American Canyon Guides Association ACGA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spidey

This statement is truly comical! Clark Myself and other's that are now members of the ACGA are so prone to and fond of Dictatorial control over us.:lol8::lol8::lol8: I could be wrong, but you seem to make the assumption that because we support the ACA, or the ACGA dare I say it, might even be friends with Rich that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves.

You have at least got me figured out. I is just to darn dumb to think for myself,:crazy: all my friends already know that though.

---

Do you like engaging in rational conversations or just ridiculing people, Spidey? Because you haven't ever actually done much conversing with me yet. You can disagree with the statements, thats fine. (Something like, "Hey, I'm part of the ACGA and I haven't observed that yet"). The dictator-like control was observed during my tenure with the Pro Division. Its honest and accurate. Things may be different with the ACGA but the ACA language, structure, and 100% ACA membership thus far doesn't seem promising. But like I said in my first post on this thread, I still have hope.

Never made a statement about your ability to think for yourself. And yes, your assumption is wrong. I dare say, on the internet, you either lack an interest in actually engaging in conversations or lack the skills. Which is odd because I know second hand how much people admire you in the field.

Phillip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spidey

You have at least got me figured out. I is just to darn dumb to think for myself,:crazy: all my friends already know that though.

---

Are you always so antagonistic and sarcastic? I have seen several of your former "students" and I wouldn't have guessed that was one of your primary characteristics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xxnitsuaxx

I don't get this. You get in your car with some friends after work on Friday. You drive down some dirt roads and throw a sleeping bag on the ground. You wake up, slide down some ropes, bury some stuff in the dirt, swim around in some water, and walk back to the same damned place you started from. Most people don't know what canyoneering is and most people wouldn't care if they did. How the hell can such a ridiculous activity (because it's sure as hell not a sport!) generate the countless wasted man-hours that have been spent on whatever the hell it is we're talking about. (7 years of school and I can't understand what everyone is yelling about.) I almost miss the assholes I was in law school with :facepalm1:

---

As a lawyer you probably have come across Foucault's concepts of "discursive forces" or "hegemony". Directly related here. Maybe you haven't been exposed to the sociological concepts of "structure", "agency", "hierarchy" and identity yet. Either way, "our activity" is very meaningful to some of us. We build community, culture, organizations, identity and a plurality of meaning around it. Very complex stuff if you want to dive deep. Political issues abound, if you understand "politics" to mean power and non-state governance.

Oh wait, were you just trying to be sarcastic :naughty:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

As a lawyer you probably have come across Foucault's concepts of "discursive forces" or "hegemony". Directly related here. Maybe you haven't been exposed to the sociological concepts of "structure", "agency", "hierarchy" and identity yet. Either way, "our activity" is very meaningful to some of us. We build community, culture, organizations, identity and a plurality of meaning around it. Very complex stuff if you want to dive deep. Political issues abound, if you understand "politics" to mean power and non-state governance.

Oh wait, were you just trying to be sarcastic :naughty:

---

Dude. Phil. Seriously bro. You like, blew my mind right there. Foucault - didn't he make cars or something? And I don't believe in sociological concepts either; if it's not mentioned in the Bible I don't talk about it. That's devils' talk right there.

Seriously man? Were you expecting me to be impressed at your ability to blather on about some ostensibly esoteric terms that are actually pretty basic concepts? I got a hint for you - pedantry doesn't work if the object of your condescension isn't impressed. It's pretty obvious that you misunderstood my question; you were probably trying to anthropomorphize the little facepalm guy that I used in order to parse more meaning from my question. It's perfectly reasonable that you would want to add some sort of structure to canyoneering. Personally, I see no need for it. Canyoneering is a fun way to spend a weekend for me, nothing more. If canyoneering is a strong part of your self-identity then it makes sense to create a culture around it so that you can belong. That structure and culture will inevitably result in the "hierarchy" and "agency" issues that you put "in quotation marks" so we could all be "real impressed" with your "big words". Not my cup of tea - but whatever. My issue is with the Machiavellian politicking that surrounds your attempt at "structure". This ain't international politics and it ain't multibillion dollar business deals. I'm not trying to belittle canyoneering; I love to do it myself. I'm just confused at the amount of vitriol, wasted energy, and bad feelings that surround something as seemingly simple as doing canyons.

I've got my dictionary out so you can use all the big words you want buckaroo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

Are you always so antagonistic and sarcastic? I have seen several of your former "students" and I wouldn't have guessed that was one of your primary characteristics.

---

PS - you're the one to whom EVERYONE is responding negatively. You think we're all just a bunch of antagonistic assholes or do your people skills need a little work? Piece of advice - if you think everyone is rude...it's probably you. That one's for free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spidey

I could be wrong, but you seem to make the assumption that because we support the ACA, or the ACGA dare I say it, might even be friends with Rich that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves.

---

Spidey, there is one item I just can't figure out in regards to your thinking..... The list of notable canyoneers that Rich has a continuing conflict with is extremely long and distinguished. It's a virtual who's who of U.S. canyoneering. Its not just a couple of them, but all of them. Most of them were strong supporters of the ACA at some point in time. Most of them donated substantial amounts of time, money and/or services to the ACA in one form or anther at some point in time. And all became disillusioned and cynical of the ACA for various reasons.

So my question to you is..... what makes you think your experience will end up any different?

Where you are, we once were.
Where we are, you will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xxnitsuaxx

Dude. Phil. Seriously bro. You like, blew my mind right there. Foucault - didn't he make cars or something? And I don't believe in sociological concepts either; if it's not mentioned in the Bible I don't talk about it. That's devils' talk right there.

Seriously man? Were you expecting me to be impressed at your ability to blather on about some ostensibly esoteric terms that are actually pretty basic concepts? I got a hint for you - pedantry doesn't work if the object of your condescension isn't impressed. It's pretty obvious that you misunderstood my question; you were probably trying to anthropomorphize the little facepalm guy that I used in order to parse more meaning from my question. It's perfectly reasonable that you would want to add some sort of structure to canyoneering. Personally, I see no need for it. Canyoneering is a fun way to spend a weekend for me, nothing more. If canyoneering is a strong part of your self-identity then it makes sense to create a culture around it so that you can belong. That structure and culture will inevitably result in the "hierarchy" and "agency" issues that you put "in quotation marks" so we could all be "real impressed" with your "big words". Not my cup of tea - but whatever. My issue is with the Machiavellian politicking that surrounds your attempt at "structure". This ain't international politics and it ain't multibillion dollar business deals. I'm not trying to belittle canyoneering; I love to do it myself. I'm just confused at the amount of vitriol, wasted energy, and bad feelings that surround something as seemingly simple as doing canyons.

I've got my dictionary out so you can use all the big words you want buckaroo.

---

Not quite...actually used those words because I know most lawyers have a foundation in philosophy well beyond my own. Mines limited to curiosity and my wife's degree. Big words....ah, precise words.

Concepts are pretty basic hence why I was shocked by your original response. I got your sarcasm, you got mine. I rarely engage in sarcasm much on the internet much because it often fails to communicate itself well. Just fundamentally don't understand why people "waste" their time on topics they have no investment in. I find it quite ironic. Its normally only the behavior of a troll who goes out of their way to comment on issues they have no investment or interest in. Especially when the primary gist of the comment is demean and belittle the worth of others opinions.

To your second comment.....my people skills can always use work. Never called anyone assholes on the forum. Your summation is only accurate in some ways. Some people are responding negatively (you, Spidey and Scott is what I can see; Felicia and I just misunderstood each other). I find free advice, especially from anonymous internet users, to be worth the price paid. Don't believe most of my posts have been rude to date, could be wrong.

And I don't think I am far off base on describing Spidey's comments as antagonistic and I think it is fair to guess it was intentional. And Shocked and curious as to why he can't disagree in a more civil manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iceaxe

Spidey, there is one item I just can't figure out in regards to your thinking..... The list of notable canyoneers that Rich has a continuing conflict with is extremely long and distinguished. It's a virtual who's who of U.S. canyoneering. Its not just a couple of them, but all of them. Most of them were strong supporters of the ACA at some point in time. Most of them donated substantial amounts of time, money and/or services to the ACA in one form or anther at some point in time. And all became disillusioned and cynical of the ACA for various reasons.

So my question to you is..... what makes you think your experience will end up any different?

Where you are, we once were.
Where we are, you will be.

---

The only exceptions I can think of are Charly, DB and Chuey. And I know Rich is honestly grateful for their help.

Phillip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

For me, it has to do with honoring and protecting the limited importance the name carries.

Phillip

---

Let me retrace my path a mile or two. IT IS NOT YOUR NAME!!!! it is not your concern. It is not my concern. Apparently no one but Rich owns the ACA. Isn't that the end of the story-- legal and moral and ethical? I am very sorry but you can't control what ain't yours. If Rich is as bad as you all say, you are not ever going to control or pay homage or protect that name. Well I guess you could pay homage but it still won't be yours and you won't have any say in it. Period.

I am not defending the ACA or Rich with these comments, just stating fact; cold, hard, fact. What is so wrong with all the big wigs starting the U.S. Canyoneering Association? The North American Canyoneering Association? The Area Formerly Known as Mexico Canyoneering Association? I don't see anyone doing that but those mentioned in the first post (i think) of this thread. I now see a promising group that has formed. This group is a group of individuals who are big boys, independent men and Rich is not on the Board (or what ever the leadership group is called -- operative word for many, "group"). Rich is involved..... (begin evil music now) da da dummmmmm. (end evil music) But under the corporate documents, he does not control anything. He can be fired. Right?

Sorry....not the ACA name.....the "Association" element. We just disagree about what options are available (or where the story ends). Doesn't seem like thats gonna change. Fair?

Phillip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

Just fundamentally don't understand why people "waste" their time on topics they have no investment in. I find it quite ironic. Its normally only the behavior of a troll who goes out of their way to comment on issues they have no investment or interest in.

... Felicia and I just misunderstood each other).

---

Gentlemen, I have no vested interest in ACGA. I'd like to think that I've been facilitative in the conversation about ACGA - at least that is my goal.

I would like to see the group move passed the past, take what they have learned from the past and try to create a positive future. All of you are very articulate and are able to stand your ground. All of you have assets to offer. I suggest you focus on what you would like to see from an entity such as ACGA.

Years back I told Rich, in public on Bogley, that I thought he was a mean and vindictive man. My definition of mean was "in the middle" and my definition of vindictive was "Having a tendency to seek revenge when wronged". For the record I used a dictionary and chose those two words purposefully. It's not my character to be 'mean' or confrontational. I generally consider myself a watcher and not a player. Rich has been evolving - I would like to see movement from everyone.

I'm interested in seeing all this conversation amount to something positive - even if it means that there is no need for such an entity.

Felicia

Though.....I guess we also disagree on who's concern it is. If you don't want it to be yours thats fine. You haven't made a compelling enough argument that its not mine.

Phillip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scott Card

What is so wrong with all the big wigs starting the U.S. Canyoneering Association? The North American Canyoneering Association? The Area Formerly Known as Mexico Canyoneering Association? I don't see anyone doing that but those mentioned in the first post

---

What makes you think we need an umbrella organization or that an umbrella organization is the best approach?

And I still remember dealing with Zion NP when the whole permit thing happened. It went something like this:

Ice: Gosh Zion NP, I think the proposed permit system is too restrictive.

Zion NP: Well the ACA thinks we are taking the correct approach.

And this has nothing to do with any actual conversations that the ACA might have had with the park. It was the fact that the ACA's opionion carried a lot of weight with Zion NP. Zion was under the misstaken impression that the ACA was the collective voice of a large group of canyoneers. That is why I have problems with Association name being used by an individual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iceaxe

What makes you think we need an umbrella organization or that an umbrella organization is the best approach?

And I still remember dealing with Zion NP when the whole permit thing happened. It went something like this:

Ice: Gosh Zion NP, I think the proposed permit system is too restrictive.

Zion NP: Well the ACA thinks we are taking the correct approach.

And this has nothing to do with any actual conversations that the ACA might have had with the park. It was the fact that the ACA's opionion carried a lot of weight with Zion NP. Zion was under the misstaken impression that the ACA was the collective voice of a large group of canyoneers. That is why I have problems with Association name being used by an individual.

---

So what would you do if you could have the name American Canyoneering Association?

:ne_nau:

I believe most the "big wigs" as Scott calls them are opposed to an umbrella organization for numerous reasons.

Personally I believe an Umbrella organization is detrimental to the sport. I prefer to support my causes buffet style.

Changes:

http://www.canyoneering.net/forums/s...ds-a-New-Owner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rich on ACA Website

ACA Needs a New Owner

It is time for me to leave.

If you haven't heard, I screwed up and let the ACA corporate filings expire. Notices were sent to an old PO box and were never received. It would be simple enough to remedy; pay the past due filing fees and late fees. But the situation has provided an opportunity for me to do some soul searching. The ACA now is nothing like I originally envisioned. Unlikely it will ever reach its full potential without some new blood.

The ACA exists in name only now and with this website. I intend to give it to someone who can come up with a good plan for it in the future. Post in this thread what YOU will do with it. Share your vision with others and be willing to follow through with that vision.

On November 1st, I will post a poll so everyone can vote on their favorite plan for the future. I will give this website and the rights to the name to the person who receives the most votes. They can take it from there.

---

I'll believe it when the moving van backs up to the ACA doors. This is not Rich's first melt down. Those who have been around for a while have seen this exact same movie before.

Rich posts this stuff to rally the ACA supporters so they will beg him to stay and post warm fuzzy threads. Same old story, just a different day...

:-)

Don't like the odds associated with betting on this one but I am more idealistic. Never been good at predicting long term outcomes myself.

Phillip

Edit: Hope someone with a positive approach gets voted the new owner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iceaxe

Spidey, there is one item I just can't figure out in regards to your thinking..... The list of notable canyoneers that Rich has a continuing conflict with is extremely long and distinguished. It's a virtual who's who of U.S. canyoneering. Its not just a couple of them, but all of them. Most of them were strong supporters of the ACA at some point in time. Most of them donated substantial amounts of time, money and/or services to the ACA in one form or anther at some point in time. And all became disillusioned and cynical of the ACA for various reasons.

So my question to you is..... what makes you think your experience will end up any different?

Where you are, we once were.
Where we are, you will be.

---

I Never tried to predict the future Shane. I replied to the insinuation that any of us that are now making up the ACGA are incapable of thinking for ourselves. Phil has pointed out my assumption was wrong, that although I believe his language implied that he did not mean that, issue resolved.

As for you and I ever being in the same place?:lol8::lol8: Other than possibly being physically in the same vicinity as each other at points in time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spidey

I could be wrong, but you seem to make the assumption that because we support the ACA, or the ACGA dare I say it, might even be friends with Rich that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves.

---

Overstated.

I make the assumption that you have not yet had a conflict of any kind with Rich.

Come back and chat after you have.

Tom :moses: