Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
We have received a handful of emails questioning our motives and planning for the forthcoming St Bees Bouldering Festival.
We therefore thought it would be a good idea to outline our plans for the event, and get your feedback. We have placed a poll on our facebook page and would appreciate it if you would take the time to tell us what you think by voting on it. Your opinion either way is important, because if there are lots of people who think it is a bad idea we will reconsider our plans. There is another site asking for opinions and votes on the same topic, but it is possible to vote multiple times on that site, thus potentially distorting the findings of the poll.
There is a link to our poll at the bottom of the article, which you can read in full here:
http://www.planetfear.com/news/The_St_Bees_Bouldering_Festival_2662.html
Cheers
pF
In reply to winhill: Sorry about that, we don't currently have the facility to host a poll on our site and thought that this would be the most transparent way of reaching the most people quickly.
Do you have a Fb friend who might vote on your behalf?
Many thanks for reading
pF
Do you have a Fb friend who might vote on your behalf?
Many thanks for reading
pF
In reply to planetFear:
I am not on Facebook either, but if I was I'd vote against this. This really isn't the right venue for this, even if this event was appropriate in the first place.
I am not on Facebook either, but if I was I'd vote against this. This really isn't the right venue for this, even if this event was appropriate in the first place.
In reply to planetFear:
Another non-Farcebook user here, but I'd vote "Nay", not the right venue for this.
P.S. - @planetFear : You can set up free surveys that anyone can complete using http://www.surveymonkey.com/
Another non-Farcebook user here, but I'd vote "Nay", not the right venue for this.
P.S. - @planetFear : You can set up free surveys that anyone can complete using http://www.surveymonkey.com/
In reply to planetFear:
Perhaps it would be only fair to link to the counter argument, as they appear to have payed you the same courtesy:
http://lakesbloc.blogspot.com/2011/04/planet-fear-corporate-express.html
Perhaps it would be only fair to link to the counter argument, as they appear to have payed you the same courtesy:
http://lakesbloc.blogspot.com/2011/04/planet-fear-corporate-express.html
In reply to planetFear:
As for the above I don't have a Facebook account, but would have voted no. I don't think that St Bees is a suitable venue for this sort of event, and hope that pF will move their festival to a less sensitive location.
George.
As for the above I don't have a Facebook account, but would have voted no. I don't think that St Bees is a suitable venue for this sort of event, and hope that pF will move their festival to a less sensitive location.
George.
In reply to planetFear:
Another non-Facebook user and another vote for no. I'd argue that St. Bees is too sensitive a venue to have a festival based there, from both an environmental and access point of view. The damage from the increase in visitors over recent years is all too clear on the approach paths. If the event goes ahead and it's a wet day/weekend, will PlanetFear be stopping people from climbing in the area as the damage to the rock could be significant?
Another non-Facebook user and another vote for no. I'd argue that St. Bees is too sensitive a venue to have a festival based there, from both an environmental and access point of view. The damage from the increase in visitors over recent years is all too clear on the approach paths. If the event goes ahead and it's a wet day/weekend, will PlanetFear be stopping people from climbing in the area as the damage to the rock could be significant?
In reply to planetFear:
"Some local climbing activists, used to having the area pretty much to themselves, have voiced opposition to the event, citing access, environmental, and erosion concerns. They were not aware of the steps we are planning to take to mitigate these, outlined above. They will no doubt stay away for the duration of the event, and return when they can have ‘their' crag back"
This is a direct quote from yourselves which I find extremely condescending. These 'local' climbers are the ones who probably help keep your business running. I'm not a 'local' and I think its an awful idea, as do most others, local or otherwise.
Greg, who runs the Lakesbloc website has tried to present a balanced view of the argument, something your company hasn't bothered to do. You've already had to remove it's a 'BMC approved' event from your website and sending out mail shots encouraging people to vote Yes is hardly a fair way to do things.
I also hope you have produced your own topos rather than cribbing the Lakesbloc or Rockfax guides, as both of these no doubt had a lot of hard work behind them, especially Lakesbloc which is free.
Perhaps you should post on UKBouldering so you can get as wide a picture as possible?
"Some local climbing activists, used to having the area pretty much to themselves, have voiced opposition to the event, citing access, environmental, and erosion concerns. They were not aware of the steps we are planning to take to mitigate these, outlined above. They will no doubt stay away for the duration of the event, and return when they can have ‘their' crag back"
This is a direct quote from yourselves which I find extremely condescending. These 'local' climbers are the ones who probably help keep your business running. I'm not a 'local' and I think its an awful idea, as do most others, local or otherwise.
Greg, who runs the Lakesbloc website has tried to present a balanced view of the argument, something your company hasn't bothered to do. You've already had to remove it's a 'BMC approved' event from your website and sending out mail shots encouraging people to vote Yes is hardly a fair way to do things.
I also hope you have produced your own topos rather than cribbing the Lakesbloc or Rockfax guides, as both of these no doubt had a lot of hard work behind them, especially Lakesbloc which is free.
Perhaps you should post on UKBouldering so you can get as wide a picture as possible?
In reply to SteveOc:
Quite - and furthermore if the locals hadn't developed the crag it wouldnt be the venue it is now
Quite - and furthermore if the locals hadn't developed the crag it wouldnt be the venue it is now
In reply to planetFear: I take it that due to this mostly negative public reaction the event won't go ahead?
In reply to NJBrown:
Are you sure? There has been negative publicity already, the vote on LakesBloc showed over 68% of voters were against this occurring- PlanetFear are aware of this, and the lack of BMC backing, and still plan to procede at this present time.
Are you sure? There has been negative publicity already, the vote on LakesBloc showed over 68% of voters were against this occurring- PlanetFear are aware of this, and the lack of BMC backing, and still plan to procede at this present time.
In reply to bentley's biceps: A question directed at PlanetFear. I'd like to hear their response to their own poll on facebook (which they appear to be losing) and the people on here who don't want the event to go ahead.
In reply to NJBrown:
My point was that PF already know the feelings of a majority of climbers but have ignored it thus far. How will this change anything?
My point was that PF already know the feelings of a majority of climbers but have ignored it thus far. How will this change anything?
In reply to bentley's biceps: Well it may not... But it would be a relatively smart thing from a business point of view to change the outlook on this. They must be willing to stop the event or else why would they have posted or poll or bothered with an argument?
More commentary/insight here from Dan Varian: http://www.beastmaker.co.uk/2011/04/07/corporate-bouldering-events-the-good...
In reply to shark: Another Vote against. Even for those who don't know StBees, PFs attitude to the criticism and their sniping at LakesBloc make it pretty clear which side to support.
In reply to chuffer:
100 for, 183 against at present on the PF vote.
Does this tell you something, PlanetFear?
100 for, 183 against at present on the PF vote.
Does this tell you something, PlanetFear?
In reply to bentley's biceps: Seems like a funny place to hold a festival, especially given access. Bad idea in my opinion.
In reply to planetFear:
When and why did DMM pull out?
http://www.climber.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?c=7&cate=__10444
When and why did DMM pull out?
http://www.climber.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?c=7&cate=__10444
In reply to planetFear: another non-facebooker - this is not the place for such an event - it's a quiet peaceful environmentally sensitive place. Please leave it like that instead of exploiting it for publicity for your business.
thanks Kris
thanks Kris
In reply to slacky: Thanks very much Slacky, duely noted
In reply to liquid: Here here back off pF
Hello all and thanks for your comments.
The St Bees Festival was devised as a low-key, friendly get together for a limited number of people to come and find out more about what many already know to be a great bouldering venue. It was never going to or designed to make us any money. Having said that some things could have been better - you live and learn.
First of all there seems to be a little confusion over the Facebook Poll we're currently holding (it ends on Wednesday) with some here and elsewhere looking at it as a competition:
The poll was started when what we thought was a positive idea began to receive criticism from (again) what we thought was a small group of climbers attacking the idea quite openly and who had a poll running which people were able to vote on as many times as they liked. In order to gauge opinion to the festival more accurately we therefore started the poll on our Fb page. We have always stated that the results of the poll will determine whether or not the festival goes ahead - and we are more than happy for democracy to take its course. We're here to promote the outdoors and help people to enjoy it.
It seems that for the most part peoples' concerns are due to sensitivity at the venue. While we agree that St Bees has access issues we did not announce the event without first consulting the landowners, RSPB and BMC - all of whose responses were very positive - limiting the numbers to the crag and putting in place measures to manage access as well as contingencies for bad weather/damp rock.
Second highest on the list are concerns over the lack of information that was available at the time of us first promoting the event, prompting us to ensure that more information will be available for future events.
And then we have the topo debate. We have produced our own topos in our own time using the knowledge of the climbers in our store and have at no time copied information from another source. As we devoted time and materials to this production we thought it would be an opportunity to cover the minimal costs, but more importantly, offer some money to help maintain the area. In hindsight perhaps it would have been prudent for us to contact Lakesbloc earlier, however, they asked us to reference their site as an alternative source early on in proceedings, which we duly did.
Regarding the use of the BMC logo and their backing of the festival - we feel a little let down by them as we went to them first to gauge opinion and seek advice. Permission to use the logo was seen to be given (as can be seen in the minutes of the Lakes Area Meeting) only to be withdrawn by them later. The BMC do fantastic work and we hope that this won't damage our fantastic relationship.
As this was only ever going to be a low-key event - reflected in the organisation of it - i think we've been suprised by the level of feedback, which has been great at showing the amount of passion there is out there for the place. Please understand that this is something we do and will always take on board.
Thanks for reading
Jim
PS - A lot of these points are in discussion on our Fb page too, so apologies if you have/haven't seen them already.
The St Bees Festival was devised as a low-key, friendly get together for a limited number of people to come and find out more about what many already know to be a great bouldering venue. It was never going to or designed to make us any money. Having said that some things could have been better - you live and learn.
First of all there seems to be a little confusion over the Facebook Poll we're currently holding (it ends on Wednesday) with some here and elsewhere looking at it as a competition:
The poll was started when what we thought was a positive idea began to receive criticism from (again) what we thought was a small group of climbers attacking the idea quite openly and who had a poll running which people were able to vote on as many times as they liked. In order to gauge opinion to the festival more accurately we therefore started the poll on our Fb page. We have always stated that the results of the poll will determine whether or not the festival goes ahead - and we are more than happy for democracy to take its course. We're here to promote the outdoors and help people to enjoy it.
It seems that for the most part peoples' concerns are due to sensitivity at the venue. While we agree that St Bees has access issues we did not announce the event without first consulting the landowners, RSPB and BMC - all of whose responses were very positive - limiting the numbers to the crag and putting in place measures to manage access as well as contingencies for bad weather/damp rock.
Second highest on the list are concerns over the lack of information that was available at the time of us first promoting the event, prompting us to ensure that more information will be available for future events.
And then we have the topo debate. We have produced our own topos in our own time using the knowledge of the climbers in our store and have at no time copied information from another source. As we devoted time and materials to this production we thought it would be an opportunity to cover the minimal costs, but more importantly, offer some money to help maintain the area. In hindsight perhaps it would have been prudent for us to contact Lakesbloc earlier, however, they asked us to reference their site as an alternative source early on in proceedings, which we duly did.
Regarding the use of the BMC logo and their backing of the festival - we feel a little let down by them as we went to them first to gauge opinion and seek advice. Permission to use the logo was seen to be given (as can be seen in the minutes of the Lakes Area Meeting) only to be withdrawn by them later. The BMC do fantastic work and we hope that this won't damage our fantastic relationship.
As this was only ever going to be a low-key event - reflected in the organisation of it - i think we've been suprised by the level of feedback, which has been great at showing the amount of passion there is out there for the place. Please understand that this is something we do and will always take on board.
Thanks for reading
Jim
PS - A lot of these points are in discussion on our Fb page too, so apologies if you have/haven't seen them already.
In reply to planetFear: Fair play for eating some humble pie there and admitting some of your mistakes.
However:
Could you please explain your apparent disrespect and disdain for the local climbers/activists who first expressed their concerns about the event:
"Some local climbing activists, used to having the area pretty much to themselves, have voiced opposition to the event, citing access, environmental, and erosion concerns. They were not aware of the steps we are planning to take to mitigate these, outlined above. They will no doubt stay away for the duration of the event, and return when they can have ‘their' crag back".
It seems their concerns were rather valid and I for one found your attitude toward them in very bad taste and rather arrogant. I hope you don't have the same attitude if you organise such an event in N.Wales when you open your new shop in Betws, it really wouldn't go down well.
With regard to the sensitivity of the environment the following comment is quite interesting from Jamie Bardot..... no mention of any of this before:
"No, this is a bad idea and could easily damage access agreements elsewhere on crags which are in SSSI's. I appreciate that the organisers have taken some time to consider thier impacts but i don't think thats enough.
The reason for this is because as a SSSI, consent is needed to carry out 'Potentially Damaging Opera...tions' (PDO's), which are listed for each individual SSSI. The list relating to St Bees Head found at http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/ which has, as number 27 'Recreational or educational activities likely to damage features of interest from.
Now, one of the reasons why this area has been designated as a SSSI is because of the local geology. I'd have no doubt that such an intensive use of the area for this Festival would have a negative impact on the soft rock. I've not even considered the the flora and fauna of the SSSI. I wonder if the organisers have contacted Natural England (the regulator which actually matters in all of this - not the RSPB!) at all to get an opinion?
Normally rock climbing is tolerated in these areas because the numbers are fairly low and so is the potential impact... I hope this mass influx doesn't ruin the access, not only here but elsewhere in the UK. Rant over."
As for a low key event....how many people is 30 tents? Seems like this could easily be 60 people, hardly low key for a single bouldering area, sensitive or not. What actual limit have you put on numbers then?
I am still suprised that there wasn't any specific fund raising for the bolt fund that supplied the bolts for the routes in the first place, this would have been good if you, "wanted to do something for the local climbing community who have supported us so far" as you said.
Maybe also collaberating with the local activists who developed the area in the first place would have been a good starting point. That would have sorted the topo issue out and this all shows a distinct lack of integration and respect for the community you said you actually wished to support.
Are DMM still sponsoring the event?
Many thanks
Jon Ratcliffe
However:
Could you please explain your apparent disrespect and disdain for the local climbers/activists who first expressed their concerns about the event:
"Some local climbing activists, used to having the area pretty much to themselves, have voiced opposition to the event, citing access, environmental, and erosion concerns. They were not aware of the steps we are planning to take to mitigate these, outlined above. They will no doubt stay away for the duration of the event, and return when they can have ‘their' crag back".
It seems their concerns were rather valid and I for one found your attitude toward them in very bad taste and rather arrogant. I hope you don't have the same attitude if you organise such an event in N.Wales when you open your new shop in Betws, it really wouldn't go down well.
With regard to the sensitivity of the environment the following comment is quite interesting from Jamie Bardot..... no mention of any of this before:
"No, this is a bad idea and could easily damage access agreements elsewhere on crags which are in SSSI's. I appreciate that the organisers have taken some time to consider thier impacts but i don't think thats enough.
The reason for this is because as a SSSI, consent is needed to carry out 'Potentially Damaging Opera...tions' (PDO's), which are listed for each individual SSSI. The list relating to St Bees Head found at http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/ which has, as number 27 'Recreational or educational activities likely to damage features of interest from.
Now, one of the reasons why this area has been designated as a SSSI is because of the local geology. I'd have no doubt that such an intensive use of the area for this Festival would have a negative impact on the soft rock. I've not even considered the the flora and fauna of the SSSI. I wonder if the organisers have contacted Natural England (the regulator which actually matters in all of this - not the RSPB!) at all to get an opinion?
Normally rock climbing is tolerated in these areas because the numbers are fairly low and so is the potential impact... I hope this mass influx doesn't ruin the access, not only here but elsewhere in the UK. Rant over."
As for a low key event....how many people is 30 tents? Seems like this could easily be 60 people, hardly low key for a single bouldering area, sensitive or not. What actual limit have you put on numbers then?
I am still suprised that there wasn't any specific fund raising for the bolt fund that supplied the bolts for the routes in the first place, this would have been good if you, "wanted to do something for the local climbing community who have supported us so far" as you said.
Maybe also collaberating with the local activists who developed the area in the first place would have been a good starting point. That would have sorted the topo issue out and this all shows a distinct lack of integration and respect for the community you said you actually wished to support.
Are DMM still sponsoring the event?
Many thanks
Jon Ratcliffe
In reply to chummer: Lets not forget that these 'local activists' are the ones who bolted/rebolted the routes folk would climb on and developed the bouldering; naming, grading and documenting the problems on your topo.
In reply to chummer:
Hi Jon and thanks for the input.
Regarding the comment about the local climbers - when the concept for the festival was first broached everyone we spoke to thought it was a great idea, including the BMC etc so perhaps rather innocently we thought great, let's put it on.
Shortly after publicising it we had contact from Lakesbloc regarding topos, which after some discussion regarding referencing/copy issues, they seemed happy for us to carry on producing. Shortly after this entries began to appear on Lakesbloc Blog offering unfounded evidence against the festival relating primarily to the involvement of the BMC - which frankly wasn't Lakesbloc or our fault but which painted us in a very bad light - and access, which we believed to have covered by speaking to the relevant bodies.
Given that we thought we'd just try and do something proactive about promoting the venue and bouldring in general, and believed that we'd covered all the bases we maybe took it to be a dig by a select few locals looking to get one over, rather than genuine concern. Add to this that a poll appeared on Lakesbloc which allowed repeat voting and maybe the picture becomes a little less clouded. A mistake? Looks like it.
Your mention of the comment by Jamie Bardot is the first time we've come across this. As mentioned here, on our site and Fb we thought that by speaking to the BMC, RSPB and landowners that we'd ticked the relveant boxes so far as access, permission and conservation were concerned. Clearly we did not and more research will go into any future events as a result.
If the event is to go on at all (unlikely given the current opinion of the poll) then DMM are still involved. We're not sure where the information for gabriel_m's comment came from, the link goes to the original press release. Maybe it was meant to read BMC?
The fact is that we cannot legally put a limit on numbers because St Bees is an open access area, however, we restricted tickets to 30 tents expecting to sell less. As it turns out we have sold less than half. In a Fb thread I asked whether people would have the same questions about Stanage Edge in The Peak, given the amount of erosion and climbers using it at any given time, including organised groups.
You're quite right in that we could have contacted the local activists, and if there's ever to be a 'next time' anywhere then we'll be sure to - but again having attended the BMC's Lakes area meet we thought - maybe naively - that any concerns would have been raised there.
Although there are a few things we could have done better, and we readily admit that, we didn't set out with the intention of upsetting anyone. We thought that by promoting the venue it might receive more support in terms of funding for better access.
It is extremely unfortunate that an innocent idea has turned into a bit of a mess. I personally defend that as climbers ourselves we did what we believed to be right in the setting up of the festival. I can also fully accept, with the gift of hindsight, why some people are opposed to it.
Hi Jon and thanks for the input.
Regarding the comment about the local climbers - when the concept for the festival was first broached everyone we spoke to thought it was a great idea, including the BMC etc so perhaps rather innocently we thought great, let's put it on.
Shortly after publicising it we had contact from Lakesbloc regarding topos, which after some discussion regarding referencing/copy issues, they seemed happy for us to carry on producing. Shortly after this entries began to appear on Lakesbloc Blog offering unfounded evidence against the festival relating primarily to the involvement of the BMC - which frankly wasn't Lakesbloc or our fault but which painted us in a very bad light - and access, which we believed to have covered by speaking to the relevant bodies.
Given that we thought we'd just try and do something proactive about promoting the venue and bouldring in general, and believed that we'd covered all the bases we maybe took it to be a dig by a select few locals looking to get one over, rather than genuine concern. Add to this that a poll appeared on Lakesbloc which allowed repeat voting and maybe the picture becomes a little less clouded. A mistake? Looks like it.
Your mention of the comment by Jamie Bardot is the first time we've come across this. As mentioned here, on our site and Fb we thought that by speaking to the BMC, RSPB and landowners that we'd ticked the relveant boxes so far as access, permission and conservation were concerned. Clearly we did not and more research will go into any future events as a result.
If the event is to go on at all (unlikely given the current opinion of the poll) then DMM are still involved. We're not sure where the information for gabriel_m's comment came from, the link goes to the original press release. Maybe it was meant to read BMC?
The fact is that we cannot legally put a limit on numbers because St Bees is an open access area, however, we restricted tickets to 30 tents expecting to sell less. As it turns out we have sold less than half. In a Fb thread I asked whether people would have the same questions about Stanage Edge in The Peak, given the amount of erosion and climbers using it at any given time, including organised groups.
You're quite right in that we could have contacted the local activists, and if there's ever to be a 'next time' anywhere then we'll be sure to - but again having attended the BMC's Lakes area meet we thought - maybe naively - that any concerns would have been raised there.
Although there are a few things we could have done better, and we readily admit that, we didn't set out with the intention of upsetting anyone. We thought that by promoting the venue it might receive more support in terms of funding for better access.
It is extremely unfortunate that an innocent idea has turned into a bit of a mess. I personally defend that as climbers ourselves we did what we believed to be right in the setting up of the festival. I can also fully accept, with the gift of hindsight, why some people are opposed to it.
In reply to planetFear:
"...why SOME people are opposed to it!!!"
75% of those who took part in your poll are opposed to it!
"...why SOME people are opposed to it!!!"
75% of those who took part in your poll are opposed to it!
In reply to tim carruthers:
Well, that's not all. And that's not none. So that would be some?
FFS - SOME people aren't going to be happy no matter what pF say are they?
Maybe if all the staff committed ritual suicide or something...
Si
> (In reply to planetFear)
>
> "...why SOME people are opposed to it!!!"
>
> 75% of those who took part in your poll are opposed to it!
>
> "...why SOME people are opposed to it!!!"
>
> 75% of those who took part in your poll are opposed to it!
Well, that's not all. And that's not none. So that would be some?
FFS - SOME people aren't going to be happy no matter what pF say are they?
Maybe if all the staff committed ritual suicide or something...
Si
In reply to planetFear:
The red mist has descended.
I have a real problem with these festivals of climbing, the lakes one, the gogarth one etc. They are an attempt to commercialise our crags and can potentially lead to access problems, take Redheads provocative slogan and poster for the gogarth festival as an example of very poor practice.
I do not wish to arrive at a crag to find banners, leaflets, gear stalls etc, which is what these festivals will eventually develop into. I may be wearing the black hat but I forsee a future of these festivals where access is limited to those who have bought the Planet Fear t shirt. We are not there yet but not too far away. Our crags are not you advertising resource planet fear.
I live in West Cumbria and I am in need of some new shoes and a rope. My dummy is spat, I have taken my ball home, I will not be shopping with you.
When I have calmed down I may start making more sense
...and breathe
The red mist has descended.
I have a real problem with these festivals of climbing, the lakes one, the gogarth one etc. They are an attempt to commercialise our crags and can potentially lead to access problems, take Redheads provocative slogan and poster for the gogarth festival as an example of very poor practice.
I do not wish to arrive at a crag to find banners, leaflets, gear stalls etc, which is what these festivals will eventually develop into. I may be wearing the black hat but I forsee a future of these festivals where access is limited to those who have bought the Planet Fear t shirt. We are not there yet but not too far away. Our crags are not you advertising resource planet fear.
I live in West Cumbria and I am in need of some new shoes and a rope. My dummy is spat, I have taken my ball home, I will not be shopping with you.
When I have calmed down I may start making more sense
...and breathe
Thanks all once again for your feedback, whichever way you happened to vote. The poll was counted up this morning with 114 votes for and 287 votes against the festival going ahead.
As a result we've cancelled the event and are issuing refunds to those who bought tickets (please call 01768 774422 if you require further information).
Just to reiterate that as climbers working for an ethical company we would not have undertaken the organisation of this or any other event if we thought that its outcome would result in a negative impact being had on the venue. We take the points on the commercialisation of venues, but our intentions were only ever to have a bit of fun and to help promote St Bees in order that it might even receive development to improve access.
A report is now on our site with further information at the below URL.
http://www.planetfear.com/news/St_Bees_Bouldering_Festival_Called_Off_2665....
Thanks again for reading and happy summer!
pF
As a result we've cancelled the event and are issuing refunds to those who bought tickets (please call 01768 774422 if you require further information).
Just to reiterate that as climbers working for an ethical company we would not have undertaken the organisation of this or any other event if we thought that its outcome would result in a negative impact being had on the venue. We take the points on the commercialisation of venues, but our intentions were only ever to have a bit of fun and to help promote St Bees in order that it might even receive development to improve access.
A report is now on our site with further information at the below URL.
http://www.planetfear.com/news/St_Bees_Bouldering_Festival_Called_Off_2665....
Thanks again for reading and happy summer!
pF
In reply to planetFear:
To set the record straight:
Just to be clear: I never had a discussion with anyone from Planet Fear regarding the topo or anything else and I certainly never accused anyone of plagiarizing or copying my work. I emailed to say I thought it was poor form that you had not originally referenced my site in your "Find out more about St. Bees Bouldering" links, and mentioned in brief my concerns regarding the fact you were charging for a topo that it seemed likely would been researched, at least in part, via my site. I then sent a few more emails highlighting my concerns about the various issues, all now well outlined.
I think the comment below, which you posted on the LakesBloc blog, truly shows your lack of understanding of what it takes to construct decent climbing guides, and therefore why you shouldn't be commenting on such matters. I found this comment in particular; "taking a picture of a rock and then applying common knowledge", insulting and quite frankly ridiculous. Well over a third of my St. Bees North guide contains information on sectors that were rarely climbed on and in some cases was the first instance of entirely newly developed blocks being documented. I understand you may well have been centering the focus of your event on the well trodden Apiary Wall area, but as nobody from PF has gone to the trouble of actually informing me on the exact nuances of the event I have no idea what your topo will and will not include, and therefore I feel my concerns were well founded.
Regarding the topo - I don't think in fairness that anyone can be stopped legally or ethically from taking a picture of a rock and then applying common knowledge of a problem to it - grades are afterall open to debate. James Swann, Planet Fear (LakesBloc Blog Comment 06/04/2011)
Anyway, glad to hear you have canned the event at last.
Greg,
LakesBloc
> Shortly after publicising it we had contact from Lakesbloc regarding topos, which after some discussion regarding referencing/copy issues, they seemed happy for us to carry on producing.
> And then we have the topo debate. We have produced our own topos in our own time using the knowledge of the climbers in our store and have at no time copied information from another source.
To set the record straight:
Just to be clear: I never had a discussion with anyone from Planet Fear regarding the topo or anything else and I certainly never accused anyone of plagiarizing or copying my work. I emailed to say I thought it was poor form that you had not originally referenced my site in your "Find out more about St. Bees Bouldering" links, and mentioned in brief my concerns regarding the fact you were charging for a topo that it seemed likely would been researched, at least in part, via my site. I then sent a few more emails highlighting my concerns about the various issues, all now well outlined.
I think the comment below, which you posted on the LakesBloc blog, truly shows your lack of understanding of what it takes to construct decent climbing guides, and therefore why you shouldn't be commenting on such matters. I found this comment in particular; "taking a picture of a rock and then applying common knowledge", insulting and quite frankly ridiculous. Well over a third of my St. Bees North guide contains information on sectors that were rarely climbed on and in some cases was the first instance of entirely newly developed blocks being documented. I understand you may well have been centering the focus of your event on the well trodden Apiary Wall area, but as nobody from PF has gone to the trouble of actually informing me on the exact nuances of the event I have no idea what your topo will and will not include, and therefore I feel my concerns were well founded.
Regarding the topo - I don't think in fairness that anyone can be stopped legally or ethically from taking a picture of a rock and then applying common knowledge of a problem to it - grades are afterall open to debate. James Swann, Planet Fear (LakesBloc Blog Comment 06/04/2011)
Anyway, glad to hear you have canned the event at last.
Greg,
LakesBloc
Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...