Chambers

[hank moon]

RockGremlin

I meant no disrespect by suggesting your Chambers post was ego-driven. I think it was a fair assessment given the balls-driven nature of this site (lots of fun sometimes). It is my opinion that posting the location of an R/X canyon w/o beta is likely to do more harm that good; ergo, ego. Obviously I do not know you or your true motivation

[hank moon]

Shane

We've shared a lot of good times, including an honest little epic. Why you persist in abusing friendships is beyond me...and beyond the pale.

Karma - it's what's for dinner.

hank

[rockgremlin]

Hey Hank -

No worries. I'm pretty thick skinned. I like to help out when I can, and ironically, that mindset can draw the ire of many within the canyoneering community. I mean no offense, nor mean to boast when I offer up beta....just thought I'd help out.



So......when a we doin' a canyon?

[hank moon]

No worries. I'm pretty thick skinned.

Glad to hear it bounced off - mine's a little thinner, prolly.

I like to help out when I can, and ironically, that mindset can draw the ire of many within the canyoneering community. I mean no offense, nor mean to boast when I offer up beta....just thought I'd help out.

Right on. It's hard to discuss these things online anyway - best to do it over a beer and sardine burrito mid-canyon somewheres. so....

So......when a we doin' a canyon?

PM sent.

[Iceaxe]

Shane

We've shared a lot of good times, including an honest little epic. Why you persist in abusing friendships is beyond me...and beyond the pale.

Karma - it's what's for dinner.

hank

Dude..... sorry to hear you feel that way. I certainly don't.... never have. Any animosity felt is totally on your part.

The n00b pic was a joke..... if it offended you I apologize. It was meant in good fun.

[nat]

Rockgremlin, I am actually curious how you got those coordinates for "Chambers", especially with 99.99% certainty?

[stefan]

wow, looks like i missed a lot.

Let's say that someone -- anyone goes and does Chambers from the coords I posted -- and then gets injured because they were unprepared.

IS THAT MY FAULT?!

well, i believe that there is some level of responsibility.

it's not entirely your fault, obviously, but if it were your information that lead the person there ...
also by broadbanding it, others have access and might be drawn there too, ...
if it's a difficult canyon, this could present a problem, for example (one of many) if someone doesn't know the technical difficulties, especially in a remote area.

RG's "beta" posting seemed to me an ego thing. Hope it was worth it.

An "ego" thing would be if I volunteered those coords without any request or provocation otherwise.

generally speaking, an ego thing can manifest itself in many different forms ...

but if you say the following

C'mon man...someone asked for help...I gave it.

then i think a typical approach for these circumstances would be to PM the person ... perhaps broadbanding that it's a difficult canyon and you'd rather not broadband the coordinates.


as is nat, i am curious too how you got the coordinates.

[Iceaxe]

as is nat, i am curious too how you got the coordinates.

Oh yeah.... tossing a friend and/or reliable source of beta under this bus is a brilliant idea.

[rockgremlin]

Sheesh...now I know how Oliver North felt!

Earlier this year, I was canyoneering with a couple of guys -- some who post here, and some who do not. I got a glimpse of an enlarged map of a part of the Roost containing four slots -- all between NFRR, and the Pasture forks. Rumors were that several of these were pretty good slots, and one resembling "a small scale version of Shenanigans was the first slot north of NFRR." The guy who owned the map doesn't post on Uutah, in fact he doesn't post on any of the canyons forums, but I'm pretty sure he lurks.

The map that Shane posted earlier in this thread highlighting the four slots with a dashed line is pretty much a carbon copy of the map that was shown me. All I had to do was pick the coords off the map for "slot #1"

[rockgremlin]

You know, the ironic thing about this thread is that, there are some folks out there who don't want this beta published, but the more they question my sources, the more popular this thread becomes. My last post explicitly describes the location of Chambers, not mentioned before in any of my other posts.

If the grilling continues, I suspect there will be bolts in Chambers before this weekend.

[stefan]

You know, the ironic thing about this thread is that, there are some folks out there who don't want this beta published, but the more they question my sources, the more popular this thread becomes.

hmm ... it's just curiosity, man, no need to inflate its importance. just remember, some choose to keep information quiet until they publish it, which is a reasonable thing to do.


but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta, especially in response to a photojournal entry showing enticing photos of such a canyon? i was more interested in your response to this

[rockgremlin]

but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta, especially in response to a photojournal entry showing enticing photos of such a canyon? i was more interested in your response to this

I think my thoughts on that were summed up succinctly by Sombeech's post:

If this were a PAY site, I could see a little justification in offering only professional Trip Reports, safety precautions, exact mileage, and a packing list.

Since it's free and we're all above 13 years old, (remember that agreement you clicked on upon registering?), I think it's safe to say that we're going to investigate our destinations before taking advice from a complete stranger on the internet.

And if you're an unregistered lurker under the age of 13, find somebody to drive you, and then sue them.

[Iceaxe]

but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta

It always amazes me when some think their skills are so superior to all others..... If you can do it and survive we can do it.



But we do appreciate the warning and your concern.

[stefan]

but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta

It always amazes me when some think their skills are so superior to all others..... trust me.... if you can do it and survive we can do it.

hmm ... shane, please don't put words into my mouth.

superiority? bah. i certainly don't have a complex, do you?


my concern had more to do with the unexpected use of information. hence PMing can be very useful

[stefan]

I think my thoughts on that were summed up succinctly by Sombeech's post:

...

alright, thanks for your thoughts. i hope you're right.

[Iceaxe]

my concern had more to do with the unexpected use of information. hence PMing can be very useful

You would be defeating the purpose of this forum. This forum was created for the exchange of information among responsible adults.

And let's get serious.... all the whining in this thread is really the result of a certain group of individuals who do not want the canyon published yet because it does not meet their self-serving agenda. Don't feed me all this its for safety bullshit. If you were truly concerned about safety you would have taken a minute and explain the dangers and what to be aware of.

[rockgremlin]

EZ there Shane...let's not polarize ourselves....too much.

[nat]

You know, the ironic thing about this thread is that, there are some folks out there who don't want this beta published, but the more they question my sources, the more popular this thread becomes. My last post explicitly describes the location of Chambers, not mentioned before in any of my other posts.

If the grilling continues, I suspect there will be bolts in Chambers before this weekend.

Hey RockGremlin, I didn't mean my question to be a "grilling". I was just honestly curious how you found the canyon. I personally don't have any problems with posting such beta. If you figure it out, you're free to do whatever you want with it. I think from Tom's latest rave posts, people should be aware that it poses some physical difficulties in terms of climbing/stemming. Personally, I don't think that people who give out beta on canyons are responsible for others getting into trouble, unless the beta is misleading (i.e. if someone says "goat canyon is a real sweet beginners slot!", when it has hours of 5.8 stemming 60ft off the deck).

[rockgremlin]

No offense Nat, however you were one of about four people who questioned me not only here but via private emails. Kinda felt like the Inquisition there....

[Scott P]

but i am far more concerned about broadbanding coordinates about difficult canyons without beta

As long as you mention it is difficult, this kind of information is useful.

For example, some of us are out there doing canyons without beta. If someone has done it and knows it do be difficult, sometimes a heads up is good to know.

Chambers is something I haven't divulged the location on simply because I was asked not too.

I had known about (but haven't done) the canyon for a very long time, several years ago, and undoubtable others have too. It's right next to some very popular canyons and right near the trailheads for them.

The reason I have not shared is because someone (in this case MK) asked me not to. When ever someone ask me not to, I do not share. I was not aware that it was a sensitive issue until after MK asked me not to share, nor did I know that this particular canyon was Chambers until SB told me it was one and the same.

Since this canyon is right next to some roads and right next to some very popular trailheads, it doesn't seem that secret, but personally, I still do not share the info.

It's coming out in a guidebook soon anyway, so won't be "secret" after that.

There are hundreds, no, thousands of other canyons out there so there is no reason to be upset if someone doesn't divulge the location of every single one on this or any other forum.