Skiing a Peak: What it takes

[bluegrassclimber]

This thread has been glorious. I have skied exactly zero lines outside a resort, so I am fully qualified to give an outside in perspective.

So far, no one has been able to produce documented standards that are formally endorsed by a governing body. In the age of the internet, you can’t bitch about people ignoring ethics/standards that exist only in oral tradition or indirectly referenced by quotes of people who were “firsts.” If it’s important enough to maintain rules, document those rules and get the community to explicitly endorse them. If that existed, this would be a much shorter thread.

Second, nowhere on this site does it show any conditions to mark the ski descent box. And frankly, wouldn’t ever blame Bill for not diving into that... then all this bitching would be directed to him. It is understandable to want to educate “the younger generation” but there are two issues with the OP. It’s not a younger generation only, it should really be “anyone less experienced and/or uninitiated to the history and figures of Colorado ski mountaineering.” AND... a forum post isn’t going to advance your cause as much as you think. Make it permanent by getting someone like CMC or a proper skimo community authority to codify rules around descent and make a list that follows those rules. Sheesh.

Pretty clear to this outsider that the ski descent list on this site is really left up to the individual to use how they see fit. And, rules left to be super obscure and hard to find will always be in question.

[gb]

I guess I always viewed the ski icon as a generic "I carried skis and slid some portion of it, after hiking to the summit".

Which is different than claiming a "ski descent".

If I climb a peak and ski the bits I want to ski, I would have checked the box. Because it's for me and I skied during the trip.
But I also wouldn't claim it as a ski descent.

I guess I don't necessarily view the ski icon in the same light as a claim (for which there is no checkbox).

Honestly I use the skier icon in the same way. For the 14ers, yes, I adhered to Dawson's rules very strictly. Other peaks, the skier icon is probably just there for me to remember that I skied it (whether from the summit or not), vs. hiking it.

As an example, I've skied the fridge on Ice twice. One time, we had snow to the summit, and skied it. The other time, only the fridge had snow, and I left the skis there and scrambled to the summit and back. They both have ski icons. That said, if I were ever to decide to ski the cents since I've already skied the 14ers, I would of course only count the one from the summit.

[AlexeyD]

Second, nowhere on this site does it show any conditions to mark the ski descent box.

It does, actually...like I wrote earlier, hover over the skier icon, and it says "ski descent from summit". Pretty unambiguous, IMO. And I say this having interpreted it differently the first time.

[bluegrassclimber]

Second, nowhere on this site does it show any conditions to mark the ski descent box.

It does, actually...like I wrote earlier, hover over the skier icon, and it says "ski descent from summit". Pretty unambiguous, IMO. And I say this having interpreted it differently the first time.

I stand corrected. It does show that on the icon, but not in your entry from. Still ambiguous and still not as clear as the OP wants. Also doesn’t invalidate the point that if you want to bitch about rules, they need to have some authority to endorse them.


It’s also confusing because right below it is the 3k rule checkbox, and above it calendar winter; indicating if there were more specifics about the downhill part then there’d be additional checkboxes. EDIT: Sorry Bill, I’m a UXer and think the site is great, can’t help myself sometimes.

9582888F-F275-4D56-997F-6462BE19CD63.jpeg (647.04 KiB) Viewed 3239 times

[BillMiddlebrook]

Hmm, looks like I may need to reword it and add a link to a new “help” paragraph to clarify the issue and suggest the user only check the box if he/she skied from the highest, previously accepted “summit” starting point AND .... etc.

I’ll take a stab at it since I’m the one who originally made the checkbox.

Like Otina, I also care about the rulz when it comes to something like this, but really only if people plan on claiming a finisher of some sort. You know, like the Dr. Douche scenario

[AlexeyD]

Hmm, looks like I may need to reword it and add a link to a new “help” paragraph to clarify the issue and suggest the user only check the box if he/she skied from the highest, previously accepted “summit” starting point AND .... etc.

I’ll take a stab at it since I’m the one who originally made the checkbox.

Like Otina, I also care about the rulz when it comes to something like this, but really only if people plan on claiming a finisher of some sort. You know, like the Dr. Douche scenario

That's a great idea, and will hopefully clear up a lot of the misunderstanding! Much appreciated.

On the question of "enforcement", though - I don't think it's really about that. Nobody's actually going to make you (proverbial "you" of course) go back and uncheck that box, it seems more a question of integrity and honesty.

EDIT - I did finally figure out how to remove the checklist without deleting the whole entry. It turns out you have to click on the peak URL within the "edit checklist" option, then it lets you change the checkboxes as you wish. Oh well, guess it means I have to come back to Colorado some day and ski the Emperor

[bergsteigen]

Hmm, looks like I may need to reword it and add a link to a new “help” paragraph to clarify the issue and suggest the user only check the box if he/she skied from the highest, previously accepted “summit” starting point AND .... etc.

I’ll take a stab at it since I’m the one who originally made the checkbox.

Like Otina, I also care about the rulz when it comes to something like this, but really only if people plan on claiming a finisher of some sort. You know, like the Dr. Douche scenario

Thanks Bill! I think this will be the needed clarification. Let the user decide after that. I will NOT be gatekeepering/policing/etc (unless I see you up on Bierstadt and make a snide comment, haha - like in this case (see conditions report). My humor does better in person anyway). I know I would feel guilty, but others obviously do not. To each their own!

[Trotter]

Same snowflake debate, different icon.

Otina, I just want you to be happy! You're in for a lifetime of disappointment if you think that people are going to use the Ski Descent checkbox properly.

Snowflakes have 1 and only 1 rule - it signifies a summit in a trip within calendar winter. It's not complex. And yet, like you said, we have debates about that.

Ski Descents are WAY more complicated than a simple date/time as you cited in your original post..

+1

The snowflake thing gets arguments and pushback all the time. And its super clear cut. The ski descent thing is loaded with qualifiers and modifiers and best judgement calls. Not an easy thing to have rulings on.

"Since you're skiing natural snow, some descents might have gaps where you remove your skis and move a few feet across rock or tundra. Again, if you're up there on an average snow year with decent coverage, such maneuvers are legit so long as they are not excessive. "

Good luck getting people to decide on what constitutes an average snow year, what decent coverage means, and what excessive is.


Imagine if the snowflake winter ascent thing was worded the same. People would be claiming winter ascents in july.

[supranihilest]

So far, no one has been able to produce documented standards that are formally endorsed by a governing body.

This is an even more ridiculous rule than trying to use tradition set by the most well known and "greatest/skilled" members of the community and one that you know will never happen. An entire governing body? lol, just lol. Those members advocating for these rules are the closest thing to a governing body we'll see. If you're trying to satirize Otina's original point then bravo.

In the age of the internet, you can’t bitch about people ignoring ethics/standards that exist only in oral tradition or indirectly referenced by quotes of people who were “firsts.”

Arbitrary rule that I do not agree with, don't you tell me what I can and can't bitch about! Where's the governing body on whether the existence of the internet means bitching about certain topics is off limits?! I don't respect their authoritah anyway! /s

If it’s important enough to maintain rules, document those rules and get the community to explicitly endorse them.

Also doesn’t invalidate the point that if you want to bitch about rules, they need to have some authority to endorse them.

The community as a whole will never agree 100%. That so many of the most well known members and some of the most "completed" members (by which I mean, those who have done all/most of the peaks/skis/whatever by the very high standards that this small sub-group appears to agree with; see Lodgling, Otina, Snow Alien, gb, etc. for skiing, Ralston, Gladbach, Sarah Meiser, etc. for snowflakes) agree, that seems by some virtue to be the "governing body" you wish for. Officially sanctioned it is not, but who gets to determine what or who is officially sanctioned in the first place? And how did that governing body get the authority to authorize other governing bodies? It's unsanctioned groups attempting to assert authority all the way down.

You will never get the entire community to agree on anything (except that perhaps the entire community can't agree on anything), so it seems that that small, elite group which advocates for the high standards they themselves live by and have repeatedly proven they can perform at is the governing body, even if never "officially" sanctioned by the community, because it never will be. That doesn't mean that their points are irrelevant or unworthy of consideration by serious list tickers.

[lodgling]

Seems the real issue in this particular thread is that one person's attempt at "teaching" can be another person's "bitching" (not my term). The purpose of a message is often lost in the digital world.

In general, the skiers on here are among the best and most willing resources for information about their hobby. And that's what this site is really about, right?

[cedica]

Hmm, this sounds more and more like it could be great application of blockchain technology, as opposed to burning Chinese coal to mine the rest of Bitcoin. If you want to play with check marks why not just hash your GPS and snow data collected outside in the clear air?

[greenonion]

Seems the real issue in this particular thread is that one person's attempt at "teaching" can be another person's "bitching" (not my term). The purpose of a message is often lost in the digital world.

In general, the skiers on here are among the best and most willing resources for information about their hobby. And that's what this site is really about, right?

Bingo.