the Himalayas there. This is the pre-internet world, so these slides really are a big deal - they're proper slides too, little bits of celluloid in a cardboard frame that goes in this crazy machine that smells of overheated dust from the bright light that can only escape through the celluloid picture.
"Here is a roadside tea-station. They put sugar in the pot and they use condensed milk - it's the only sort of tea anyone drinks and it's just what you need in these conditions". John's voice is precise, clipped even. Everyone is sitting up, paying attention - it's a real contrast to my room next door, full of stoned bikers who poke their head around the door, looking for me and just don't know what to make of this strange world that blurrily unfolds before them as they go "oops, OK" and take their heads back out again. Fast-forward 20 years, and John has hired a whole youth hostel for his 40th. I'm there with my kids now, running around getting under everybody's feet. And hey, there in the youth hostel kitchen is a real-live Sherpa or something rather like one to my untutored eye.... Not a Sherpa actually, he's from Pakistan, they've flown him over here specially for the celebrations and it's probably the first time he's ever been away from his home village where John's mates go each year to take paying yuppies up Everest. The guide - I can't remember his name - has brought with him a hundredweight sack of gram-flour and he's making chapatis on the youth hostel stove because that's what you do when you go away on an expedition - it's his job. I'm here, taking this all in - is this a club? Is this a business? Is it a bunch of mates? Whatever it is, for me it's an adventure, the whole of life is one big adventure and talking bollox is a big part of that, an essential part even because talking bollox is how we make sense of it all. In my student house in the room next door to the student mountaineers, we talk bollox all the time. I don't know if we make any sense of it actually because we're all probably stoned, but we're having fun. I think I probably talk bollox less with John than I do with my biker mates because already, at 20, he is a man with a mission and so stands apart a little, but I feel that I can talk bollox with him if I want to. In fact, I am going to call him tonight and ask him about this bollox - not so much about this specific nonsense, but about this whole, new, rock-climbing phase of my life that I am going through right now and have been now for nearly two years. Student life is actually quite relevant to all this for me because it's like being back in that time all over again - throwing myself at the world in a new way and opening myself up to all sorts of new things, so I'll remind him of that weird, rabbit-warren of a student house. I can't refer him to any of this stuff here, probably just as well really, because he doesn't have a Facebook account even and UKC would mean nothing to him, but he will recognise the situation when I tell him about it. Why are there so many people here, David Beynon, who can't handle people talking the odd bit of bollox, not necessarily in a silly way, but more in the context of me pretending to be a travel writer? Why are they all so serious, or such prats when they try not to be serious? I mean, I can do serious, so if serious is what they want to be then I can propose bureaucratic schemes to curtail the growing menace of university climbing clubs that is threatening to take over our land and take all our jobs and rape our women and sodomise all our sheep in the gentle rolling meadows that lead to the crags of this, our beautous isle... Oh no, wait, that's immigration... But why is it that this online forum is full of people who, unlike me, are not pretending to be a travel writer but are pretending instead to be John Wayne? (a 'strong, silent' long dead actor). I mean, some of them seem to get so freaked out to be presented with more than two lines of text to read that you'd think someone had invited them to have sex with their mother. All part of life's rich tapestry I guess but what I really want to know is - am I in the right room here, or should I maybe go back to my biker mates or someone else?

It's a serious question actually. When I am pretending to be a travel writer, I can write about the hut I stayed in this weekend. It was full of lovely, mumsey people who made us cups of tea the instant we got there. It was like going to visit your nan and meeting all sorts of aunts and uncles and cousins you didn't know you had. Then, there was the student party going on next door and I can write about that too. Two of my kids snuck in there and ate their food on the Friday night. Now they know that, they'll probably try to say it was my kids who did all the pranking, since they seem to like blaming other people for stuff. This is where it gets edgy because when I write about that, people don't like it, but for me, writing about life's big adventure, you have to write about the bad stuff along with the good. Where would Lord of the Rings be without the Orcs and without Gollum and Sauron? For me, here on UKC, I seem to have blundered into a room full of really uptight people who seem to hate communication of any kind, let alone talking bollox, if it isn't the precise variety of bollox that they seem to want to see, whatever that is. If I write about how my daughter got so upset when the lovely, mumsey climbing club that was like my nan got their cake stolen, it really is like I'd farted in church. To me, it's just another aspect of the continuing story that is flowing around me as I speak, all the time, dipping in, sampling the information flow, capturing it in prose, writing poems about it even, talking bollox - definitely. So really, it's about making sense of the world through talking or writing or communicating in any way. It's what I do. It's what I've always done, me and my mates. Why do people in this room of this particular house react like John Wayne being chatted up by a gay guy or something when they get confronted by that?

In reply to Andy Morley:

Perhaps it isn't so much the quantity of your writing, it could be the turgid, verbose, quality.

In reply to Andy Morley:


I get that.


Because you wrongly extrapolated from the poorly understood particular to some poorly thought-through generalisations? At great length.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Sorry, could you summarise?

In reply to JJL:


Sure. If you don't like it, then f*ck off and read something else. No-one's forcing you to read this and it's not my job to provide you with entertainment. So in short, get a life, stop whining and stop being the person/ people who put the 'W' in 'anchor'.

In reply to Andy Morley:


See you dont always have to use 10000 words to argue your side of things.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Its a bit early for it, but I'm about to get a cup of tea, a few Hob-Nobs and sit back and watch the forthcoming entertainment.

Not sure that your "it's not my job to provide you with entertainment" remark is your attempt at irony

In reply to Andy Morley:

F*ck me! Are you still going on?

JW

In reply to Greenbanks:


It's an allusion to Robert Crumb.

In reply to John Ww:


OK, hold on while I break out the vaseline. Hope you don't mind if I blindfold you first? What you are about to receive might not be quite what you're expecting...

In reply to Andy Morley:

For the love of god please make him stop. I'm sorry. I don't know what I've done but I'm sorry. Please just make him stop.

You have to be the most boring middle class Middle England poster I've ever seen on UKC. Christ the standards have dropped. I'd rather meet a team of drunken students any day than spend an hour in your company. You come across as a completely boring tw*t. Your child was right. Chill out its just some students having fun.

In reply to Andy Morley:


Utter nonsense.

You seem obsessed with this idea that a code of conduct needs to be handed down from on high, and that such a code would have prevented what happened. It doesn't, and it wouldn't.

Any official student club will be affiliated in some way to its university; via the SU, or the Sports Fed, or whatever structure is in place in that particular institution. I guarantee you there will be some sort of institution-wide code of conduct that the club will already have had to incorporate as a result. The paperwork you so earnestly demand is already there, in place.

And the last thing student climbing clubs need is more paperwork to incorporate! Remember that the committee is, quite likely, made of 19- or 20-year-olds who've never done anything like this before. In an awful lot of cases they are already struggling with demands placed upon them by the institution, many of which don't really understand climbing and place onerous or ridiculous demands on them as a result. I've heard of clubs who can't climb outside (I remember someone posting on here a while ago, who simultaneously said he was his club's ex-president and that he'd almost never climbed on real rock) because of red tape. About 15 years ago, my own club got within days of a vote to disaffiliate when our regulators tried to impose a rule saying we'd need qualified instructors to run every trip - thankfully we persuaded them otherwise. An additional source of more bureaucracy is simply not going to help. The BMC does great work with the student seminars, of course, but that's not what you're talking about.

And what on earth do you think a universal code of conduct would have done in this case? This is the part you don't seem to grasp. 'Fran' did what he (I'll assume he) did because he was a prick. Not because he was, or was not, a student. Not because he was, or was not, bound by a piece of paper back in the secretary's files, and most certainly not because of who wrote that piece of paper. He did it because he was a prick and no code of conduct would have changed that.

Though, given your last few posts, I'm fairly sure we're all feeding a troll here anyway.

In reply to Andy Morley:


The point JJL and many others are trying to make is that you're saying in five paragraphs what could easily and better be said in one. Writing more doesn't make your points valid, and it certainly doesn't create clarity. Obviously you're very angry about all this, but if you want sympathy (which quite clearly you do) then write 80% less and you might get 80% more.

In reply to Andy Morley:

Do you seriously think that a set of BMC-moderated guidelines would stop the occasional idiot doing stupid things?

In reply to Frank the Husky:


Why do you think I would want sympathy? As for 'angry', I've seen some of that around here, but then this is the internet. It's always full of angry people.

In reply to Andy Morley:


OK then, you don't want sympathy from UKC, you want validation. I think everyone agrees with you that what happened was out of order, but your terminally long posts (especially the first one which only confused the issue and said nothing about the actual event) really didn't help your cause.

Perhaps as a sensible grown up you will already have pointed out to your daughter that condemning hundreds of thousands of people on the basis of the behaviour of a few isn't even slightly reasonable.

Anyway, good luck with this and, since you said it didn't impact upon you at all, I hope you can let this go sooner rather than later.

Aha!! Now I'm beginning to see where your true interests lie...I reckon all this talk of a climbing hut fracas is just a red herring

JW

In reply to Andy Morley:

42, E0, and its probably Schiehallion.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:
>. Chill out its just some students having fun.

I have shared campsites, youth hostels and mountain huts with student groups on many occasions and while the majority have been perfectly well behaved there have been enough £incidents£ over the years from a sizable minority of pissed up tw*ts treating the facilities as a Club 18-30 weekend to make me treat such groups with a degree of trepidation.

The £Chill out its just some students having fun£ sentiment is a nice glossing over of some truly crap behavior I have witnessed over the years and if me getting irate at 3am when I was planning an early start in the hills because the tossers in the shared kitchen, or in the tents next door are having a party makes me a £Middle England£ bore then so be it.

In reply to Morgan Woods:


It is my genuine name. I attempt to live up to the title but I feel I somewhat fall short :p

In reply to John Ww:


No shit Sherlock!

In reply to Frank the Husky:


Let's try to humour each other. Have you ever introduced someone to climbing, who might have been the very last person you would expect to be able to do it and then, maybe watched them surprise themselves at what they could do?

I can see that you don't like to have to deal with too much in the way of reading matter. But let me just introduce one little idea to you. It's called 'The Intentional Fallacy'.

Maybe those weird-sounding words make you feel just as nauseous as standing on the edge of a cliff might make some people? But now that we've got that out of the way, I'll just try to explain it using as few words as ever I can.

You try to read some stuff and your eyes start to glaze over, but you make yourself do it. You say to yourself "Aha, Andy Morley wants 'validation' or 'sympathy' or 'he's angry'". But actually, you don't really have any idea what I want or how I feel, there's just some words and the effect that they produce on you. So maybe, just maybe, the effect of those words could be to bring up thoughts and feelings that are actually all about you, and whatever the words themselves say to you?

So could it be that actually, it's YOU that are angry or in want of sympathy or validation?

In reply to Andy Morley:

Up until that last post you had a lot of people taking you seriously. You've blown it now though; it's clearly not humanly feasible to be THAT condescending, ergo you can't possibly be for real.

In reply to Andy Morley:


Re the above. It seems misplaced to blame the groups.

If a customer has paid but cannot climb safely then the issue is with the wall for admitting too large a number of people. If the number of people admitted is 'reasonable' then there is no cause for complaint. You admit no-one is doing anything wrong so why include it as an issue re uni groups?

My local wall has kids parties and regular learning disabled groups - personally I appreciate the presence of both in their own right but also I am aware that without custom the wall itself would be unlikely to exist.

On a side issue, I'm glad UKC didn't just slam teens/young people. Like the rest of the planet they're a mixed bunch - we're a mixed bunch.

In reply to Andy Morley: Andy my dear chap. You've hit the nail on the head. I don't like to deal with too much in the way of reading matter - especially when that reading matter is congested and confused, unnecessarily verbose and somewhat sanctimonious.

We all know that the only reason for posting rants on UKC is to garner support and therefore validation and sympathy. If you wanted to effectively deal with this thing that didn’t affect you* then you could have done so on the day or privately.

I know all about "intentional fallacy" and it's usually used by people to explain why no one understands or agrees with what they’ve written.

*until today, that is

In reply to Andy Morley:


Is that the one where where you deliberately behave like a prick?

In reply to Dave Garnett:


It's the one where people describe themselves without realising it because they think they're describing other people.

In reply to john arran:


Why is it condescending?

In reply to Frank the Husky:


Well then that really does bring me back to the crashingly obvious point. If that's how you feel, then what the **** are you doing here at all, obviously reading all this stuff? Why don't you just go away then - what kind of an idiot would clearly stick around doing something he says he doesn't like?

In reply to Greenbanks:


How are you enjoying it so far? I'm beginning to think it's the best troll ever; Andy Morley and Fran Hammond are clearly the same person.

In reply to Dave Garnett:


A troll should play fair and not come back repeatedly though. Also, although this isnt a normal rule, shouldnt write more words than everyone else put together.

In reply to Andy Morley:

>> Sorry, could you summarise?


Ah! That's much clearer. Thanks.

Do all your posts say that? Or, if there's anything interesting in any of them, please can you summarise that too?

In reply to Dave Garnett:

It's up there with the best (worst) of them. Taking on epic proportions even. Another refill is required

In reply to Dave Garnett:


Very good!

In reply to Greenbanks:

I've just tuned in for lunch and, I have to say, I've not been disappointed, it's got the lot, Max Weber, some undertones of violence and impeccable passive-agressive lunges. The only thing that's missing is a reading list, sadly I know I'm missing many esoteric allusions but I'm petty sure Derrida's Grammatology is in there somewhere.

In reply to KevinD:


A troll is just a person articulating a point of view that you disagree with, and where you can't find the words or the logic to counter those arguments. Yes, it's upsetting for you to have to deal with it if you happen to find yourself in that position but any 'rules' anyone makes to cover those sorts of concern just lead to some form of censorship aimed at reinforcing whatever the prevailing group-think is. The end result of going down that particular route is a bunch of people who are continually up themselves and up each other. Hmmmm......

In reply to Andy Morley:

ever heard of this?

"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte."

"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal

I feel like you may also be able to structure a more reasonable argument if you thought about it more than a few seconds. So just take your time! We're all going to be here for a while!

In reply to Andy Morley:

Editing out the chaff from your first post, for newcomers:

Yup

In reply to Andy Morley:


No a troll is something quite different. Its someone who provokes arguments and watches the results. Which is why those who enjoy trolling generally do it under a set of rules to make it sporting.
Which is why I dont think troll applies in your case.

In reply to Andy Morley:

My head hurts. I must admit to struggling when Andy went all Jackanory midway through the thread.

At first i was on Andys side
Then the guy from the uni made a fair and reasoned response
Then Andy couldnt accept a simple apology so i went on the Uni's side
Then the dickhead culprit piped up and spolied things so i had to move back in with Andy
Now Andy just makes me want to beat him up. I am not a violent man normally but he brings out hidden anger in almost everyone.

Lets make one thing clear, pissing about and having a laugh is fine within your group. Why the uni 'group' had to inflict this on someone elses group is beyond me. Messing about with a set of keys is pretty shitty but i draw the line at messing with another guys food. That deserved physical violence in return. This doesnt need a whole new set of rules to sort out. It needs Andy locked in a padded room mumbling to himself, the dickhead who instigated everything given a good slap and everyone else to move on and let it lie.

My head still hurts

In reply to KevinD:


That could generally be a description of a university debating society or of the written or spoken word as used in a variety of other contexts relating to current affairs, politics, philosophy or whatever. Arguably most of human life is a game ('sporting') - the ability to 'play' is what sets aside the higher mammals. But here, this particular subject is just a distraction used in this and other similar contexts by people who are involved in some way in some sort of argument that's tending towards a conclusion that they personally don't like. Therefore, they just make a lot of noise to try to prevent that happening, and shouting 'troll' is one way of doing that. Monsters in the cupboard. In the House of Commons, I believe they call this 'fillibustering'. Does anyone know if I'm right about the use of that term?

In reply to Andy Morley:


You siilly billy. I'm NOT reading any of your stuff because it's unreadable nonsense. The sympathy you might originally have had has gone, never to return. You'll have a stroke if you carry on like this. Stop it!

In reply to Thelittlesthobo:


I'm not looking for anyone to take sides with me one way or the other. The episode that triggered this certainly got my attention and made me think about university mountaineering clubs in a fairly critical way. Then I personally moved on and started thinking about wider aspects of it - 'went all Jackanory' as you put it.

Yes there's a lot of 'hidden anger' coming out, but then that's not unknown around here - analyse it, ignore it or join in at your choice. 'Choice' is one of the key issues that I'm seeing coming out of this whole thread. There's a whole load of people blaming all sorts of other people for all sorts of things, their own choices included. Elsewhere on the internet, people seemed to stop blaming other people for their own hidden anger quite a while back. Now, the word on the street is, in the apocryphal words of the immortal Yoda (not):
"Offended you are? Then off must you f*ck!"
But for some reason, the outdoorsy world seems to lag a long way behind the wider internet, and it has done that consistently for a long time now. Meh!

In reply to UKC and Alan:

Hi Alan

For the next release of UKC, please could we have an "auto-dislike" feature? It would save me quite a bit of time goind down finding all Andy's (and Lemming's) posts. I think it would be a hit with a lot of people to be honest, judging by how the button gets used in threads like this.

Thanks!

In reply to Andy Morley:

"Monsters in the cupboard. In the House of Commons, I believe they call this 'fillibustering'. Does anyone know if I'm right about the use of that term?"... surefire troll post or fabulous self satire??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster

In reply to MSchobitz:


If this commentary were a matter of any greater import (to me) then I would. But I don't have time, and most people on the internet are in a similar position. From a personal perspective, yes, there are too many words floating around here in general - there's a very high noise-to-signal ratio in the volume and content of posts that's going on and a huge amount of people throwing their toys, even allowing for the fact that the internet in general and UKC in particular is often like that. Some of you may find this subject matter more upsetting than I do, and that's understandable if you're involved in uni mountaineering groups, but basically you need to own your own stuff, some of you, and get a grip.

From now on, I'm going to be ignoring some of you more and more (impossible not to, given the volumes) and just focusing on the people who actually have something to say.

In reply to Andy Morley:



Given the length and amount of replies you have provided us with i would say it is of great importance to you and that you do have a huge amount of time!


Could you tell us which subjects you will reply to? I'm sure most people would like to know so we can avoid them and not merit a response

In reply to Andy Morley:
Nice to know that you'll be "just focusing on the people who actually have something to say".
Presumably you'll be determining who these folk are? If so, that's not at all wise given the singular lack of judgement you've demonstrated repeatedly in this thread.
Why don't you nip out to your local wall and climb it out of yourself, rather than allowing your own noise-to-signal ratio (sic) to drown all others? Oh, sorry - its not that at all. It's your own conceit.

In reply to C£ Chullain:



It doesn't. It makes you a completely reasonable person. I too have suffered such annoyance, a particular night in the bunkhouse near the Clachaig proved to be memorable for all the wrong reasons.

My comment was directed squarely at Mr Morley and in the context of everything he says. I note he's a relative newcomer, I doubt he'll last long. Hopefully.....

In reply to franhammond92:




well, now that the rather bizarre diversion created by today's postings seems to have settled down, back to the point of the thread...

have you made those apologies yet?

best wishes
gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I did so last night and they have been very kindly accepted by all parties involved and the matter is now considered closed by the owner of the keys and their club as a whole.

In reply to franhammond92:

probably worth apologising to Andy Morley too. Your comments on monday to him were needless. He's clearly not covered himself in glory in the way he's handled himself as the thread has gone on, but he was justified in making the OP.

cheers
gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Oh f*ck off! Who made you mum? franhammond didn't need to apologise to anyone in my book. What's happened to the world when people can't get pissed and make an arse of themselves without having to spend the next day in the stocks in the town square. Bloody depressing.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Bugger saying sorry, I reckon a big "thank you" to Mr Morley is in order, never have so many words been given to so few...

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

two traditions as long as time- drunken dickery and public humiliation thereafter. if you do the first, got to be willing to take your medicine if you get caught. always been the case, and the medicine is probably a good deal more civilised than it used to be...

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Bollocks. Never been publicly shamed for any of my youthful evenings. Bloody good fun they were too, well the ones I can remember

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

ah, but you didnt get caught...



cheers,

mum

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


Apologies may make some people feel better and are generally considered 'good form' but to be honest, I'm not particularly fussed either way.

But I still think that the BMC should do something for university mountaineering groups because, to be honest, if what I saw is at all typical they are struggling a bit, though also making some good efforts. Give them some money, just a little bit - students like money. More important, share your expertise, and not just in climbing - from what's emerged in the wider discussion, continuity is where they need most help. But above all else, don't take their autonomy away when you do that.

Just had a fantastic evening btw down a local bouldering wall with one of my lads. Got chatting to some really nice people who gave him some great tips - he said he learned more in five minutes from her than hours of the pair of us trying to figure stuff out for ourselves. Real life is much nicer (usually) than the internet and if you do find people here a bit pompous or sanctimonious, that's only because they think they're on display. If you meet them in person, you'll probably find you'll get on with them a lot better than you might think.

In reply to Andy Morley:

If.

In reply to Andy Morley:

And even in the death throes of the thread you still manage to be a sanctimonious patronising prick - "students like money". I really do hope you're nicer in real life. But I doubt it.

In reply to Andy Morley:

do you think you are 'on display' then? not really sure what you mean by that.

cheers
gregor

ps father noel is right about the 'students like money'comment. not sure that if you said that to us face to face it would be any better...!

In reply to Andy Morley:
Can I just clarify again that I'm not a student. I feel this has been said many times but continually ignored. Haven't been a student for a while. That's why I said what I did to Andy. He was told at the time it wasn't students but still went ahead and posted his socks off. Reading all this has been jolly good fun though.


Also, I make a point of not saying sorry to war criminals. Especially when they don't want my tupperware.

In reply to franhammond92:

Bloody grown ups with jobs. Just who do they think they are?

So long as you don't work in public service, he's got a big chip about that one as well.

In reply to franhammond92:

yes, his persistence about the student aspect is baffling

still, a shame you wont apologise. chance to be the 'bigger man' etc missed, imo.

also, since you appear to have posted under your real name- 30 secs with google, and reading the post of the chair of the sheffield mountaineering club on monday, appears to link you to a well known gear brand. that may be you, may not be, i dont know. but not good to have your name associated with the comments you made on a public climbing forum if it is (and unfair on the 'other' fran hammond and the company if its not, tbh).

i'd reckon best course of action would be to disown your comments from monday, apologise, and move on.

and dont use your real name in future if you want to get in public spats which leave a permanent record...

cheers
gregor

In reply to Andy Morley:


They can't have been that warm-hearted if they didn't share their cake with you.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Turn the lights out when you eventually leave guys. As Jean-Paul Sartre said, "Hell is other people" - but only in contexts like this one
Carry on!

In reply to Andy Morley:

The last word? I think not. You signed off last night with a similar dismissive patronising post. You can't return to the thread and then try and do the same thing again.

My take? You are clearly affected that we do not agree with your narrow view of how the world works. As I said earlier you're still new here, I don't give you long. Thankfully.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


sadly, it would appear that he not only can, but just did

and probably will again tomorrow too.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

You appear to be suggesting that anybody who shares a name with somebody else should always moderate their behaviour to consider the possible impact on their namesake.

Do you want to give that one a bit more thought perhaps?

In reply to victim of mathematics:
not really- i'm suggesting that its best not to behave like a cock at all.

the effect on your employer/sponsor, or that of people who are unfortunate enough to share your name is a secondary consideration.

mostly, its just because behaving like a cock is just not a good thing to do, in its own right

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Unless you're a cock. In which case it's pretty much expected

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

lol...