UKC

Hi I was wandering if anybody can help with the grading of the new route I put up. It's the wall right of chockstone climb and the left side wall of remergence. Ive given it a 6a but I spent that long practising the moves it could be harder or it could be easier due to tiredness. I've told ROCKFAX and BMC about the line but was hoping that a regular 6a/ 6b climber wants a crack at it to confirm the grade I gave it. I dont want to be like the fella that put up the E10 an have it knocked down to E7.

In reply to huzy8t3: bump

In reply to huzy8t3:

Can you give more details. That wall is incredibly popular with boulderers and has multiple variations. Very unlikely anything new at 6a.

In reply to Offwidth:

From another thread, it's the side wall of the Remergence butress, to the right of Slanting Chimney and Chockstone climb. I know I've had a play on it before, but can't remember much about it, and would be surprised if this really is a first ascent, but I can't see it recorded in any guidebook.

In reply to huzy8t3:

The bottom half is the downclimb from the left hand remergence problems, you hand traverse the break in and then downclimb.

In reply to huzy8t3: I'm not falling for this one. Get back under your bridge.

In reply to huzy8t3: About 10 years ago I did a route uprise bit of wall involving a big span off an undercut without Iain the left arête of the crack or the arête of gymnipodies??had opposing runners in the break.was basically one hard move an a bit eliminate so didn't report it but was gonna name it Saturday night fever as the move looked like a tracings dance move.thought it E4/5 6C for my height

In reply to jimjimjim:

Why is it a troll? He's done a route/problem that isn't written up in the definative or summary guides and whilst it's unlikely (but not impossible) to be new given its location he's entitled to ask.

In reply to huzy8t3:

Have you checked here for instance:

http://www.peakbouldering.info/crags/7/boulders/86

In reply to Offwidth: its not on there ive put it on wikitopo and on here with a picture although i dont doubt it has been done before it just hasnt been recoreded. have a crack if when u visit next

In reply to jimjimjim: lol jim did you manage to get the ring back?

In reply to beastofackworth: i used the left crimp on the arete then moved a long reach for the break i spose if you keep right it makes it harder so i might look at this as none of that wall has been recorded

In reply to huzy8t3: Dude, good effort, and i appreciate that your experience of it was one of the best youve had, but three stars? is it really 'nationally significant'? Maybe a little bias eh?

In reply to tallsop: didnt know what the stars meant i just put 3 stars for personal experience

In reply to huzy8t3:

You have been climbing for over 10 years and don't know what the stars mean?


Chris

In reply to huzy8t3: Yeah I wanted th avoid the left arête bit.climbed to right hand on a triangular flatty in the middle of the wall above the break then left hand undercut then big span to break under top.I didn't record it because it seemed too eliminate

In reply to Chris Craggs: Does that mean I'm not a real climber because i go out and have fun climbing trying to push my grades and don't worry about terminology, stars and what people might think. just because I'm only at 6a and bouldering 6c and dont know what the star system is it must mean I'm not as professional as those that do - does it even matter its a hobby so why would i care about stars? when someone repeats it surely they can re-grade or even put a different star grade?? try logging off n give ur head a shake and not take it so serious will you

In reply to huzy8t3: All I asked is would some1 do the route and check grade as it's not been recorded so i take it that nobody wants to and someone who hasnt done the route given it the worst star rating possible whats that about?? a few pre-madonnas on here i think

In reply to huzy8t3: HAHA i can't work out if your serious or not!!!??? so you want to claim & grade a FA, but don't really care how the grading system works. You said you didn't want to be like James Pearson, having your route downgraded... but now it suits you, you don't actually care.

In reply to iamchris: more like I did the route that wasn't recorded then recorded it but wanted to know if any else would grade it the same but as no one will then i guess its upto the BMC i dont know how the stars work all i know is if i think a climb is within my capabilities then I'll have a go at it. I take it thats not the way to do it just to go out and have a laugh and enjoy climbing for what it is??

In reply to huzy8t3:

This is the first thread I've laughed loudly at in a long time! Fantastic!

In reply to gribble: Me too! And was there anything pre-Madonna?

In reply to huzy8t3:

I am not sure where that came from? I was just puzzled how you could climb for 10 years plus, know the route is on Remergence Buttress and profess to have no knowledge of the start system.

For what it is worth, it your route isn't in the guides or on the bouldering site I would think it is new.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs: All i asked for was help grading a climb and get anything but useful replies all i know is danger grading ie Vdiff - E and tecnical grades. Ive never looked at or used star grades. and still dont know what they are

In reply to huzy8t3:

= pants
* = worth a look
** = got to do it if you are in the area
*** = worth travelling halfway round the world for.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs: thankyou in that case its probably * but is it really that strange that Ive never heard of it?

In reply to huzy8t3:
thankyou in that case its probably *

Probably not.

but is it really that strange that Ive never heard of it?

Yes.

If it is accepted as a new route...well done. Don't worry about the grade to much, it'll sort itself out.

In reply to huzy8t3:

I'm in no way attacking you, but yes, I do think that it is strange that you have never heard of the star system in 10 years of climbing. Have you never wondered what the stars meant next to the route name in the guidebooks?

As for the grade, I haven't been on that wall in ages, and I am no longer local, but I would think that you aren't too far off with the grade.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

zero stars really = pants?

That has never been my interpretation of the star system, I must admit.

In reply to Stefan Kruger:

Yes I realised that after I had posted it!

How about:

= of interest to locals
* = worth calling in for
** = worth going out of your way for
*** = worth a special trip for?


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I thought a better way of doing things was the 'bag of ****' symbol for routes that were rubbish a la North Wales Limestone guide.

In reply to metal arms:

Bag of four stars?

Interesting idea!


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs: I think the star system is more crag-dependent than even the grading system.

No star routes at Stanage are of interest to locals. No star routes at Horseshoe Quarry are only of interest to idiots. No star routes at Chee Tor East are of interst to ecologists.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Bloomin' deliberate misunderstanding on a Monday just isn't sporting.

I'm trying to find the will to live at work and you're not helping!

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

or a classic route that the locals want to keep to themselves

In reply to Monk: I have always just followed my dad climbing when he was on SPA and thereafter so did the routes as a second without looking in guidebooks its only recently that I have got back into climbing every weekend and choosing routes but even then i just look at the grade and not rating. I use wikitopo nowadays and there's no stars on as far as i can see. But Ive only been to Burbage and Stanage for the past couple of months.

In reply to huzy8t3:

My point being there is a highball boulder problem recorded on that site which seems to be in roughly the same place. Although many boulder problems and variations are still not recorded anywhere, things are changing fast with all these new web resources. Whatever, the good keen local boulderers know about most unrecorded problems, so in this case why not post on UKB which is where most of the good keen peak boulderers hang out?

In reply to Offwidth: tbh mate i didnt know about it and how many sites were didicated to climbing/bouldering, topos, guides etc. but now Im back into climbing I'll get on that site aswell. I did see the amount of variations on remergence wall and that one wasnt so i had to try it.

In reply to huzy8t3:

Yes, because they're listed right next to the grades in the guide books, which you have presumably been using because you state that you know and understand them. Yet it sounds as though for ten years you've been using these guides to judge how you are progressing and improving, but never once thought "Hang on, what are those little stars next to the route description/grade for?"

In reply to huzy8t3: Face it...the reality is that it's been done countless times before.

In reply to Anonymous:

see why you stayed anon for that-what a prick,its not the op's fault he didnt know it had been done before so give him a break

In reply to Anonymous: haha at couldnt be bothered-another ukc member who darent post their comments under their logged name-what a loser

In reply to Loz FRancomb: another reality is that its not recorded i take it you've done it??

In reply to slacky: I've already answered this and its not a grade its a rating really. I was always a second and never really looked at guide books just went on whatever my dad led but ive had a long break from it and getting back into now I use wikitopo with a d/l pdf i dont need a guide there arent stars as far as i can see on there

In reply to Anonymous: how could I know if its been done before if its not recorded anywhere??

In reply to huzy8t3:

Perhaps consider purchasing some guide books as it is the authors of those who go out and do the groundwork to check and accurately record reported climbs/problems and their grades. Also by buying BMC guide books (which are compiled by volunteers who don't get paid) the money feeds back into the work they do to preserve access to climbing areas and maintain crags.

Also, all the guides have a section on grades and stars and what they mean, so that might help with reconciling your past experiences and applying a grade/star to the current problem/route you are querying about.

Chances are that if its not already recorded its because its eliminate/of no great note. There are tons of squeezed in eliminates such as this all over the grit edges.

There are whole areas which are purposefully left undocumented for those with an exploratory nature to seek out and enjoy the delights of (e.g. Woolpack & Grinah Stones spring to mind). Not every inch of rock needs a name/grade/star.

In reply to Anonymous:

That's no reason not to write it up though. For example, the Stanage guide went from about 900 routes in 1989 to ~1900 in the latest edition. Does the fact that those routes weren't previously recorded mean that they shouldn't be recorded. As for this wall, I don't think it's that trivial that it will have had loads of ascents, and there are many equally/more eliminate lines already recorded. What's the problem?

In reply to Anonymous: i think all anon users should be banned full stop.your having a go at me claiming an ascent?i quite clearly stated i climbed an eliminate line about 10 years ago and didnt report it but gave it a name amongst friends for the fun of it.at the time it was very unlikely the line i climbed had been done before,im fairly sure due to the landing that it hadnt been bouldered but i still didnt report it because it wasnt really a good route and i couldnt be bothered staking a claim.

awwww calling me the name i called you-are we entering into i know you are i said you are so what am i territory?

What is it with people not liking anonymous posters?

Who is 'beastofackworth' anyway? Its nothing more than a pseudonym that you've chosen. The email address associated with your account could easily be fake/dummy set up just for registering here.

What is the one piece of information that you need to get anywhere near close to identifying someone on-line (with the caveat of public computers)? Their IP address which is logged for registered users logged in and for anonymous posters. The only difference is that for the later it is displayed for all and sundry whilst for registered users who choose to login all the time its hidden from everyone else.

Trying to use the fact that someone chooses not to register/login to belittle their viewpoint is a complete waste of time, as what they write is just as valid as whatever you (or I) write.

In reply to Anonymous: No i thought it had been left because the amount of moss I had to clean off of the line.. funny isn't it when we're outside climbing we encourage eachother and talk to strangers yet behind a screen its rather different... sad really

In reply to Monk:

There are ~1400 named routes in the new Stanage guide not ~1900. I wish people would stop counting the logbook totals here and attributing this to the BMC guide as for some reason the logbook numbers are bigger; they include all boulder problems and problems and routes not listed in the guide (some new, some elliminate, some shit):

Some more details here:

http://offwidth.uptosummit.com/stanage07upgrade_topten.html

In reply to Monk:

500+ of the 1900 were previously unrecorded boulder problems rather newly discovered routes, hence the big jump.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs and Offwidth:

Fair enough, but that doesn't change my point. Just because something is unrecorded doesn't mean that there is no merit in recording it (and I know you both agree with me!)

In reply to huzy8t3:

Moss will grow back quite quickly on rarely climbed lines. I've cleaned moss off stuff that was back again in a couple of years (and I've cleaned inches of stuff at Laddow, when I've sandbagged myself solo, only to find polish underneath!). You are right about it being a shame that some posters are rude on such posts but equally you could have been a bit more humble given the location (something like .... I've climbed a line thats a bit elliminate and in a very popular area but I wondered if it might be a new route ... might have been treated more kindly).

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Just over 1600 numbered routes and problems in 2007, including at least 300 boulder problems that were known of in the 1990's. The biggest increase for named routes was probably in the topo guide.

In reply to Anonymous:

Echo, echo, echo

In reply to Anonymous:

Plenty of examples of what?

In reply to Monk:

Examples of what you were saying shouldn't be the case!

I.e. both are places where plenty of boulder problems/micro-routes have been done but not documented in any guide!

In reply to Monk:

I think he means there are plenty of unlisted great quality lines and in places this has been deliberate policy. There are also unlisted but clearly independant known lines that are poor and thousands of unnamed elliminates of varying quality just in the guides I've helped worked on. As editors you have to draw the line somewhere and you know its never going to keep everyone happy.

An example I've used before is the new Froggatt guide which contains three times the info of the Old Chatsworth guide (about double the number of named routes and for every 2 named routes there is a named boulder problem) despite being strict on known new listings for minor veneus and using web backup on the BMC site to help those keen to explore and develop the unsung areas.

In reply to Offwidth:

my advice would not be not to post on this site regarding this topic to be honest, people on ukb are far more intolerant of posts like this.
Unless youve climbed a new problem at font7b to 8b i wouldnt bother, ul get more stick than its worth taking, or you'll be completely ignored.

Im not being funny, but i can promise you, the guys at ukb will be, its not a fun place to post unless you know all the regular peeps as most of them know each other and are not great at letting new comers in (although some people are nice). dont get worked up about it, just leave em' to it, go climbing, and remember how easy it is to take things the wrong way when you post on these things

In reply to Anonymous:


thats looking more and more doubtfull with every post you make

In reply to tallsop: you get far more helpfull non spammed replies on ukb than you do on here!!!

In reply to huzy8t3:

Nice to see you can delete all the messages I wrote. A bit Ryanish really. I'm sure this will go too. Why have the option to post without signing on and then delete = no sense. BTW I was on another computer and can't remember my password (which is normally not a problem)

This is not a new route for either of you idiots. You are not breaking new ground, just playing in the mud

In reply to Theclimbinglab:


a big yawn back to you and another reiteration that ive never claimed the route which you cant seem to get your stupid head round

In reply to Anonymous:

yes you are

In reply to Theclimbinglab:

No users, can't delete posts/threads, only admins can. Not only did your anon postings disappear, but also mine where I pointed out the nonsensical reasoning that having to be logged in with a user name somehow makes the content of a post more valid, it doesn't.

If anonymous postings are routinely deleted why permit them in the first place?

In reply to tallsop:




It's on UKB already, and those intolerant, cliquey, unfriendly ignorami have managed a thread about it without calling anyone a c*nt. Ironic that you get on your high horse and pretend that UKC is superior!!

In reply to Theclimbinglab:

Dissapearing threads are bloody annoying but its not that hard to log on and give the mods one less excuse.

In reply to Offwidth:

with the result that existing lines are repeatedly claimed by others.
And in time, the policy gets forgotten, and the claims become recorded as facts.

Example, the Big Corner area of Wharncliff - old guides (from the 60s) used to say that this area contained many obvious lines which were being left for others to discover, all are listed in the latest guidebook with FA details given from the 90s.

In reply to Toreador: We're not talking obvious lines here. Guidebooks shouldn't need to state "every inch of this popular bouldering area has been bouldered out, please stop sending us 'new' routes" on every page. To give it an independent (non-eliminate derived) name is pretty daft. Is the name a coincidence? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snatch

In reply to Toreador:
Really popular crags like Burbage and Stanage are always going to attract more attention, and have more eliminates identified, than more inaccessible crags.

Look at the 20 foot walls at Burbage - some lines about a foot apart, or the Business boulder - link holds A and F to reach G etc. Do such problems merit documentation - why not ? When you go to these crags a lot, you do work out the eliminates and it is useful, or at least interesting, to record them.

Whether or not the first ascent, or rather first claim should be recorded is another matter - this seems to be where the unpleasentness on this thread has arisen.

Anyway, I've added this route to the UKC database, but omitted the first ascent details - anyone got a problem with that ?

In reply to bentley's biceps:
ignoramuses
</pedant>

In reply to tallsop:

Yeah all problems under 7B that are reported on UKB get ignored or ridiculed.....

http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/board,53.0.html

.....er....oh. Well yeah but you'd never get a sensible reply on there if you posted about this issue.....

http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,15890.msg277278.html

.....OOPS.

Do you only open your mouth to change feet?

(awaits imminent deletion and banning by 5 of Ryan)

In reply to steve456: there is no other climb on the wall so i didn't really class it as an eliminate but thats a matter of opinion its like saying there's no point recording every way to do remergence or its arete depending on which hand you use... that in my opinion is pointless! and i gave it said title because of the crux move and every other ....mergence is taken but thankyou for your input it's constructive as most have been.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


I think that's a very good reason to record all lines. So many people (who have usually only been climbing a short while) make new route claims on overlooked pieces of rock that climbers have been playing on for years. I don't like the way people tend to jump on new route claims like this. They are only claimed and mentioned on here because the climbers in question are enthusiastic and excited by their experience. Are we really that jaded that we have to set the dogs on them, rather than let them down gently?

In reply to Monk: also the average climber as myself who is new to ukc and getting back into climbing that looks at wikitopo and sees an unclaimed wall doesn't think that there is route there when it hasnt been documented. I just thought people have been more bothered with the face of the buttress and only see this as a downclimb. It should be recorded though as most people who have had a go at me are better in the grade than i am so if other people are progressing and see this they might want to make this line as their first 6a.

In reply to Toreador:

Sorry but that is nonsense, the 'policy' isses relate to areas with access sensitivity, etc, like the Woolpacks.

It's pretty clear to me Wharncliffe must have been case by case and was hardly much different from any other crag in that respect. If you talk to people climbing at that time a large number of 'rediscovered' sub-VS lines were known of then but not regarded as worth naming in a guide. What is special about Wharncliffe is there were certainly 100 odd lines climbed in 1900, so I'd suggest any climb below VS, even in 1960, is wrongly attributed, except the handful listed against Puttrell.

In reply to sean0409:

As I suggested above, try buying the definitive guides to see what routes _have_ been recorded rather than relying on wikitopo which is NOT definitive.

In reply to sean0409: together with countless hordes...it's the walk off fool

In reply to slacky: I will get definative guide book and learn about rating climbs plus will include more about the area as it seems I need to do my homework

In reply to Loz FRancomb: I have already written this somewhere that i realise its part of the down climb but the "walk off" doesn't go up surely. as for fool that really doesnt bother me mate I've probably been called alot worse by alot of people and probably on here but since Im new to this do you often find yourself calling people on this site because you feel you might be somewhat superior based on how hard you can pull on pebbles?

In reply to Monk:

"I think that's a very good reason to record all lines." Whats a line? Who checks and records the thousands of shit lines and elliminates such a policy could generate. We tried to do something sub VS, on Peak grit, on Offwidth, that included all non-elliminates but even we had to draw the line in places (and if you look plenty of ours still arn't on the UKC logbook that are independant lines... sensibly so quite often if you read our notes).

No one 'sets the dogs' on anyone but dogs do have a habit of sniffing around shit. I'll reserve judgement on this particular climb until I've had a look again but I have seen boulderers on this section of rock several times before (eapecially when we were working the crag early last decade) and I assumed it was one of many occasional but known unlisted elliminates at that time.

In reply to sean0409: I don't pull on pebbles, i eat dem, fool.

In reply to Loz FRancomb: lol and a Mr T impersonator by the looks of things, quality!

In reply to Offwidth:

The policy issues you were talking about might have been, but the ones that I'm talking about aren't. The Wharncliffe one being a case in point, the stated policy was not to record some lines, not because of access, but so there would be something for new climbers to discover.

A bit like NW Scotland on a very local scale - and we all know the arguments that have resulted from the reversal of that particular policy.

In reply to Toreador:

Prove it was policy rather than editorial largesse.

In reply to slacky:

Because many occasional or new users don't want to go through the procedure of registering just to post a single comment. About 90% of Anon postings are like this, usually with a name and often linked to an email, just not actually signed in. We welcome these people and requiring registration would almost certainly prevent many of them from posting.

The ones who deliberately stay anonymous to protect their identity and cause trouble like the guy did on this thread know what they are doing. Their threads get removed.

We can't permit the former without suffering the latter.

Alan

In reply to Offwidth:
>

You only have to look at the databases on here to see loads of new route claims awaiting moderation. If I was still local, I would happily moderate and check them. That way, a list is begun. In the same way that you have minor crags online, you could have a routelist on the BMC website for people who want to know the details, and then make a note in the guidebook (as you often see) that "the walls to the left/right/wherever have been climbed on for years" to deter further new route claims.


This thread hasn't exactly always been entirely polite to Huzy/Sean.


Undoubtably. There is a line there, but it is relatively minor (but no more so than the grotty chimney that IS recorded). I have been on that wall several times, and suspect I may have climbed a certain line, but I can't remember details, or how/if I topped out. All I remember is that there was potential for a nasty fall leftwards. Burbage North was my local crag for 10 years, and I climbed there whenever I had a short slot of time/break in the weather, so I have played on most of it at some point, and climbed many, many unclaimed lines there.

In reply to Monk:

"I would happily moderate and check them." You must have the patience of a saint I still think you'd do more good for the climbing community checking existing less travelled routes and problems. Despite all the happy volunteers I've more than once ended up with only a couple of super keen climbers on good days on well advertised moorland meets.

Web forums are often impolite, hopefully in jest but even if not there is no bar on w**kers unless they clearly breach guidelines.

You can maybe blame me for some of the grotty chimneys, we even had a specialist UKC meet for these at Burbage a few years back. However chimneys are rather more finite than 6a micro-variants which are OK in a bouldering cave but counterproductive on most crags. Where repeat problems arise with claims the guidebooks already say the rocks have been climbed for years (or maybe even are left for explorers to rediscover, ... but in doing so are not intending to raise hackles).

In reply to Offwidth:

Another point on chimneys was missing them out (as an obvious locating feature) can sometimes confuse the reader. Certainly a few unnamed ones went back in on Stanage to help with that.

In reply to sean0409:
To defend UKB I would say that if you posted this on there originally you probably would have got a measured and sensible response along the lines of "This has more than likely been done before but left unrecorded as it is too eliminate and if all such things were included in the guidebook it would be too heavy to lift to the crag. Nice work on doing something you found hard anyway".

However, when its posted on UKC as a link featuring poor spelling and grammar, endless petty sniping and aggravation and nobody really taking notice of the most sensible (if not a little disappointing for the original poster) answers then it is bound to get ridiculed!

In reply to Will Hunt:

I thought UKB quite rightly didn't do bad grammar sniping?

"Don't resort to critcising people's grammar or spelling when arguing/debating - firstly it's rather scraping the insults barrel; secondly people often type to forums quickly whilst at work, etc; and lastly some people may be dyslexic."

In reply to Offwidth:

Prove it wasn't!

In reply to seagull:



Sorry to disappoint Jasper - I was out climbing rather than behind a computer.

If you want to join me later, I'm doing the Stanage Struggle course in prep for this weekend.

Be good to jog with you and I'd buy you a pint later.

In reply to Alan James - UKC:


the guy stated he was a registered member who forgot his log in so posted as an anon

you say making everyone register would deter some people from posting,i say thats a good thing.99% of internet forums are better places by having only registered users posting

In reply to beastofackworth:

Yes, he is an occasional poster on here, and a UKB regular. Some of his increasingly-nasty posts would have been removed even if he hadn't posted anon though.


Check the third reply on this thread - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=424795
That is an amazing example of what you get by allowing anonymous posters. I doubt whetehr he would have posted that had we required registration. There are many other examples like that.

Alan

In reply to beastofackworth:


Yeah cause being registered means your not anonyonmous.........

In reply to Gorilla:

Your true identity may be hidden, but your posting history and character are easily deduced.

In reply to Alan James - UKC:


but does on good post make up for thousands of bad ones?with the best will in the world ukc dont have enough moderators to get rid of all the crap,its just too big a job

"but does on good post make up for thousands of bad ones?with the best will in the world UKC don't have enough moderators to get rid of all the crap,its just too big a job"

Could that fit on a T-shirt?

In reply to beastofackworth:

>with the best will in the world ukc dont have enough moderators to get rid of all the crap,its just too big a job

You're number 2 in the Top 40 Posters...... that takes some doing.

In reply to Derbyshire Ben:

not really it doesnt-its less than 15 posts a day and most of the topics i enter involve multiple replies

In reply to tallsop:

Inspired by your post I have initiated a Hug a Newbie Week on UKB

Group hug, shark

In reply to beastofackworth:

Where do you get your numbers from? And how do you define a crap post?
You've got another post up there with something about 99% of online forums being fab because they only allow registered users to post. Where did you get that from? Did you know that 99% of people who make unsubstantiated claims have a secret desire to be French?

Being a registered user doesn't guarantee anything. If messages are going to be removed, it should happen based on their content, not who wrote them.

In reply to shark:
I might sign up, just for the hug.

In reply to Toreador:

Touche... did you know the moon landing was faked as well ?

In reply to Alan James

Please ignore those requesting the removal of anonymouse posters as I know so many with good reasons to do so who make good contributions: especially those uncertain of the rules (or the site!). I simply don't believe the ratio of bad to good posts is even in the majority, let alone huge, except on the bun-fights (although it would be nice to see some analysis). I do think UKC can be too strict sometimes on moderation, loosing good if controversial additions as a result, but I'm not fighting to prevent deletion of rude anonymouse posts, given the more worthy cases around.