Appropriate discussion around mountaineering accidents

[JaredJohnson]

This is specifically with regards to threads in the "Climbing Accidents: Info and Analysis" forum. It's worth noting Bill's sticky post in there:

Friends and family of fallen climbers will be reading this sub-forum so please keep it civil and be respectful.

Ultimately Bill decides what is beyond the pale and can lock threads / delete messages when necessary, but it seems like many people want to debate or define what is appropriate and useful for people to post in the first place. Although well-intentioned, it seems like these discussions are derailing the threads at best, and offending loved ones at worst. This thread might be a better place to discuss those guidelines, and when the issue comes up in accident threads perhaps this one could be bumped and we can beat this dead dog instead of reproducing it again in the wrong place.

I thought it was possible to allow respondents to provide additional answers, but I don't see such an option, maybe I was imagining things. I can add more if people identify additional behavior that they consider in-bounds or out-of-bounds for these types of threads.

[BKS]

There’s a considerable amount of history on the forum behind the OP’s post. Perhaps it should be retold.

This discussion has to include a former member of this community who died on lightning pyramid in 2013. Arguably, steve gladbach was the most influential mountain mentor this community has seen. Before he died, the death threads were always contentious, continuously devolving into what the recent capitol thread became. Many of them were arrogant and offensive - “when I go out I do this and i’ve never had an accident”.

A year or so before Steve’s accident, he posted a plea entitled “when I die”. I’m sure it’s archived, as it’s a classic post. His point was all the “analysis” and arm chair quarter- backing of accidents were doing more harm than good. He asked that nobody go down that path in the event of his death. Rocks move, feet slip, and snow slides - this was his summary (or something like that). He was such a respected person and his post so notorious that nobody asked about it online following his death. So for almost ten years these death threads have been mostly statements of condolence. It was a huge improvement in the forum.

Prior to Steve’s death, there was another significant member who sought to catalog all Colorado accidents and provide some “analysis”. He believed there were lessons to be learned. However, he publicly recanted his perspective, erased his writings and discontinued doing this. He cited the amount of pain being caused by his effort, letters he had received and the inability to have a productive conversation about this on such a forum.

Also about this time, Bill decided to make two categories - one for memorial comments and condolences and one for analysis with the wording that has been highlighted. The goal was to keep these things separate. It was an improvement.

Early in my mountaineering I couldn’t help but try to get all the info when a fatality happened. I also believed there was something to be learned. While I still think that, after watching this forum for 10 years, I agree with Steve that there is more harm than good coming from such public musings. Part of Steve’s opposition was that he struggled with guilt for years after an accident that claimed the life of one of his partners. He was blamed by other’s “analysis. He also helped other prominent members deal with survivors guilt.

Feet slip, rocks move, snow slides. Our hobby carries with it unavoidable risk.

[greenonion]

I tried something like this Jared and I think someone else too. Don’t hold out much hope of this working, but I sincerely wish you and this success.

People + internet =

[JaredJohnson]

I think Bill should do away with the newsfeed for the forum on the front page.

I'm not a fan of this idea as a generality, but what if posts in the "Climbing Accidents: Info and Analysis" forum did not show up on the news feed?

You would probably want to split out (yet another) forum for missing climbers and any other incidents where it's actually helpful and maybe life-saving for people in the community to see information and have a place to respond with firsthand knowledge that can reach SAR and/or family. You could lock a thread when the incident it referenced was no longer ongoing / in need of information, and someone could create a new analysis thread referencing it if they wished.

At any rate, what if ideas such as these were discussed in separate threads?

blameful questions were asked …was the climber wearing a helmet? Was the climber solo? it came across very accusatory.

And round and round we go. This is the problem with you guys on the “please do not discuss” side.

Can't we discuss those off-topic questions in a separate thread or private message? Or maybe click on the user that you believe is operating in bad faith or is making unreasonable judgements about your good faith, and click "add foe"

[JaredJohnson]

Arguably, steve gladbach was the most influential mountain mentor this community has seen.

I never met him but his reputation seems well deserved and enduring, and the memory of losing him is surely difficult for the many people that did know him

A year or so before Steve’s accident, he posted a plea entitled “when I die”. I’m sure it’s archived, as it’s a classic post.

It wasn't easy to find but here it is reproduced:

viewtopic.php?f=42&t=40282&start=276#p487718

I can't say I fully agree with him but I get it and furthermore he seems to have had a better glimpse than most into what can rub salt in the wounds of survivors; it would be foolish to discard that perspective. It's horrible to imagine surviving a fatal incident or how I'd react, but I suppose I'd be wise to avoid reading uncurated discussion about it.

I know there are others who have said or would say "if I die in the mountains, go ahead and pick it apart". That's my wish, because I believe that humbly thinking and talking through the choices and immovable factors that can get people killed in the mountains is a helpful learning/teaching tool and reminder to be vigilant. It isn't dishonoring to his wishes to honor theirs, or vice versa. If God forbid I should become the subject of one of these threads, speculate away; but I'm glad my wife doesn't frequent this site so she won't be annoyed and confused by all the arguing |:

[JROSKA]

Can't we discuss those off-topic questions in a separate thread or private message? Or maybe click on the user that you believe is operating in bad faith or is making unreasonable judgements about your good faith, and click "add foe"

I’ve agreed that these questions should be addressed in a separate thread. The problem is, even when that is done, you still get a bunch of “you’re being insensitive, don’t speculate, there’s nothing that can be learned, go climb the mountain yourself”. I get that we can just ignore or foe the person but why can’t they just ignore the topic to begin with and not comment if they don’t want a discussion? As for posing questions such as “were they solo / wearing a helmet” in a PM, then all you’re going to get is someone telling you in a PM, “you’re being insensitive, don’t speculate, there’s nothing that can be learned, go climb the mountain yourself” instead of in front of the forum. Not sure how that solves the problem. Seems like if we have to resort to under the table PM’s, it might be time to just not have anymore analysis threads or discussions (or even links to accidents) period. Just like several other topics on the internet, politics / religion etc, things always devolve into a fight and maybe accident analysis is just one of those topics.

[Eli Boardman]

Some of you just don't get it, do you? A locked thread means shut up and move along.

If you actually care about analysis, read the annual AAC accident report, which is compiled by actual professionals doing this sort of thing in a very objective manner that might actually be informative.

99% of accident "analysis" on this forum is a thinly disguised attempt to convince oneself that "it won't happen to me because I'm smarter."

bulls**t. It might happen to you, or someone you love, for no particular reason whatsoever, other than this thing called climbing is bloody dangerous sometimes. We need to be honest with ourselves. It's ok to be scared of dying in the mountains. Hiding from risk behind a veil of individual perfectionism ("I'll eliminate the risk with perfect equipment/training/whatever") is not the way to go. The human factor is real--the imperfection of your own decision-making is one of the risks you'll just have to accept if you choose to pursue this sport. I'm not here to offer a solution, but I'm here to call out the lie that understanding other's accidents will prevent you from repeating said accidents. Modern mountaineering safety practices are very well established, and if an accident was caused by something preventable, chances are you already know that you should be following whatever the best practice is in that scenario. As Steve says below, "you know what mistakes can be made."

Thanks Jared for posting the link to Steve's statement. Though I'm quite new to this community compared to many here and my climbing never overlapped with Steve's, his wisdom is as relevant as ever, and his statement is worth quoting in full here.

.......include this in my last will and testament:

Feel free to post messages of condolence to my children and family.

Do not ask for details (beyond those that a newspaper would report) so that you can "Learn" from my mistakes. Please ,Site Administrators: if you value me at all as a person, delete such requests immediately.

I have seen about 5% (That 5% often does more harm than the 95% does good) of every accident thread deteriorate into a useless guessing game designed to "analyze' the accident. In reality, it only serves to stir up feelings of guilt and loss amongst those left behind. The "lessons" learned never serve to prevent future incidents, because the armchair critics assimilate the info by convincing themselves that , "Since I take precaution "X", that will not happen to me." BS.

In every thread (and in at least one book where the author told me he didn't necessarily consider it important to interview the primary survivor), the critics boil the details down to some trite conclusion which can be filed under a particular chapter of stuff "not to do". Every time, you hear how there are no such things as "accidents"; the person performing the analysis can always explain how they would have prevented the accident. If only they could be there every time we climb!

These things are true:

Upside:
1. Training highlights preventable mistakes : PLEASE take a series of CMC or private courses designed to build skills. Repeat classes peiodically as long as you are a climber.
2. Mentorship and group participation can teach skills (Thanks, TomPierce for the fieldwork in Ruby Basin.) There is always something new to be learned from a partner.
3. GOOD books, i.e. Freedom of the Hills, written to teach actual skills, can help.
4. Time in the field teaches valuable, applicable (but not perfect) lessons.

Downside:
1. Climbing is dangerous and each climber must decide for themselves the level of risk they wish to assume.
2. Rocks move, feet slip, snow slides.
3.The exact conditions leading to an accident are never analyzed 100% correctly (witnesses are dead, traumatized, or non-existent), so the conclusions are always skewed.
4. Time in the field increases that opportunity for #1 and #2 to catch up with you!

What is useful:
1.Expressions of condolence.
2.Continued comfort and support to those left behind. An internet note and attendance at a memorial is 1% of what you COULD choose to do.
3.Take the memory of those lost with you each time you go into the field.

Remembering those who have passed will do more to heighten your own awareness of potential dangers than would a critque of their errors. Remember: you've already taken courses, participated with good mentors, and read valuable books. You know what mistakes can be made. You know that you can make zero mistakes and still die. Vigilance is the best defense and bringing along the memory of those lost partners will always heighten vigilance. Sadly, none of us are 100% vigilant.

Whether an 18 y/o boy with 2 years experience or a 70 y/o legend with 50 years of climbing, you could slip on some ice and die. If we're lucky, we might remember that and look twice before we take that next step.

ONWARDS!

Steve

[JaredJohnson]

A locked thread means shut up and move along.

I think in the particular case it meant either shut up or take the debate elsewhere. But if I'm wrong I won't be offended if Bill locks or removes this thread too (:

chances are you already know that you should be following whatever the best practice is in that scenario. As Steve says below, "you know what mistakes can be made."

I agree that many of the mistakes that wind up being discussed are already understood, but not always, and at any rate talking through them can help underline and impress on people the risks and considerations. I agree there are publications that get the facts more correct and should be read. I also think it's natural, acceptable, and useful for people in the community to talk through events that are closer to them.

There was a very beloved person that passed away while glissading with a hiking pole instead of an ice axe. AFAIK this detail was brought up and discussed delicately and respectfully on this forum. I don't presume to know how things could have otherwise gone, and I was already aware of the "don't glissade without an ice axe" mantra before this. But now any time the subject of glissading comes up I think of this person and all the people that grieved for them, and I'm deadly serious with myself and my companions about this and similar dangers. It makes me reflect more seriously on questions like whether the equipment I'm considering entrusting my life with is designed for that purpose.

Another forum member fell a couple of thousand feet off pyramid peak solo in the winter and spent a couple of days painfully making it out on his own with a broken hip. I bought a PLB after reading his TR. When I'm planning solo winter trips I often see that guy's struggle in my mind and consider whether I'm being overly optimistic about my skills and the risks involved.

The misfortunes of others so close to my own time and place lend gravity to my practice and to my choices about what to attempt and how to prepare. If some oversimplify and say "here are two mistakes that can get you killed or ruin your weekend, I carry a PLB and an ice axe so I'll be fine", then I guess morons gonna moron. Reading remote reports in publications with definitive root causes may feed that foolishness more readily than talking through recent events in our back yard that sadden us and give us pause.

[dan0rama]

Why can’t we disagree and make room for our differences? Why can’t those who don’t want to discuss accidents simply step aside and ignore the threads and allow those who want to discuss the accidents carry on? Imagine if a large group of people who don’t like climbing barricaded THs under the premise that climbing is a dangerous pursuit and thus kept everyone else from going up the mountains . That’s like what’s happening here. A group of people believe they have monopoly over what is righteous, are not tolerant of others seeing the world differently, and want to bully everyone else into submitting to that view of the world. There’s a mental health epidemic going on and a lot of you are struggling to cope with emotional distress, but shutting down everyone who disagrees with you is not your cure. Realize that no one here is purposefully trying to hurt anyone - intentions do matter - we are all just looking to process a traumatic event. What I think was missing from Steve’s analysis is that while discussing an accident might not make you a better climber, it might help you process the trauma.

Talk about the event

After a traumatic event you might want to avoid things that remind you of the event, and avoid talking about what happened. However, research has shown that talking about the event and your feelings can help you to be more resilient. Avoiding memories and feelings has been shown to make people feel worse.

https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health ... atic-event

[Tim A]

Jared,

The two examples you give of accidents that were discussed on this forum that led you to making different decisions were both initiated by people on the scene who could provide actual information. The Pyramid winter fall was written up by the climber himself and made for stark reading, and the Humboldt slide was discussed by TM’s companion and by the after-action report by SAR. Those types of discussions, by actual on-the-scene people, do offer some lessons because they aren’t purely conjecture.

What rubs some (myself included) the wrong way is the pointless what-ifs by folks who were not present, or the absurd questions like the loaded ‘was he wearing a helmet?’ or ‘was he off-route?’ These types of questions come from the same macabre place in our brains that cause us to slow down when driving past traffic accidents to look at the carnage while divorcing ourselves from the possibility of it ever happening to us.

I defer to SG’s argument. He’d learned and forgotten more about the mountains, mountaineering accidents, and grief than I’ll probably ever learn, and I assume out of that large base of wisdom and experience that his conclusions are more grounded than most.

I’ve bought the annual AAC publication on accidents since I’ve started this hobby a decade ago. I read every CAIC report in its entirety. I read forum posts by people who’ve survived near-misses (arguably these are the most valuable resource of all). I consume accident-related data voraciously when it comes from trusted sources who’ve got experience and knowledge of the realities of our chosen hobby OR were themselves a party to the incident. Armchair conjecture in an online forum between people who were not present for either the accident or recovery provides little actual benefit besides, as Eli mentioned above, making us feel better by hypothesizing that it couldn’t happen to us.

[JaredJohnson]

What rubs some (myself included) the wrong way is the pointless what-ifs by folks who were not present, or the absurd questions like the loaded ‘was he wearing a helmet?’ or ‘was he off-route?’ These types of questions come from the same macabre place in our brains that cause us to slow down when driving past traffic accidents to look at the carnage while divorcing ourselves from the possibility of it ever happening to us.

I think it's an over-generalization to assume that speculation must come from a place of voyeurism, and it makes sense to me that people would react poorly to being the subject of - forgive me - speculation about their motivations and their conclusions, even (or especially) in cases where you're spot-on.

My first 14er attempt was on Longs with a very experienced mentor. When we approached the section of the Ledges with the rebar hold he pointed out that a teenager had recently passed away after falling from that spot as his father looked on. I asked him how that could have happened, all I could imagine was that the moves were too technical for him (I thought they were pretty technical at the time although objectively they're extremely simple in normal conditions). He said he didn't know, but speculated that it might have been on the descent if he was dealing with unexpected fatigue or altitude sickness. Or it could have been due to nerves, or due to cavalier inattentiveness, or perhaps rain had made the polished rock very slick. Pure speculation, and my mentor was using it as a teaching tool. Not to assure me that something like that would never happen to me; but to highlight that it could happen to me, and to process through some ways that it could. You can bet I took all of these possibilities to heart and regarded the gravity of the adventure I was on. I returned to Longs a half dozen times, and these reflections informed my decisions about who to bring, when to start, how far to go, when to turn back.

I attempted Lightning Pyramid for the first time a couple of months ago. I hadn't engaged in or read any online speculation about Steve G. But from my armchair, I absolutely did speculate privately about what mistakes or misfortunes could have caused his accident - what could possibly have gone wrong. I won't enumerate those thoughts since I do want to respect Steve's wishes. But when I approached the climb, these possibilities were at the front of my mind, as well as the knowledge that someone very capable and experienced had met his match here for reasons that might not be on my list. I unexpectedly wound up attempting the harder bits solo. I had trouble with route finding, and the lack of snow meant loose rock was abundant with no alternatives. I turned back pretty early even though I might have been able to go on to summit. Private, uninformed speculation helped to inform that good decision.

Perhaps some folks never benefit from speculation and they unwisely do it anyway. Perhaps some know they'd never benefit from speculation so they wisely avoid it. For others I think it would be better to describe their thought process as rumination rather than speculation. I just want to illustrate some possible motivations for the latter group that aren't voyeuristic and foolish; at worst they're well-meaning, at best profitable.

If one can't believe the best in people, it's nice to at least assume the best, and if one can't assume the best in people it's nice to at least hope for the best.

[JQDivide]

What sorts of discussion are INAPPROPRIATE in a thread about a specific climbing incident?....
So, like many questions in mountaineering and life... it depends.

Depends on the thread.
If it is a simple, "this happened" and maybe a link to a news story or SAR report.
That's a place to be respectful and pass along your condolences.

Discussing accidents, asking questions, can provide insight and education, but that should be done in a different thread.
But should also be respectful.
Speculation, accusations, etc. aren't helpful and can be hurtful.

Reading first-hand information from SAR or from people that were there is good place to start.

Joel