UKC

/ Kalymnos Guidebook

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
cha1n on 11 Sep 2018

Can anyone comment on which is the best guidebook out of the two new ones currently available? I'm slightly inclined to go with the Rockfax one as it's just what I'm used to using but if there's a good reason to go with the newer, locally produced one (like more new routes listed, etc) then I will do. Thanks.

In reply to cha1n:

The non-Rockfax guidebook isn't available yet so it is difficult to compare. I suspect the content won't vary much and the new book will be like the old one with the new stuff added. There are some routes done this summer since the Rockfax which are likely to be in and there are the silly renames of course. Assuming the layout is similar to the last books then there aren't any real maps in there which the Rockfax is obviously very big on.

I strongly suspect both books will have way more routes than you can possibly climb in a lifetime. If you are going in a group then why not buy both?

Alan 

Big Bruva - on 11 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

>  but if there's a good reason to go with the newer, locally produced one (like more new routes listed, etc) then I will do.

Seems from various sources that the authors of the local guide have invested a huge amount of time and money in equipping the routes. This would be a good reason to support them.

mik82 - on 11 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

The last two editions of the local guidebook have both been excellent. I think they're examples of how to do guidebooks well. As much as I like some Rockfax guides, I'd go for the local one. 

Wiley Coyote2 - on 11 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

Slightly off at a tangent but anybody else wish they would cut out the superfluous pix and cut it back to a functional guidebook? A few inspiring pix are all well and good but  there seems to be an action shot or a view or a vignette or two  on every spread which over 400 pages  must add up in terms of space and cost. The guide is now like a ruddy brick and as more crags are developed will only eat deeper into the baggage allowance.

tjekel - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

Thanks @Alan for the very balanced view. One difference to be added is the detailed history of FA's in the local guide. It adds close to nothing for practical purposes, but personally I find it nice to know to have climbed a Remy / Kaspar Ochsner / Michel Piola etc line. 

Wide_Mouth_Frog - on 12 Sep 2018

 

> Seems from various sources that the authors of the local guide have invested a huge amount of time and money in equipping the routes. This would be a good reason to support them.

Another vote for this ^

Trevor Langhorne on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

Support the Kalymnos climbing community and buy the excellent Greek guide, preferably from a shop on the Island.

whenry on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

Depends when you're going and whether you want to go through the guide before you go... from what I've read on the Climb Kalymnos forum it seems that the new local guide isn't likely to appear in the UK for a month or so.

In reply to cha1n:

One thing worth noting, if the Rockfax hadn't been published then your choice would have been the single older guidebook which is minus about 500 routes.

Alan

Post edited at 09:28
In reply to Trevor Langhorne:

> Support the Kalymnos climbing community and buy the excellent Greek guide, preferably from a shop on the Island.

Thanks Trevor for your support for the Rockfax buy supplying a photo. Also, note that we will be supporting the bolting on the island as well.

Alan

morphomouse - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

I have the rockfax guidebook - I just like the format. All politics aside, it is an excellent guide and all that you need in my opinion. As Alan mentioned I believe there are quite a few newer routes added that I didn't see in my friends local guide book and besides the very few names changes is the most up to date as far as I'm aware.

The local one is also excellent and slightly more detailed on each crag and provides more information on when you'll get shade in specific areas which can make or break a session.

Wide_Mouth_Frog - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to whenry:

> Depends when you're going and whether you want to go through the guide before you go... from what I've read on the Climb Kalymnos forum it seems that the new local guide isn't likely to appear in the UK for a month or so.

Maybe not. But you will be able to buy it here on the island from next Friday (21st)

Post edited at 10:13
In reply to morphomouse:

> The local one is also excellent and slightly more detailed on each crag and provides more information on when you'll get shade in specific areas which can make or break a session.

Well we provide sun symbols on every buttress and also include extremely accurate maps which are very useful for working out sun and shade for those that have a reliable orientation brain.

Remember, the sun is always due south at 12 noon, due west at 6pm and due east at 6am in winter time (+ 1 hour in summer time). Amazing how many people don't know that.

Alan

J1_TOV - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

As many of you know, in response to the Rockfax guidebook being released the local author has put climbers at risk by mixing and changing the names of routes written on the rock. For that reason and that reason alone, I regret that I will not be buying more local kalymnos guidebooks in the future. I have a trip booked already so will be proudly clutching my shiny new Rockfax guide. Sadly, I'll be seriously considering if I should return to the Island, especially if any accidents occur as a result of the name changing episodes. Let's just pray that it's been publicised well enough that it doesn't.

Post edited at 10:36
In reply to J1_TOV:

> As many of you know, in response to the Rockfax guidebook being released the local author has put climbers at risk by mixing and changing the names of routes written on the rock.

I appreciate your stance. It isn't strictly true that it is the local author. The action we believe was carried out by Claude Idoux and, as far as we are aware, Aris wasn't involved although he was almost certainly aware of it. Claude doesn't write the guidebook but is a very prolific new router and, ironically, also the main person behind the island Rescue Team.

As mentioned in the Rockfax PDF update, the only two routes we think where there could be problems are on Magoulias Wall on the Summertime area. The route with the name 'Beau' is now a 28m pitch that was formally called 'Mr Rigalo'. The route in the Rockfax called 'Beau' is nearer 15m and is now called 'Antonis Lampos'. Could be a problem if you are climbing on a 50m rope or a shortened 60m rope. 

The other one is the route that is now called 'Antonis Lampos' is 6c. The route called 'Antonis Lampos' in the Rockfax is only 6a+. Could be a rude awakening for someone but probably not too dangerous.

Alan

 

Big Bruva - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Remember, the sun is always due south at 12 noon, due west at 6pm and due east at 6am in winter time (+ 1 hour in summer time). Amazing how many people don't know that.

Actually sun is due south at 1pm (+1hr in summer time)!

 

In reply to Big Bruva:

> Actually sun is due south at 1pm (+1hr in summer time)!

er no. It occurs at solar noon which can be a little either side of clock noon. This can be greater at the extremes of some time zones.

Alan

Andy Gamisou - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

 "Remember, the sun is always due south at 12 noon, due west at 6pm and due east at 6am in winter time (+ 1 hour in summer time). Amazing how many people don't know that."

It's not always that simple though.  There's at least one major sector that I regularly climb at that is North facing, yet for 2 weeks either side of  the summer solstice gets no shade during most of the day.  If the guide merely gave crag orientation and left it to the visitors brain, then there would be lots of wasted journeys (possibly of several hours) and frustrated punters.

Correction - 2 major sectors.

Post edited at 14:17
In reply to Andy Gamisou:

> It's not always that simple though.  There's at least one major sector that I regularly climb at that is North facing, yet for 2 weeks either side of  the summer solstice gets no shade during most of the day.  If the guide merely gave crag orientation and left it to the visitors brain, then there would be lots of wasted journeys (possibly of several hours) and frustrated punters.

Well I don't quite follow this but, as mentioned, every buttress in every Rockfax has a sun symbol saying when it is approximately in the sun anyway. The map helps if you figure it out as well if looking at a group of crags. Writing sun from 1pm is good as a general guideline, but obviously this can change considerably anyway at different times of year depending on surrounding geography and summertime changes.

I think it is fair to say that sun south at noon/1pm is a good enough guideline which navigators have used for years to work out where they are going.

Alan

Andy Gamisou - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Well I don't quite follow this 

In what way?

> I think it is fair to say that sun south at noon/1pm is a good enough guideline which navigators have used for years to work out where they are going.

I thought the conversation was about being in the sun or not, not navigation.  Apologies if I am confused about this.

 

Pedro50 on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Slightly off topic but interesting: When we were on Lourdes at El Chorro (SE facing) it was in the sun in April. By May due to its overhanging nature the (higher elevation) sun went past leaving it shaded all day. Difficult to to have realised this from the guide book. 

Maybe more modern guide books point this out. 

Post edited at 15:07
L slawosz - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Trevor Langhorne:

> Support the Kalymnos climbing community and buy the excellent Greek guide, preferably from a shop on the Island.

+1

I will do the same. For research before trip, I am using 5 GBP iphone app from 'the send', its good (could be bit more user friendly). They use entire income from their app for Kalymnos bolts fund.

In reply to Pedro50:

> Slightly off topic but interesting: When we were on Lourdes at El Chorro (SE facing) it was in the sun in April. By May due to its overhanging nature the (higher elevation) sun went past leaving it shaded all day. Difficult to to have realised this from the guide book. 

Sure, although that doesn't really make it much cooler there I don't think, especially for the belayer!

Alan

 

Andy Gamisou - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Pedro50:

> Slightly off topic but interesting: When we were on Lourdes at El Chorro (SE facing) it was in the sun in April. By May due to its overhanging nature the (higher elevation) sun went past leaving it shaded all day. Difficult to to have realised this from the guide book. 

Exactly.  The point I was trying to make that simply indicating a sector faces a particular orientation (as it seems the RF guides do), doesn't guarantee that you know when the conditions are best (or for hot/cold climates even climbable).  A bit of explanatory context can be useful.  But surprised the RF guides don't do this (if I'm interpreting Alan's stuff above correctly).

 

Iamgregp - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to cha1n:

Rockfax are going to make financial contribution to the bolt fund

The other guys bought the bolts in the first place, found the crags, climbed, cleaned, gardened, equipped and graded the routes, marked the approaches and sorted out access with landowners.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe anyone from Rockfax did any of these things?

Your call as to which book you buy, I'm sure both are excellent.

Wide_Mouth_Frog - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Gamisou:

> In what way?

> I thought the conversation was about being in the sun or not, not navigation.  Apologies if I am confused about this.

In Alan James' defence I think his point is that if you can get a good enough approximation of where the sun is in the sky to navigate across the globe, it's certainly going to be good enough to make an educated guess as to whether a crag might be in the shade or not

In reply to Iamgregp:

> The other guys bought the bolts in the first place, found the crags, climbed, cleaned, gardened, equipped and graded the routes, marked the approaches and sorted out access with landowners.

Well that is actually quite misleading. The majority of the routes on the island were put up at the effort and expense of people who have nothing to do with either guidebook. And there are some routes on the island put up by Chris (not many I admit) and there are new routers who are fully supportive of the Rockfax.

However, it is certainly true that Aris has played a great part in developing the island and I am glad to see he at least is responding in the right way to our guidebook - by bringing out a new edition of his book.

Alan

tjekel - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Gamisou: in kaly, think of Arhi. The whole face pointing roughly in the same direction. Sun from 10 in the morning on the left, 11.30 on the right, 13.30 in the center. Makes a whole lot of a difference when to prepare coffee in the morning.

Edit: to get this from a map requires needs a rather high portion of geospatial thinking. A PhD in geography is not sufficient (from personal experience).

Post edited at 16:33
tjekel - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Iamgregp:

Didn't Chris develop the world class st george crag there?

Ramon Marin - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Yes all this talk about locals (which one is French and the other form mainland I believe?) feeling a sort of ownership over Kalymnos, what about the tons of routes Neil Gresham, Chris Craggs and the rest? Plus all the bolts funded by Glaros? For the same logic we would only have one guidebook for Siurana, El Chorro, Pembroke... which is ludricous. The more competition the better, makes better guidebooks and climbers win. My opinion to the OP, buy the best. Both guidebook contribute to the bolting there. 

Iamgregp - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Fair point re the independent equippers, happy to be corrected on this. 

I guess the point I was attempting to make was that funding bolts is just one part of the huge effort that goes into developing the area into the sport climbing mecca it has become, and it's fair to argue that Aris, Claude and their friends and associates have done more of this than RF and their associates.

 

tjekel - on 12 Sep 2018
In reply to Ramon Marin:

Thanks for pointing to the migrant nature of ALL developers in Kaly , be it the UK, France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Italy, mainland Greece and a few others. This makes the posessive attitude of a self-selected few all the more nonsensical.

Post edited at 17:29
In reply to Iamgregp:

> I guess the point I was attempting to make was that funding bolts is just one part of the huge effort that goes into developing the area into the sport climbing mecca it has become, and it's fair to argue that Aris, Claude and their friends and associates have done more of this than RF and their associates.

I would say that is a fair point.

The thing is that UKC/Rockfax is a different type of organisation to some local guidebook producers. We are around a dozen people who work hard and spend all our time trying to make great stuff for climbers. We don't rip anyone off, and we don't pay ourselves ridiculous amounts, we just do what we do because we enjoy it and are good at it. But we are not new routers.

Print guidebooks are integral to what we do and it is only because of our success with print guidebooks that we are where we are. I have said it before, without Rockfax UKC wouldn't exist - none of it, not the forums, the logbooks, the news articles or anything. We simply couldn't have kept it going. 

So UKC/Rockfax needed print guidebooks to get going and we still need them as part of our ongoing projects with UKC logbooks and the Rockfax app and as a fundamental part of our business. 

Yes, this is sometimes not fully compatible with the traditional old local guidebook model. It is often claimed to be a huge problem and there can be big arguments (like this one) but in the end little of any consequence changes. Most people get on with it and other guidebook producers often use Rockfax ideas and start producing better guidebooks themselves. That has certainly happened in the UK where we were said to be the end of guidebooks as we know them in the 1990s and yet we now have better guidebooks than ever from all producers.

There is a contradiction in those who actively use, read, post and log their stuff on UKC but then also undermine Rockfax guidebooks and suggest that we shouldn't publish a book here, or there. It is a 'cake and eat it' situation to use that trendy idiom. Of course we will listen to criticism, and I have had some good exchanges with people over this issue, but I do think those who proclaim that we do nothing and throw their support behind the efforts of others who they know little about need to look a bit at where they are saying that and not take everything that makes up UKC/Rockfax for granted. As an example, we get as many people asking about the Android app on here as we do saying don't buy the Kalymnos Rockfax. How am I suppose to fund the development of the Android app?

Don't take this personally 'lamgregp' it is just that your post gave me the opportunity to write this.

Alan

 

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

I'm not convinced this Rockfax/UKC symbiosis is very healthy.

What you're saying is that the profits come from Rockfax - an entity whose ethics are regularly challenged - while the narrative is controlled by UKC - an entity which regularly silences critical voices (see other Kalymnos thread).

UK climbers may benefit from this relationship, not sure that Greek climbers do!

In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> What you're saying is that the profits come from Rockfax - an entity whose ethics are regularly challenged - while the narrative is controlled by UKC - an entity which regularly silences critical voices (see other Kalymnos thread).

Four threads on the Kalymnos topic with not a single removed post is hardly controlling the narrative. The same could pretty much be said every time previously that such discussions have arisen.

Yes, a few individuals have had their posting restricted - I can think of four over the 20 years of the forum. These are people who don't engage in debate and only try to undermine. I decided I don't want to fund their platform. It hasn't stopped them though since most know how to get round it and spend months absorbing the content of the site before blowing their cover by lobbing a hypocritical stink bomb at one of these debates. 

Of course we could remove the forums altogether. Do you think that would increase or decrease the public discourse on controversial matters relating to Rockfax and UKC?

Alan

 

Post edited at 08:19
morphomouse - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

I'm sure you're not trying to be condescending but the fact is the rockfax guide maps aren't detailed enough on some crags. Yes there are symbols for general sun exposure for each crag, but for example some crags are a series of north facing v shaped buttresses meaning that 'little sun' only applies to a portion of the buttress span as the rest of it gets morning and afternoon sun respectively. If a breakdown of crag sections were clearer on the overall crag map (say colour coded) this might clear up any confusion - as currently crags are shown as a thick black line with vague arrows coming off it to describe named sections of a crag.

Post edited at 12:05
In reply to morphomouse:

> I'm sure you're not trying to be condescending but the fact is the rockfax guide maps aren't detailed enough on some crags. Yes there are symbols for general sun exposure for each crag, but for example some crags are a series of north facing v shaped buttresses meaning that 'little sun' only applies to a portion of the buttress span as the rest of it gets morning and afternoon sun respectively. If a breakdown of crag sections were clearer on the overall crag map (say colour coded) this might clear up any confusion - as currently crags are shown as a thick black line with vague arrows coming off it to describe named sections of a crag.

I don't think any guidebook is going to provide this sort of data to the accuracy you seem to want. The sun hits crags at certain times of day. A rough guide as to when this happens is helpful. Our guide provides this in the form of symbols, text descriptions and maps that give the general orientation of the crag. I think this is as helpful as we can be. The other guide does the same in text but has no maps. The maps in our guidebook help locate the crags as a bonus and are by some distance the most detailed maps ever produced for climbing on the island. On the app they work even better by showing your location as a blue dot. I think this is quite a cool feature.

Alan

 

planetmarshall on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> [UKC is] an entity which regularly silences critical voices (see other Kalymnos thread).

Hmm, UKC silences critical voices...see other thread entirely composed of critical voices?

Iamgregp - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

No offence taken Alan, and thank you for your measured response.

I understand your position and appreciate the hard work that you and your team at RF/UKC put in.  I like this site, and I own and use a few RF guides, so I have no problem with your organisation.  I know you're not ripping anyone off, or paying yourselves huge amounts.  The only issue I have is the publication of the Kalymnos guide.

As I said on a different thread there are other places where the local guides are incomplete and outdated, but none of the locals want to take on the huge task of compiling a new book, so I guess I would have preferred that RF had explored these opportunities, in cooperation with the local community, rather than spending time and effort publishing this guide.

Having said that I haven't got 12 salaries, a website and an app to fund, so maybe sometimes commercial influences must take a precedence.  Maybe if I was in your situation I would have done the same as you did, and I would be the one explaining the situation to some gobby sh!t on the forum! 

Ramon Marin - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

As I said earlier, and many times before, if people have a problem with either UKC or Rockfax why are they using these forums? It's like like hating Shell and filling your car at their petrol stations. People forget these are private companies and not the BMC, as far as I know Alan and the team can do whatever he wants with them. It's up to us to use them or not. Considering it's the most visited climbing web in the world, I'm sure the got something right. As far as I'm concerned, I'm grateful there's such a platform as UKC/Rockfax that supports our community. 

Big Bruva - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> er no. It occurs at solar noon which can be a little either side of clock noon. This can be greater at the extremes of some time zones.

Ah yes, a little research suggests your approximation is wrong less often than mine.

The extremes can be quite far apart though. Solar noon in Europe today varies between 11.50 and 14.30 depending on whether you live in north-east Norway or western Spain.

 

Big Bruva - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Ramon Marin:

> As I said earlier, and many times before, if people have a problem with either UKC or Rockfax why are they using these forums?

Complaining about fossil fuels while going on trips around the world is part and parcel of being a climber!

 

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Ramon Marin:

> As I said earlier, and many times before, if people have a problem with either UKC or Rockfax why are they using these forums? . 

Boycotting a useful organisation just because you disapprove of one small part of its activities seems rather an extreme response. Most people manage to be a little more measured in their responses. Mrs C and I disagree quite frequently but I've never considered it grounds for divorce

 

earlsdonwhu - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

Blimey, you sound like Jacob R-M endorsing Mrs May!

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to earlsdonwhu:

> Blimey, you sound like Jacob R-M endorsing Mrs May!


Nah. It wasn't in Latin

In reply to Iamgregp:

> The only issue I have is the publication of the Kalymnos guide.

> As I said on a different thread there are other places where the local guides are incomplete and outdated, but none of the locals want to take on the huge task of compiling a new book, so I guess I would have preferred that RF had explored these opportunities, in cooperation with the local community, rather than spending time and effort publishing this guide.

Well I think that popular areas are well served by having more than one guide. In El Chorro, for example, there were three guides a few years ago, and now there is only our old 2008 guide available (we will be doing a new one before Christmas). Had there been more active competing of guides there then climbers would have benefitted from that in the last few years but the other guides disappeared. Climbers will certainly benefit in Kalymnos this winter season with two up-to-date guides instead of the one old guide had we not produced ours.

Also, a place like Kalymnos undoubtedly benefits economically from having two guides since the increased reach is bound to attract more visitors. Imagine the effect on visitors to Kalymnos had we published a guide to Antalya or Leonidio instead. I am sure that would have reduced numbers visiting the island.

Alan

 

 

 

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

>

> Kalymnos undoubtedly benefits economically from having two guides since the increased reach is bound to attract more visitors.

Alan, I wish you'd just drop this ridiculous argument. It insults readers' intelligence to pretend there is some vast pool of potential visitors who are keen climbers, committed enough to travel to Kaly, but who somehow have managed to miss the fact that the most popular sport climbing area in Europe, if not the world, actually exists. Where are these poor benighted souls supposed to living? In a cave on the dark side of the Moon? Did you by any chance write the 'we were just visiting the cathedral - twice' defence for those two Russkies in Salisbury?

I'd have far more respect for an admission that the place is ridiculously popular, you happened to have a regular and respected  author who knows the island like the back of his hand, and the chance  to rake in a few bob was irresistible.

 

In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

> Alan, I wish you'd just drop this ridiculous argument. It insults readers' intelligence to pretend there is some vast pool of potential visitors who are keen climbers, committed enough to travel to Kaly, but who somehow have managed to miss the fact that the most popular sport climbing area in Europe, if not the world, actually exists. Where are these poor benighted souls supposed to living? In a cave on the dark side of the Moon? Did you by any chance write the 'we were just visiting the cathedral - twice' defence for those two Russkies in Salisbury?

Well I didn’t claim a “vast pool”, I claim “an increase”, and this is unquestionably true. Climbers often assume everyone is like them and knows and reads everything they do but I am continually amazed by what many climbers do and do not know. Don’t forget that the pool of climbers is being added to all the time through indoor walls and they certainly don’t all know every area. 

Also, we regularly observe increases in attention to areas when we publish new guidebooks to any area. Believe it or not there are people that go places ‘because’ we publish a book. 

Whatever you think, it isn’t possible that it will have resulted in a reduction.

Alan

earlsdonwhu - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Leonidio may have been more useful.

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Maybe it's time for a UKC feature; "Kalymnos - climbing's best kept secret"

Or how about: "Kalymnos - the best sport climbing you've never heard of"

Sorry, mate, I'm just not buying that line

In reply to earlsdonwhu:

> Leonidio may have been more useful.

But we hadn’t spent 17 years producing information for Leonidio nor had Chris spent the bulk of the last 10 winters there.

Alan

TimKnight - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

I'm afraid that I'm one of those people that Alan describes: climbs not enough times per year, enjoys exploring new places.

I was heading to the Pyrenees/Ariège a few years ago cycling but didn't know anything about the climbing there, saw that Rockfax had a guidebook and hence stayed an extra day to sample the climbing. Did I spend much money in the area, no, did I spend a few € that I wouldn't have spent otherwise, yes.

Similar in the Dolomites. Obviously I'd heard of the climbing there, I'd stared up at it cycling for enough hours, but didn't know where to start. The Rockfax guide opened the area up and helped us have a fantastic week.

 

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to TimKnight:

I accept your argument on both those places. The Ariege was  largely unknown - indeed probably still is to far as many climbers are concerned - while the climbing in the Dollies had changed out of all recognition. I don't think Kalymnos falls into either of those categories.

Let me emphasise, I'm not anti-RF. I've a dozen of their guides, including Ariege, on my shelf right now, I even have a copy of the original Mick Ryan Vertical Brain Yorks Limestone from 1990 and a North Wales Limestone Rockfax 02 from 1992 so we go back a long way together.  I was actually using my RF Northern Limestone only yesterday. That to me was  a classic case of where the local guide was not keeping pace and RF stepped in with a  vast improvement. I just happen to think the Kaly Guide was not necessary and I find the idea that it  was some great improvement that will bring in any significant number of fresh visitors or make an appreciable difference to the local economy frankly risible and not a little self-serving. The frequently-updated local guide, of which I've bought 3 or 4 editions over the years was doing just fine

In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

>  I just happen to think the Kaly Guide was not necessary and I find the idea that it  was some great improvement that will bring in any significant number of fresh visitors or make an appreciable difference to the local economy frankly risible and not a little self-serving. The frequently-updated local guide, of which I've bought 3 or 4 editions over the years was doing just fine.

Ok, but is anything going to get worse? And if we do make some money and make more good stuff is that a bad thing? Where is the downside?

Alan

 

john arran - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

I don't think anyone is pretending the new RockFax guide is groundbreaking, only that it's new and it offers an alternative. I think it's unquestionably true that a new guidebook to a good area will increase visits. You and I could argue that that doesn't make a lot of sense because almost every one of those new visitors would spend almost all of their time doing routes that were in the older or existing guides anyway, but it wouldn't change the fact that more people will go. Maybe it's just the new publicity, but in any case those new people will be going and they wouldn't have been going otherwise. I think that's the point Alan was making.

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

>  I think it's unquestionably true that a new guidebook to a good area will increase visits.

That's where we part company John. I don't see that as 'unquestionable true'. For an area like the Ariege, absolutely true but I don't see it for a mature destination like Kaly, any more than I see another walking guide to the Lakes increasing the numbers of visitors going there. The market is already well known and well served.

 

john arran - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

Given the marketing reach of Rockfax, I think your assessment is naïve. Possibly because you would like it to be the case.

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Ok, but is anything going to get worse? And if we do make some money and make more good stuff is that a bad thing? Where is the downside?

Not particularly worse. I have read the arguments re bolt funds but it is now so muddied that it is hard, if not impossible, for an outsider to get at the truth. Inevitably some money will come out of the local/Greek economy because there are now two expensive guides and I think few will buy both so sales of the local guide will suffer. Inevitably some of the proceeds from the RF guide will come back to the UK because RF has to cover costs, pay staff and make a profit and that's still money not going into the island. On a wider scale,  the local guide is printed 'in Greece' the RF 'in Europe' Is that Greece? Probably not.

So to reiterate what I've said higher up the thread, I wish RF had not printed this particular guide because I don't think it was needed, however, those who have mucked about with the route names have not exactly covered themselves with glory either. I don't buy the idea that somehow you are helping the local economy by bringing in significant numbers of visitors and  indeed, for the reasons I've just given, may actually be harming it.

If you want to print it to make a few bob, or even to fill a glaring hole in your list, I can understand that business argumenbt despite disagreeing with it but please drop this 'We're helping the island guff because that is exactly what it is - guff

 

Wiley Coyote2 - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

> Given the marketing reach of Rockfax, I think your assessment is naïve. Possibly because you would like it to be the case.


I don't think so. I'm sure your RF guide to Ariege brought in a lot of new people to the area and helped the local economy  considerably and will continue to do so for many years. Certainly it was an eye-opener for me, even though I have visited France numerous times. However, Kaly is a completely different model. It's already world famous and, as anyone who goes there knows, attracts visitors from around the globe. I've met just about every brand of European there as well as Americans, Canadians, Kiwis  and Aussies.This May there seemed to quite a few  folks from the Far East too.

tjekel - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

I have to admit i'm quite often inspired by a new guidebook (and the accompanying mag articles fresh pics) to either visit or revisit certain areas. 

Do you remember Montanejos or Sperlonga? Look at their UKC represention ... and their logbook ticks ... these have fallen completely of the international publication radar and are out of favour.

john arran - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Wiley Coyote2:

> I don't think so.

Clearly not. And you're clearly welcome to your opinion. But your reasoning, which appears to be that lots of people from lots of places already go and therefore a new Rockfax can have no discernable effect at all on overall numbers, doesn't seem to me to be sound.

Simon Caldwell - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to earlsdonwhu:

> Leonidio may have been more useful.

Why? There's already an excellent recent local guide. Though sales of it are probably suffering due to Aris's competing selective book. 

ColinAus - on 13 Sep 2018
In reply to Simon Caldwell:

Simon - do you know if that guidebook (the local one) is available over here or only once you get there? I’m off there in a few weeks for the first time!

Christheclimber on 14 Sep 2018
In reply to ColinAus:

> Simon - do you know if that guidebook (the local one) is available over here or only once you get there? I’m off there in a few weeks for the first time!

I have heard that there is a new local Leonidio guide. You would be able to get it from Panjika which is the local climbing cafe/bar/shop cooperative. 

Simon Caldwell - on 14 Sep 2018
In reply to ColinAus:

What Chris says - it's sold in Panjika (who also wrote or published it I think).

Take an 80m rope if you have one - we only had 70m and there were a few routes we couldn't do. Also the main ab descent from the big multi pitch routes needs an 80m rope (there's a scrambly alternative, not in the guidebook, but described in the new routes book at the bar)

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> In El Chorro, for example, there were three guides a few years ago, and now there is only our old 2008 guide available (we will be doing a new one before Christmas). Had there been more active competing of guides there then climbers would have benefitted from that in the last few years but the other guides disappeared. 

Perhaps the competition meant that the other guides were no longer viable (or started to look too risky)?

 

 

In reply to The Pulsing Motorik of Neu!:

> Perhaps the competition meant that the other guides were no longer viable (or started to look too risky)?

No, the authors didn’t print enough and left the area.

But it would be great if we could put this viability nonsense to bed. If by ‘viability’ people mean that selling the full print run doesn’t raise as much money as it costs to print it, or sells so slowly as to make it not worthwhile, then modern climbing guidebooks shouldn’t get anywhere near that. You would have to have be totally incompentant in order to lose money on a guidebook to somewhere like El Chorro. As I have often said, it really is possible to print a guidebook to pretty much anywhere and not lose money. I do know the figures on this one.

Alan

In reply to Alan James

I don’t entirely disagree. And I’m not necessarily knocking Rockfax. But I’m not convinced there isn’t a tension between the ‘locals muddling along’ of the past (at least that’s how a lot of past guides to the likes of Montanejos appeared) and the new guidebook age where more professional publishers can rely on modest economies of scale, established distribution etc.

Im not necessarily judging that one or other is morally superior.

In the long run my concern would be that there’s no profit from money which would otherwise have  gone to developing and re-equipping routes and that guides will still be available when fashion moves on to the next in-destination.

I’ll shortly be buying the new slate guide as that one definitely fulfills a need.

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Yes, a few individuals have had their posting restricted - I can think of four over the 20 years of the forum. These are people who don't engage in debate and only try to undermine.

Logs06 (the latest banned UKC user) simply reposted Aris's text about how his guidebook contributes to crag maintenance on Kalymnos. It's quite troubling that you think this amounts to undermining the debate rather than engaging in it. I would say this is one of the most important aspects. We're still waiting to hear about Rockfax/UKC's contributions.

As for UKC controlling the narrative, this is not just achieved through deleting posts and restricting users. The launch of the Rockfax topo to Kalymnos was headline news on UKC back in May. Will the latest edition of the local topo get the same treatment?

And then there are the rave reviews of Rockfax publications: https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/publications/guidebooks/chamonix_rockfax-8891

Independent journalism? I don't think so!

Now I suspect a majority of UKCers are quite comfortable with this - and why not? However please stop the nauseating portrayal of UKC/Rockfax as a beacon of righteousness, selflessly working to improve the lot of climbers. In reality you're a business which has no qualms about diverting sales away from locally-produced topos which make a much more significant contribution to the local climbing community. (Although this only applies to some of your guidebooks.)

> Of course we could remove the forums altogether. Do you think that would increase or decrease the public discourse on controversial matters relating to Rockfax and UKC?

I suspect this would be the death of UKC. And how would Rockfax fare then?

 

In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

 

> However please stop the nauseating portrayal of UKC/Rockfax as a beacon of righteousness, selflessly working to improve the lot of climbers. In reality you're a business which has no qualms about diverting sales away from locally-produced topos which make a much more significant contribution to the local climbing community. (Although this only applies to some of your guidebooks.)

I think you are missing my point here.

OutdoorsMagic was a business. It started with noble intentions and did some good stuff in the early days. But as soon as it chose to become the product of much bigger businesses it started going down hill. They starved it of funds, traded it back and forth, threw away legacy user content and gradually turned it into an advertorial mouthpiece for its sponsors. When they decided they couldn’t get any more out of it they pulled the plug and have presumably moved on to some other poor business they can exploit.

UKC/Rockfax has been innovating for 28 years and we have more new stuff happening now than ever before. We don’t owe any third party anything and invest everything we make back in the business.

You may find this point nauseating. I think it is a significant difference that dismissively putting everything under the all-encompassing category ‘business’ doesn’t do justice to. 

> I suspect this would be the death of UKC. And how would Rockfax fare then?

Again you missed the point, but this time it was probably deliberate since honestly answering the question I posed would have undermined your argument.

Alan

In reply to The Pulsing Motorik of Neu!:

> In the long run my concern would be that there’s no profit from money which would otherwise have  gone to developing and re-equipping routes and that guides will still be available when fashion moves on to the next in-destination.

21 years since our first Spain guide and 11 years since our first France guide, I have seen no real evidence of local areas being starved of funds. In fact there is evidence of the opposite in old forgotten areas that haven’t been featured in bigger international guidebooks - like Montanejos that you mention above. I really don’t want to claim this for Rockfax though, it is more a product of publicity. Popular areas do okay, they get guidebooks and articles and word of mouth and people visit and locals see the demand and respond.

If local guidebooks are so connected with funding development, why do some of them not even mention this in their pages? Why are they so hard to get hold of? Why do most not have associated PayPal funding pages that they are ideally placed to promote? Why do some areas in France turn down my offers to donate to bolting?

I remain convinced that the local guidebook debate is almost never actually about funding bolts. It is about localism and people resenting outsiders producing books about their area. This is an understandable attitude and one I would certainly feel in the UK if an outsider did a guidebook to Stanage.

That isn’t to say that guidebooks don’t have a role to play in generating money for local climbers, and hopefully we are able to help make up any shortfall with our donations. However, in the grand scheme of things, guidebooks have a bigger role to play in promotion and publicity. After all, Rockfax aren’t the only people who make money out of the presence of bolts in crags across Europe, but we are certainly tiny compared to the gear manufacturers that need bolts so that they can sell their ropes, harnesses and quickdraws. Surely these companies make a much better target for local funding and guidebooks are crucial in promoting this. I am sure some of them do support these efforts, but if a gear manufacturer said to me, “give us a full page advert in your guidebook and I’ll donate €X000 to local access and bolting”, I’d gratefully accept.

> I’ll shortly be buying the new slate guide as that one definitely fulfills a need.

Great, hope you like it. 

Alan

tjekel - on 13:09 Sat
In reply to cha1n:

So in earnest ... the complexities of individual and collective decision making concerning the selection of holiday destinations, as well as the expenditure patterns would make useful academic thesis material.

Actually in many places it is fact that the.local tourism funds bolting. And they do know why. To make this work they need guidebooks and publicity ... which professional publishers do better than guys who sell copied leaves at the bar tabac.

jimtitt - on 16:46 Sat
In reply to tjekel:

> Actually in many places it is fact that the.local tourism funds bolting. And they do know why. To make this work they need guidebooks and publicity ... which professional publishers do better than guys who sell copied leaves at the bar tabac.

Well yes, when we developed San Vito we gave guide production to a commercial publisher even though all of us had experience of producing and publishing guides. In fact Rockfax were on the shortlist but we knew the pace of development would require regular new editions so went with Gebro Verlag who produce a new guide roughly every year. AND we give the information to the local Italian guide producers as well. (San Vito was privately funded and we expect no contribution from either guide producer, their job is to provide accurate, up to date information, not funding though both are active in bolting new routes).

Kalymnos was of course initially developed by Italians (there were no local climbers) and then by mainland Greek climbers and "foreigners" such as the Remy brothers  and funding for the development and the guide book was from public funds (an EU tourism development project) and at the discussion/conference at that time it was made clear that experience showed the funding for maintenance/new development should come from other sources than guide production as guide profit would never even begin to cover the required costs. The guys from Arco who were involved in the discussions were quite clear on this and it´s not suprising. Producing a guide using professional staff is barely profitable anyway as Alan will tell you and the "excess" is nothing compared with the six or seven figure costs required for maintenance of areas such as Kalymnos or San Vito.

I know both Aris and Alan and if the report above is true then it is clearly a shot in the foot, one cannot accuse, directly or indirectly someone of merely copying the hard work by the original guide producers when they print newer information than is available in the current local guide.

Stairclimber on 19:03 Sat
In reply to cha1n:

Many interesting points but especially applaud Alan James for his responses. It seems too easy to attack Rockfax as the villain because of its commercial succcess, although I did initially totally support the local guide book producers as I think of Kalymnos as such a special place. Of course people can buy the guidebook of their choice, but I do hope that something more positive can come out of all this negative publicity. More direct cash deposited in the bolt fund by 'outraged climbers' perhaps? Less photographing of topos and sharing one book between a large party of climbers? Personally I like to donate each visit and resent people asking to 'have a quick look' at my guidebook while there, though feel totally at ease with sharing free info at other venues. I do hope that the name changing episode becomes a piece of amusing folklore and do not want to feel awkward about displaying a Rockfax guide should I choose to buy it in three weeks time.

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> I remain convinced that the local guidebook debate is almost never actually about funding bolts.

This is certainly the official UKC/Rockfax line, which is probably why you felt the need to ban Logs06 for posting Aris's text about how his guidebook contributes to bolt funding. 

> It is about localism and people resenting outsiders producing books about their area.

I've come across many guidebooks produced by foreigners, a number of these produced by Rockfax/UKC. The only time I have heard any grievances is when they have had an impact on bolt funding.

> This is an understandable attitude and one I would certainly feel in the UK if an outsider did a guidebook to Stanage.

Really! That's just weird!

> That isn’t to say that guidebooks don’t have a role to play in generating money for local climbers, and hopefully we are able to help make up any shortfall with our donations.

Your donations page suggests that you don't contribute much, if anything, to several areas to which you produce guidebooks. Your credibility on this issue would be much higher if you gave detailed information on the amounts donated to each area covered. If a local club refuses a donation, it would be useful tell us how much was offered so we can decide if it was an appropriate amount or just a token gesture. 

> However, in the grand scheme of things, guidebooks have a bigger role to play in promotion and publicity. 

UK climbers don't like their crags to be crowded, why do you assume foreign climbers want more publicity for theirs! Does the local economy really trump the climbing experience every time? If that were the case we'd see a lot more bolted areas in Britain. 

 

In reply to jimtitt:

> Producing a guide using professional staff is barely profitable anyway as Alan will tell you 

"Print guidebooks are integral to what we do and it is only because of our success with print guidebooks that we are where we are."

Alan James (a little higher in this thread)

 

Doug on 10:44 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

"UK climbers don't like their crags to be crowded, why do you assume foreign climbers want more publicity for theirs! Does the local economy really trump the climbing experience every time?"

In many places in France, and I assume elsewhere, bolting is, at least partly, paid for by the local council to increase visitor numbers & help the local economy.

As for localism & feeling put out if 'foreigners' produce guides to British crags, there is a French guide to Ben Nevis which I don't think provoked any outrage when published

In reply to Doug:

> In many places in France, and I assume elsewhere, bolting is, at least partly, paid for by the local council to increase visitor numbers & help the local economy.

Certainly, but if cafe owners in the UK started influencing bolting policy on the crags I think we'd hear a lot of protests on these forums. I understand that it's increasingly common for French new routers to keep quiet about their new crags.

> As for localism & feeling put out if 'foreigners' produce guides to British crags, there is a French guide to Ben Nevis which I don't think provoked any outrage when published

Exactly my point. Never heard of anyone fundamentally objecting to a foreigner putting up new routes or producing a guidebook. In my experience it's always been about bolt funding. However, I'll be following the latest Kalymnos developments with interest. I hope the new bolting committee will be able to treat all new route applications fairly and objectively? Unfortunately it seems to be a little loaded!

 

tjekel - on 12:27 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

This is exactly great shit: the bolting committee consists of aris, claude, and some friend - exactly those guys behind the renaming shit. Personally I am not waiting for their approval.

Post edited at 12:32
jimtitt - on 12:35 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> "Print guidebooks are integral to what we do and it is only because of our success with print guidebooks that we are where we are."

> Alan James (a little higher in this thread)


The comment I made was regarding the size of guide book profits related to the costs of maintaining larger sport climbing areas, this I thought was quite obvious.

In reply to jimtitt:

> The comment I made was regarding the size of guide book profits related to the costs of maintaining larger sport climbing areas, this I thought was quite obvious.

"without Rockfax UKC wouldn't exist - none of it, not the forums, the logbooks, the news articles or anything" Alan James (in this thread)

Running UKC must be equivalent to a fair number of bolts!

In reply to jimtitt:

> when we developed San Vito we gave guide production to a commercial publisher...  (San Vito was privately funded and we expect no contribution from either guide producer...).

This is not the first time you use bolting at San Vito as an example of how an area can be developed without the need for guidebook funding. However, there are numerous warnings on the internet about bolts breaking in San Vito. Are these the ones that you were involved in placing?

andyb211 on 13:08 Sun
In reply to tjekel:

> This is exactly great shit: the bolting committee consists of aris, claude, and some friend - exactly those guys behind the renaming shit. Personally I am not waiting for their approval.

Absolutely spot Tomas as usual : )

Post edited at 13:09
jon on 13:13 Sun
In reply to andyb211:

Maybe Chris C should be on it too to balance things up a bit...

In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> This is certainly the official UKC/Rockfax line, which is probably why you felt the need to ban Logs06 for posting Aris's text about how his guidebook contributes to bolt funding. 

Logs06 was banned for around the 5th or 6th time. He is a persistent offender who we don't allow on the forums. His post remains though which undermines your conspiracy theory a bit.

> I've come across many guidebooks produced by foreigners, a number of these produced by Rockfax/UKC. The only time I have heard any grievances is when they have had an impact on bolt funding.

My point is that it is often said to be about bolting, but that is not always the case. These places where you say it had an impact on bolt funding - how did that manifest? Did they say they couldn't afford bolts any more, or show you a big pile of their books which hadn't sold?

> Your donations page suggests that you don't contribute much, if anything, to several areas to which you produce guidebooks. Your credibility on this issue would be much higher if you gave detailed information on the amounts donated to each area covered. If a local club refuses a donation, it would be useful tell us how much was offered so we can decide if it was an appropriate amount or just a token gesture.

Our donations are documented here - https://www.rockfax.com/news/category/donations/

The reason I haven't publicised the area where it appears our offers have been turned down is that they haven't officially been turned down, it is just that the offer is on the table and hasn't been accepted for 2 years. The amount offered hasn't been stated yet since we needed to establish which areas it would cover, but it wouldn't be a token gesture.

I also notice that you haven't answered my question from two posts ago again.

Alan

 

 

Post edited at 15:15
jimtitt - on 15:11 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

No.

tjekel - on 16:24 Sun
In reply to jon:

Not sure about his chances for survival.

hillman - on 16:32 Sun
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Just an general input from a foreign climber (Norway) regarding our experiences with guidebooks for different areaes.  This includes destinations in Spain, France, Italy, Thailand, Greece and Turkey. A major attraction is always a good available guidebook for the area, or else we would have choosen another destination.

But our group have also each time bought a local guidebook, as the combination gives a better info.  And the extra cost of 30-40 Euro/£ is small compared with other costs on such a trip. 

The amount of money used at the destination (acc, food, dining, ++) must mean much more to the local community than sales of the guidebook could?  And this should also benefit the funding of the bolting.

Maybe Calymnos is a special case regarding the ‘need’ for an extra guidebook, but I still think that is an odd view. 

When the news of the new Rockfax for Calymnos came out this spring, I was at Leonidio. This is an area that was included in Aris’ Climb Greece, ‘competing’ with the local guidebook.  And according to the local climbers, his inclusion of Leonidio was not wanted by them. I am sure there are different views on this, but it does show that also Aris can act controversial. 

Regarding the request for Rockfax to announce the donations to bolting, where are the similar request to Aris? I would guess the guidebooks are his personal property, direct or indirect, and the basis of his own income. Anyone with correct info, feel free til inform us. 

This level of speculation isn’t nice, but the request should go both ways. 

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Logs06 was banned for around the 5th or 6th time. He is a persistent offender who we don't allow on the forums.

It would be interesting to learn a bit more about why people are banned. Is this a unilateral decision on your part? You say he's a persistent offender but what is the crime? Which posting guidelines did he infringe?

> Our donations are documented here - https://www.rockfax.com/news/category/donations/

I know, I've checked. There are no concrete figures for many areas and others aren't covered at all. If you want to be credible, you must provide detailed information. I would sort these these on your webpage according to the areas you cover, rather than by posting all-encompassing updates which make verification difficult.

> I also notice that you haven't answered my question from two posts ago again.

> Of course we could remove the forums altogether. Do you think that would increase or decrease the public discourse on controversial matters relating to Rockfax and UKC?

Is this the question you meant? If so it's completely nonsensical. If you remove the forums, UKC will cease to exist and then Rockfax will no longer have a media outlet. Of course you will decrease public discourse but you will also lose your platform.

I can appreciate that you are in a bit of a quandary though. The media side of the company (UKC) is vital for the profit-generating side (Rockfax) to flourish. However UKC is dependent on it's public forums to attract users, the same public forums that allow users to criticize Rockfax's ethics. So you try to control the criticism while still appearing to adhere to accepted standards of freedom of expression. Tricky!

Personally, I think you should put your responsibility as a media outlet before any corporate protection of Rockfax. You should be confident that the choices you make in publishing guidebooks can withstand any public scrutiny. Users should only be restricted if they do not abide by the posting guidelines. You should be able to justify any bans you impose to your other users. You could start with Logs06.

But as a number of UKC users will likely point out: your sandpit, your rules!

 

 

La benya - on 17:07 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

Dude... stop moaning about ukc on ukc. Bugger off.

If you don’t like someone sticking up for their own business on a forum that they provide for free then a) you’re bonkers and b) bugger off. 

It’s not a charity. He doesn’t have to do anything that you suggest. If you don’t like it vote with your feet and bugger off. It’s boring and cringeworthy 

La benya - on 17:09 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

Just as an FYI... you can get banned for lots of things. For example- telling someone to insert certain appendages in certain other orifices. But that was 10 years ago now. 

jon on 18:00 Sun
In reply to La benya:

Could you provide a detailed list of appendages and orifices please

Post edited at 18:04
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> It would be interesting to learn a bit more about why people are banned. Is this a unilateral decision on your part? You say he's a persistent offender but what is the crime? Which posting guidelines did he infringe?

We decided many years ago not to discuss specific moderating of individuals on the forums and the policy has served us well. On the whole people seem to approve of the moderating (90+% in our user surveys) and it is certainly more relaxed than many passion hobby sites. So I won't discuss this here but feel free to email me if you want to take the discussion off line.

> I know, I've checked. There are no concrete figures for many areas and others aren't covered at all. If you want to be credible, you must provide detailed information. I would sort these these on your webpage according to the areas you cover, rather than by posting all-encompassing updates which make verification difficult.

Usually we don't publish figures where the person requested that we keep it quiet. People do this for different reasons but sometimes there are factions within groups, some who are happy to accept donations, and others who are not. The ones who are happy prefer to just accept the donation and get on with the bolting. We have done this in a number of places and there are a handful of donations that don't even appear on our donation pages.

There are many other reasons why local bolt funds probably don't want to publicise their figures. They are quite ad hoc usually and there is plenty of competition for other more public funding in their areas. If you are going to a local council for funds then you don't want it to be publicly known that an overseas guidebook company has just given you a wodge of cash. In my experience it is best if we just accept the ways things are and get on with it. Also, actually trying to quantify and account for everything could easily lead to a situation where everything became far more formalised and regulations creep in. Kalymnos has a great example of this happening with the €300,000 EU grant it got a few years ago. In the end this was used to rebolt only 400 routes - that is an astronomical €750/ route. There are several theories why this amount is so high one of which is that it was because everything needed to be done by the book. Accountability leads to this sort of thing. I think we want to hold off this sort of intrusion into climbing for as long as possible.

> Is this the question you meant? If so it's completely nonsensical. If you remove the forums, UKC will cease to exist and then Rockfax will no longer have a media outlet. Of course you will decrease public discourse but you will also lose your platform.

Well it was hypothetical of course but I thought that was obvious. I was just illustrating the point that you were moaning about us controlling the discussion, but without us there would have been no discussion. Is some discussion not better than no discussion?

> I can appreciate that you are in a bit of a quandary though. The media side of the company (UKC) is vital for the profit-generating side (Rockfax) to flourish. However UKC is dependent on it's public forums to attract users, the same public forums that allow users to criticize Rockfax's ethics. So you try to control the criticism while still appearing to adhere to accepted standards of freedom of expression. Tricky!

Actually we aren't in a quandary at all, we are perfectly happy with the moderation and the editorial independence of UKC. Both UKC and Rockfax are the most critically assessed brands on the UKC Forums. And UKC is not dependent on its forums to attract visitors, far more of our traffic arrives elsewhere on the site these days, and UKC finances itself. So wrong on quite a few counts there.

Alan

 

Post edited at 18:11
In reply to La benya:

> Dude... stop moaning about ukc on ukc. Bugger off.

Dude (!), follow the conversation. The esteemed leader of the UKC asked me a question and then insisted I answer it. I carried out his wish but voiced an opinion that was contrary to that of his greatness. This is called debating, a concept you are obviously unfamiliar with.

Now scuttle off back to N Korea and stop interfering in the free world!

 

planetmarshall on 18:20 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> Dude (!), follow the conversation. The esteemed leader of the UKC asked me a question and then insisted I answer it. I carried out his wish but voiced an opinion that was contrary to that of his greatness. 

And yet you have not yet been banned, which goes somewhat contrary to your earlier accusation of UKC "controlling the narrative".

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> and UKC finances itself. So wrong on quite a few counts there.

A little higher on this thread you wrote:

"without Rockfax UKC wouldn't exist - none of it, not the forums, the logbooks, the news articles or anything"

How are we supposed to believe your claims of covert bolt funding when you give us this!

planetmarshall on 18:24 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

> A little higher on this thread you wrote:

> "without Rockfax UKC wouldn't exist - none of it, not the forums, the logbooks, the news articles or anything"

> How are we supposed to believe your claims of covert bolt funding when you give us this!

UKC now funds itself but did not initially? Seems pretty obvious to me.

In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

Good effort there Neil. You kept me going for quite a while but the persistence today on fairly pedantic matters has given the game away. Nice touch with the alter-ego profile details though.

Alan

Rampikino - on 18:43 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

Let’s be frank - the REAL uncomfortable truth here is that your determination to demonise Rockfax is not only leading to petty language that you use to portray Alan personally, but a grim confirmation bias. This means that you are steadfastly sticking to finding anything you can to support the narrative of “Big, nasty Rockfax” VS. “Honest local climbers”

It is obvious from the various viewpoints on multiple Kalymnos threads that this narrative has more holes in it than Malham limestone.

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Am I still here?!!

In reply to Rampikino:

>  This means that you are steadfastly sticking to finding anything you can to support the narrative of “Big, nasty Rockfax” VS. “Honest local climbers”

Actually I've also been questioning the legitimacy of the Kalymnos bolting committee, which seems to be composed entirely of local climbers...

 

 

tjekel - on 19:53 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth: wrong again. Its non-local climbers pretending to be local and exploring if the climbing community could do with the same as ordinary people a few miles further east.

 

La benya - on 20:10 Sun
In reply to the uncomfortable truth:

I have followed the conversation. That’s why I’m telling you you’re boring. If you dislike the site so much, go away. Simple. 


Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.