UKC

Does anyone know how the climber is who took a fall at Kilnsey this afternoon? And do we know how it happened? 

Don't really think that accidents should be discussed on the forum out of respect, especially considering you don't know the outcome. 

Post accident and after a proper investigation, yes. Now, no. 

Bad taste 

Post was well intentioned, as I read it. Telling off not required.

In your opinion. 

That's fine, we're all entitled to one and I was conveying mine. 

Thanks to those people with well intentioned replies. Yes, my post is well intentioned and I’d just like to know that this chap’s ok and that his partner/friends are ok too.

Whatever happened, people need to be cautious, particularly if a piece of fixed gear might be to blame. Of course, we don’t know what happened so, as Sir says we need to be careful.

I didn’t consider that showing concern was in bad taste earlier nor do I now. 

Blimey, that wasn’t the response I was expecting for my return to this forum after 8 years!

no one is interested in your opinion

disagree with you, youre completely wrong- furthermore you aren't  entitled to have an opinion or be the morality police when it comes to deciding who asks what. the OP asked how the climber was which is a nice thing, then asked how it happened. there doesn't need to be an investigation, it was a simple question which if answered could be helpful to others, and if not then we find out in the fulness of time ( or not)

tom

Too much - you've hopped on the bandwagon a little too hard there I'd say.  The telling off was a bit uncalled for, but so is the backlash.  The OP could be construed as rubbernecking to be fair.

My first reaction was that it smacked of rubbernecking - natural enough, but I felt uncomfortable.

If I was the victim I would be pretty pissed off at my misfortune, incompetence or whatever being the subject of Saturday night internet ramblings.

What a set of cynical people we seem to be here.

Firstly, if it were me I’d be grateful and heart-warmed that people were concerned about my well-being, even if they don’t know me...”no man is an island” and all that...but that’s just me. I like to be bothered and care about people.

Secondly, I certainly wasn’t rubbernecking. As my wife was driving us south through Wharfedale yesterday afternoon I was pointing out the talented climbers at Kilnsey to my 3 and 4 year old boys, when we sadly saw the unfortunate climber take his fall from what appeared to about 25 feet.

My original post was neither gratuitous, fantastical or rubbernecking. I could have titled the post “You should have seen the fall I saw earlier”. 

If you couldn’t respond to my original concern, why take the time to bother trolling it at all? 

I must be right in saying that none of you naysayers watch the news when there’s been a bombing or terrorist attack, no? You know, when we don’t know what’s happened and there hasn’t yet been a full report. 

I just asked an honest, caring and considerate question about someone who I hope and pray is ok. Why turn this good-natured care and concern into cynicism and doubt? 

I for one hope he’s ok. I didn’t ask for gossip or sensationalism, just if he’s alright  

Jesus Christ this thread is a shit show. 

Best wishes to the climber.

It certainly is. What a shame. Best wishes to the climber, as you say. I’m off. 

Edit: thanks to the kind chap/chapess on this forum who has contacted me to let me know what happened. 

Very well put. I am appalled at the response you got to your OP.

This thread is UKC at it's worst and IMHO one of it's most shameful ever.

My best wishes and thoughts are with the unfortunate climber.

Hi Trangia,

what a shame that you appear to be right. I stopped posting on UKC years ago because of mean-spirited, rude, abusive and snobbish posters...not in response to me, I hasten to add. I was just appalled at how people were speaking to others.

And this is the welcome I receive after such a long absence. I doubt I’ll be back very often, if at all. Cheers.

There are still reasonable people and there is still reasonable discussion; minds have sometimes been changed rather than positions entrenched.

But yes, it's sad to report that this thread has shown the worst side of the forums and I for one am sorry that your return has been soured by the loudmouth smallminds.  Best wishes to you and the fallen climber both.

T.

Best wishes to all those involved; climber, partners, family and friends.

No it's a long way from being the worst.

One person got quite a lot of moral support for suggesting Mypyrex deserved a punch in the face; another atrocious post had a whole catalogue of jokes arising from the fact that a man had been trampled to death by cows while walking his dog.

Sadly, at the end of all this we are no closer to finding out what happened, what might have been the causes, and therefore able to use the accident as an example of what we should be on the lookout for ourselves.  

I've banged on about this for years, but the culture on UKC seems to be one of "shut-up and pretend nothing happened"....which predictably does nothing to improve safety culture.

Well there are some Nietzsche followers on here.

Apart from his assertion that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, he also came out with

"I should not like to see rudeness under-rated.... it is one of our foremost virtues."

That's not the way I read it.

There have, sadly, been accidents that have resulted in people dying and as UKC is a popular site, it's one of the first places that journalists will find when they seek information about such accidents; it's also somewhere that relatives and friends of the deceased may discover in their own search for more information.  The culture of not speculating on the cause of accidents, or discussing lessons that might be learned from accidents, whether fatal or otherwise, is that such things aren't discussed on the thread that reports the accident but on a different thread started for that purpose.  That way any discussion about best practice and what we might take from an incident to improve our own behaviours is separated from reports about it, and such discussion might stand a chance of not adding fuel to journos seeking to sensationalise an incident.

So the culture as I understand it is that if you want to discuss cause, effect and lessons thereby learned, start a new thread about it.  By and large people seem not to, but that's a different thing.

T.

This thread seems to me to have spiralled wildly out of control. I rather thought there was an unspoken consensus that accidents should dealt with great circumspection - maybe the victim, or someone closely involved, might choose to comment or provide more info, but for the rest of us - STFU until the dust has settled.

The best wishes for the victim and any others involved is a given; there but for the grace of God go any of us. 

Yes, opinions do change. I think that just a few years ago the OP of this thread would have been largely condemned on here rather than largely supported as seems the case here! So I think that it is certainly still a reasonable subject for discussion.

The trouble with this forum is some people comment under an assumed name and hide behind it .

this is not particularly aimed at you but also all the other so called posters .

keith s

Hi there, 

I do know what happened now and do hope that he makes a good recovery. 

Yes, this does seem to have spiralled out of control. It seems ludicrous that genuine concern for one human being to another should be treated with scepticism, derision and contempt. 

It’s only a little part of life and the world, but the way people have behaved in here makes me very sad to be a part of it. 

''It seems ludicrous that genuine concern for one human being to another should be treated with scepticism, derision and contempt.'

Bloody nonsense. Get over yourself. There isn't a single example of any of those emotions on this thread.

Likewise.  'Great circumspection' still seems wholly appropriate to me, I'm a bit surprised at the way this thread has gone.

They were more puns than jokes, and I thought we'd mooved on since then. 

I don't suppose you want to extend your  pun making skills to the person who took the fall at Kilnsey?

Because if simply posting about the incident can cause so much upset , joking about it would be a lot worse. 

Nope

I'm more amoosed  by the fact you're dragging up something that happened over a year ago and are still wearing your "humour police" hat.  Get it over it man.  Moove on.   Everyone else has.

Everyone has a different sense of humour.

For my own part, I find jokes arising from a tragic death far more offensive than uttering the words "women's lingerie" in a crowded lift. Others obviously disagree.

I only brought it up because Trangia thought the Kilnsey thread had reached new depths on UKC and I disagreed with him.

I recall a thread where someone in graphic detail , described how one poster fantasised about having sex with his daughter. Shocking and disgusting even by UKC standards. It was quickly pulled. Cow puns fade into insignificance.. .in my opinion anyway . 

I agree absolutely. Who wouldn't? But the 'even by UKC standards' must be deeply depressing to Alan James. Alan's moderation of UKC is excellent but he must pull his hair out sometimes when threads spiral out of control. 

To use some people's favourite word on the topic of humour, it's all about "context".

If the cow puns had arisen from something other than a man's death, I would agree with you.

For many, the ability to joke about tragic deaths is a vital part of fending off crushing sadness

As I said, we're all different. It certainly wouldn't work for me. 

And I've yet to see a series of jokes based on a climbing death on here.

Tragic deaths are annually celebrated and laughed about with the Darwin awards and the cow trampling death did, I think, to those of us not in the farming community have a bit of the Darwinesque about it.  It would probably be inappropriate to joke about a climbing death on here but I'm sure that on, say, a dairy farming forum the idea of something as daft as dying trying to climb Ben Nevis in winter might be considered fair game for a giggle. Yes, it's all about context.

Ever thought of going into cow-nselling?

Having previously been in a position of having witnessed a serious accident and been heavily involved in the ensuing rescue only to see a thread on here asking what the cause of the accident was (this was clearly the priority, not the wellbeing of the climber), I am definitely not in favour of  this kind of thread being posted on here.

It's a peculiar breed of rubber necking whereby people feel that THEY must know what happened in an accident which I strongly disagree with. People have been climbing in large enough numbers for long enough and with sufficient quality control applied to new equipment such that an accident is incredibly unlikely to have resulted from something of which climbers were not already aware (barring bolt failure and perhaps loose rock), ultimately climbing after the accident is no less safe for the OP than before. Speculation about the causes of an accident serves no-one in the community and instead just provides fodder for lazy journalists who have nothing better to fill their columns with.

If the community wishes to learn from accidents I personally feel that it would be better done anonymously via a document such as Accidents in North American Climbing: (http://publications.americanalpineclub.org/about_accidents)

People ought to be considerate to those who are injured/ killed, the families, witnesses of the incident (particularly the climbing partner as they may be blaming themselves or trying to straighten things out in their mind), this desire to know what happened at the expense of those involved in the accident/ the aftermath is one of few distasteful aspects of the mountaineering community.

I hope yourself, Fiona and Scamp are getting on well, looks like you've been putting in the mileage this winter in your van!

To be fair to the OP his first question was as to the well being of the climber.

As he actually witnessed the fall I would not have called his post rubbernecking, and asking how it happened was a perfectly legitimate and entirely natural question to have asked.

How this thread degenerated thereafter is another matter.

As the OP I can once again reiterate that first and foremost I am concerned about the climber, his partner, friends and family. 

Also, as I now know what happened I will still feel safe climbing that route. Climbing might not be any safer for me, but now that I know the cause of this poor lad's accident it certainly won't be any more dangerous.

Not in reply to you in particular, just wondering what massive bell-end would dislike your post directly above?

And yes, I expect to get plenty of ironic dislikes for this post

I've become inured to it now!

Perhaps I have a much too ideal, simplistic and romantic view of forums like this where I think that like-minded people get together. My bad. I'll know better in the future.

You have noted that the first reply to your OP has garnered 125 dislikes haven’t you???

edit: and that the very next post supports you?

I hadn't noticed, no. I've been turned! Throughout the course of this thread I've been moulded into a cynic!

so is he OK?

The statement about rubbernecking wasn't directly aimed at you, it was more in the vein of the whole debate about things. My personal view about this is that those involved in the accident or the aftermath/ present at the time of the accident have a reason to know, being personally invested in what has happened. 

People standing watching a rescue take place as a way of occupying their time can take a long walk off a short pier if they think their peace of mind/ personal interest matters one jot to any of the people involved, either they were incapacitated for some reason (effectively a casualty themselves), or they knew enough to help and were too selfish to do so, or they didn't know enough to help the situation and therefore their opinion is of no value to anyone who was involved in the situation.

The brief reports provided by the Mountain Rescue Teams on their facebook pages are informative about the kinds of errors which people make and provide some degree of learning, however I would not encourage the scope of this to be expanded as team members seem to have plenty to do in their personal lives.

But we all feel differently.  If I'm killed or injured I want my incident to be dissected in detail on UKC and every other available forum.  I want people to learn from it.  I don't see any loss in personal dignity to me nor that the off-chance of someone who knows me being offended by the discussion is valid grounds to prevent it.

Climbing does seem perverse to me in this respect.  Unspoken forum etiquette mirrors that of certain professional sectors "back in the day" when accidents were swept under the carpet, often citing feelings and blame.  In the sectors I am thinking of, this has changed dramatically in the last few decades and demonstrably for the better.  It was a major cultural shift, against much resistance, changing a century or more of prevailing dogma.  

I do see the counter-argument being put forward here.  I just think we would be better off if these issues were discussed and that the default reaction to them wasn't that discussion is automatically negative, offensive or distasteful.  More to the point, I don't agree with the constant claim that the discussion should take place elsewhere - which just seems to end up with a "no room at the inn" situation as "somewhere else" never eventuates. 

It's apparent that dozens, if not hundreds, of accidents that take place in the UK each year.  But you could be excused for thinking that number is zero given the coverage they get here.  Almost all pass without comment, other than a few cursory words on some on a range of different mountain rescue sites, if you have the diligence to regularly check them.  There is no discussion.  There is little analysis.  I'm left presuming that the every-day practices I undertake when climbing are still fully up to date, risk-free, and completely unaware that they may be major contributory factors in all the accidents that take place.  It really is a missed opportunity not to discuss them. 

I wouldn't be surprised if one of the industries you talk about is the rail industry, given the layered structure of safety systems we have in the UK. There could be some value in a system such as NIR-Online being implemented (an initial report that a safety affecting incident has occured is emailed out to subscribers, then a subsequent more detailed report is sent out once the details are fully known), or RAIB reports. There is little to be gained from a discussion where most, if not all, parties have only some of the facts, there is benefit to a system where an experienced individual with knowledge of the incident can consider the events which occurred.

That is true to a point. 

But in the absence of anything better, I think we can accept the limitations of free-flow forum discussion, acknowledge that anyone is free to vacate the conversation at any time should they not like it, and take accident discussions as useful catalysts for a wide-ranging discussion safety issues.

Refusing to have a half-way useful discussion because its not the ideal method is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  As it stands I'd be afraid to post about any accident on UKC given the strength with which many people feel they should not be discussed at all - other than to post condolences.

I'll reiterate what I understand to be the convention: you, anyone, can discuss whatever you wish about accidents, just start a new post about it rather than doing it on the post that reports the incident.  

Your understanding of the convention is different. It would be worth resolving these differences so that everyone knows what's what.  

T.

I might be confused, but isn't this thread exactly where the discussion should take place?  The OP started a post about the accident, asking what happened.

This doesn't appear to be a condolences thread (even now it's not even clear if someone was injured or if an accident even happened) as far as I can tell. 

Are you saying that the details cannot be discussed here?  Another thread needs to be started additional to this one, and only there can the question posed by the OP be answered?    

If so, and maybe I'm insensitive, isn't that a bit pointless?  I know its a minor thing, but its exactly the kind of unspoken rule (one if breached is likely to result in much online opprobrium) that just makes discussion unlikely.  I'd certainly be unclear on which thread I'm allowed to discuss what on - does that apply only to fatalities, is it dependent on the severity of injury, etc.

I get that some people are very sensitive to this.  But surely they can just stay away from the discussion altogether if so?  Far easier to just let folks discuss.

youtube.com/watch?v=STIvNjWobzA&

I think wrt to winter it’s more appropriate as the mentality of we got away with something that seemed only moderately dodgey 90% of the time and then got caught out is far more of a learning experience. Summer the risks are more obvious in the main or relatively unavoidable and or unpredictable in a more linear understandable way.

Whilst diving maybe goes too far the other way it is a fault of the climbing community that In general we do too little to learn from past mistakes imo ofc etc....

wrt the op I personally think it’s fine in context of what the children saw it etc. It would be good for all to get some positive closure it it happened etc....

This thread would not have happened in the 20th century. The only equivalent would have been angry letters to Climber or High magazine. The response would have been a month later.

The thread is a lesson in rules and etiquette. What can one say online? How can humour and banter be misconstrued? Is it pub talk? Is it serious? How do the readers know the difference? What frame of mind was the poster in? How much had they had to drink? 

Margaret Atwood, was asked what she would do about the current problems about consent in relationships. She offered the 1950's solution of an etiquette book. 

Perhaps, on UKC the etiquette book is simply thrashed out by the wild boisterous thread below the OP,  but there are some poor bruised casualties on the way. 

I mean, we hardly know each other. 

Oh, there’s no doubt about it: an accident happened. It was a big fall and it was horrific to witness as I passed by. I can’t possibly imagine what it must have been like for the climber or his poor partner. 

No matter the cause, be it user error or gear malfunction, we just need to bear in mind that someone got hurt. It’s as simple as that. I hope he’s going to be ok and that his partner’s fine too. 

If someone's died and a coroners' report is pending then there's little sense in speculation. 

It's speculation and rumour that can be distasteful e.g. "oh maybe he forgot to tie his knot" "maybe her gear ripped" etc. 

However, I really don't see the big deal in asking if someone is all right and what happened to them.

Rubber necking is annoying because it slows down traffic to a crawl, whilst checking that someone is well looked after, and if they are, not getting in the way is the sensible thing to do.

Hi Spenser, 

thanks for the reply. Look at the top of the thread though...the accusations about rubbernecking are directed at me. I don’t take it personally, though. It’s just how some people are. 

I wonder, given all the very robust comments and opinions here, what you would say to your 3 and 4 year old boys who have been asking about this poor climber for the past two days? (This isn’t directed at you, Spenser...sometimes tone of voice and intonation can be lost in translation). 

Do I sugarcoat the fall they saw? Do I use honesty? Do I ignore their concerns about “that man who hurt himself” or.....?

I'm a private pilot and the discussion of accidents and sharing of information after an incident is common place.  Yes there is always some speculation, however it's considered good practice to discuss these things openly after the event.  There is no sense that the sharing of information is in some way disrespectful or that this sort of thing should be swept under the carpet.

This sharing of information, whether technical or human causes (or both) has no doubt lead to the saving of many other lives over the years and after each incident, we try to learn from it and make sure that we all avoid the same mistakes.  The sharing of this information benefits everyone's safety.

It also helps of course that that following any accident or incident, these are all are investigated properly by the AAIB and monthly bulletins produced such as here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/air-accident-monthly-bulletins

Regulations or operating procedures are often updated following an incident and most good pilots read these reports with interest and by doing so, learn a little more every time.

These, alongside the improvements in aviation technology of course, are the main the reasons why aviation (whether private or commercial), is so safe these days, and continues to get safer year on year.

It's really admirable how aviation has this culture of no fault/ near miss reporting. How did it come about? Is it a military thing (with many pilots in the past being ex-services)?

Commercial necessity mainly IMO. What was rightly perceived to be risky needed to be made less so and be seen to be less so so its value could be realised. It trickles down to the GA community because nobody wants to be killed by defects in training, routine or their machines that could be rectified if those defects were reported, understood and rectified. And of course it works which helps!

jk

What about people who watch to learn, and be better informed?

It was the aviation industry I was referring to in particular.  The culture is a far cry from what it once was, and all for the better.

No incident is too small to be reported and will feed back to everyone in the industry (private or professional) via the CAA's circulars.  Major incidents will be dissected in detail, down to what time the crew woke up that day, but even minor ones will be sure to feature enough detail that lessons can be learnt.

Can't emphasise enough what a culture shift this was, at a time when the industry of old's attitude very much mirrored the one here on UKC.

As much as this was driven by commercial necessity, it also came about through the otherwise conservative sector's drive to embrace concepts (ergonomics/human factors, psychological theory) that it had hitherto considered quackery. 

If "gammon" old men in the aviation industry can embrace it, why can't the right-on climbing community?

Maybe because aviation IS an industry with regulation and commercial concerns whereas climbing is an anarchic community generally opposed to any sort of rules or being told what to do. They are not comparable cultures.

Yet that industry culture has filtered down to anything from paragliding to hot air ballooning.

To not do so would be like saying only professional rope access accidents should be discussed while anything that happens in recreational climbing is best left ignored.

Possibly.  I've personally only experienced this once (so far) and didn't feel like it was a joking matter at the time, and still don't some years later. I guess we all handle grief differently.

To be honest Andy I was thinking more of people who find themselves having to deal with death and life changing injuries on a regular basis. For most, a robust sense of humour after the event provides a vital pressure release and a good defence against cumulative psychological trauma.

Thanks for your concern, and sorry your kids had to witness it! I got away lightly considering how big the fall was. My sacrum is in multiple pieces but I was able to walk out of the hospital that evening. Thanks also to everyone at the crag who assisted 

Well Done! Good Effort. You are the best of us, you had a go. And it is good to know your walked off... I am sure we all wish you a quick recovery. A lot of concern for you on this site.

In reply to : Pursued by a Bear: The rock it did rebuke.... Oh we did that... Shakespeare on Limestone... Hmm... 'Pleasure and action make the hours seem short'... ? Or for one trained on the Grit... 'Hell is empty and all the devils are here'. 

Not being a parent (and having two who weren't exactly shining examples of parenthood) I can't really answer that question. Teaching children about injury and death must be difficult and uncertainty about matters like those is not good for a child, I had not considered the possibility of children being involved.

As the climber is relatively alright I am glad that you don't need to have a more serious discussion with your children.

If this has been asked and answered fair enough but I haven't seen it. Why didn't you stop to offer help? The road past kinsley is only short so if you witnessed the fall there was no way you could know if the people there were capable of dealing with the incident as you would have been past and out of the area before anyone else there got to the casualty. Personally if I saw something like that at a roadside crag I would have stopped and been up the hill ASAP, if things are being dealt with correctly then I would leave but I would have to be sure as I couldn't live with the thought of a death happening that I could maybe have prevented. I know you had your kids with you but your wife was there too so that's no excuse.

It seems these days the culture is "its nothing to do with me so I don't want to get involved" driving a lot as I do I see it often. A smash happens and whilst I'm grabbing my first aid kit the majority of other drivers are buggering off. 

1) I wasn’t driving that day because I can’t walk and am on crutches. 

2) My 3 and 4 yr old boys were in the car with us.

3) The person driving was not equipped to deal with such a fall.

4) You assume we didn’t stop offer help but you don’t know 

and

5) The Crag was absolutely crawling with climbers who, more than likely, though not necessarily probably, would have been able to deal with it. They were certainly closer to hand and could tend to the lad more quickly than I could. 

Having been witness to and having tended to several mountain victims in the past I can absolutely tell you that sometimes too many cooks cause too many problems.