Quantifiable Skill Subsets

guest · February 8th, 2002, 11:38 PM

G-day mate,

About the judgeable aspects of B.A.S.E..
You forgot low pull comps dude.
I'm dissapointed

Or how about an object strike competition where you accumulate points each time you strike the object.
Provided you do it in a safe and responsible manner of course.
I believe we're missing the real essence of the publics attraction to B.A.S.E..
Lets face it the general public wants to see us slamming into things.If we organize comps that promote object strikes, canopy wraps, malfunctions, hard landiings and other high impact extreme stuff people would love it.
You could put hot chicks iin the landing area with big cards that have the round number on them.Just like in boxing or wrestling.We could scream obscenities at each other on the exit point.Maybe slam each other in the head with a chair now and then.
I got it, how about battling it out with big sticks while walking on the steel beams under a bridge.
Just a thought

D.J.

Yuri · February 11th, 2002, 07:41 AM

Yo !

Here we have it: AN ACCURACY OBJECT STRIKE comp! We put a target on the object and judges and TV crew below. Look:

It is highly quantifiable (just like a regular accuracy comp).

It is easy to judge precisely as the impact point will be clearly marked by blood spots.

It is completely foolproof: anybody falsely claiming a competitor's blood spot will receive additional penalty points following a quick DNA test.

It is a Real TV dream (we're all going to get RICH!)

Finally, Robin-related traffic on the board will increase 10-fold so Mick can get some advertisement money.

bsbd!

Yuri.

guest · February 11th, 2002, 08:50 AM

I don't know how one would work this into a competition -- no matter how you do it, I can't see it being the most exciting part of the thing -- but the ability to estimate object height, both from the bottom and from the top, is an important skill which (in my very limited experience) is more difficult than one would initially expect. Also easy to quantify.

. . . Laser range finders are nice, but I'm looking forward to the day when I can guess within 10% or so before taking the reading. The more sources, the better on that particular bit of data...

guest · February 11th, 2002, 10:31 AM

DJ:

You're right, you know! The public loves to see crashes and spills... as my good froend Dennis McGlynn says: "Nobody wants to see someone die, but if someone dies, they want to see it!"

But the big point involved here is the "IF" you mentioned... "IF we organize comps that promote..." and the point I've been making in this thread is that we did NOT promote this event this way to the public AND, much MUCH more importantly, we didn't present it that way to the corporation.

IF the KL Tower event had been presented to Telekom Malaysia as a black death event , and its black death components promoted and emphasized -- and Telekom Malaysia knowingly and willingly consented and agreed to go forward, then far out, wonderful, excellent, have at it, mates.

But that is NOT what happened, and this was just the very second of the big time corporate-level BASE events in Malaysia and that is definitely NOT the time to be doing black death stuff that the sanctioning corporation did NOT agree to.

Once again, we have a division bwetween the "thank you" base jumpers and the "fucck you" BASE jumpers, because it's definitely a "fucck you" when you expose your host to risks and conduct they did not sign on for.

It's really simply.

As for the screaming obscenities at the exit point, world ChUmpWeasel and Brian Choppin already did that -- shortly before or after the hero jump being discussed on this thread.

BUt really, DJ, you're right; crashing and burning (hopefully without serious consequence) will definitely "pack 'em in" and there's nothing wrong with promoting it that way, but your corporate partners have to be knowing and willing participants or it's not cool.

Love,

Robin

**460** · February 11th, 2002, 10:44 AM

How about "most creative last words?"

guest · February 11th, 2002, 11:47 AM

I don't know who to give credit for this, but my favorite is:
"Watch this!":-) :-) :-)

Later,
Thomas

imported_Tom Aiello · February 11th, 2002, 11:55 AM

>5. Landing
>.....5.1. Accuracy
>.....5.1. Standup (i.e. land softly - not pound
>in)

How about accuracy over obstacles. I think that "pure" accuracy often misses the fact that we usually have to miss things on the way in (trees, power lines, etc), and so we often have trouble making a real accuracy approach.

What if you surrounded the accuracy targets with "soft" obstacles (maybe windblades, or some taller variation thereof), and penalized people for hitting them?

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu

d-dog · February 11th, 2002, 01:00 PM

Robin, Sophism is a noun not a verb. Sophism is also a philosophical system, not a simple modifier like "cold" or "stupid." Maybe your grade-school dictionary isn't able to capture this reality; that doesn't change it.

Perhaps you could go back and read up on philosophy before you started using words you don't understand. Others might be impressed by random word-dropping, but for me I'd rather you used words within your educational range and left out concepts with which you have essentially no experience. And I'm not even talking about BASE just yet. . .

Speaking of experience, my experience in reading your posts leads me to the following recommendation. I've made it once to you, but let me repeat in case you were lost looking up wannabe-impressive words in your thesaurus and missed it the first time:

Get into another sport. BASE is not about posturing, and appearances, and corporate sponsorship, and "leaders." It is about going out and doing something fun, with friends or alone. And surviving, hopefully. You personally, Robin, aren't going to get rich in BASE. That seems to be 99% of what your constant griping here is about: you missed a payday at Petronas and just can't get over it.

Maybe figure skating needs "leaders" and you could point out over and over that you first put skates on 50 years ago and thus should be considered some sort of authority despite an admitted inability to stake beyond beginner level. That's the argument most congruent with your constant attempt to conflate time in sport with experience and skill level.

"We" are not missing opportunities because someone did or didn't do something at some jump or another. WE are out jumping every day, all sorts of fun objects, around the world. WE travel to new places, meet new jumpers, jump new stuff, and return the favor on our home objects. WE open new objects every few weeks and share them with other jumpers freely. WE have fun in the sport, almost without exception. WE are doing just fine, thank you.

How are you doing, Robin?

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

guest · February 11th, 2002, 01:08 PM

Dennis McGlynn is NOT your good friend.

guest · February 11th, 2002, 07:21 PM

Great idea Tom. That is precisely why Reggie invented Airblades and uses them in his swoop comps.

The initial idea was that people hit wind socks a lot, which causes two problems: It can hurt the jumper; and it knocks the windsock out of commission because they tend to break.

THe airblade bends and/or strips when hit, so it doesn't hurt the person hitting it and doesn't get put oput of commission.

In the swoop comps that are speed oriented, hitting a blade results in a 3-5 second penalty, and the way he sets them up encourages "good piloting," so a variation of that would indeed be use in a BASE comp... as would more BASE-specific things such as soft-squishy pillow "rocks" and other such obstacles. You know, you could even have "high-tension wires" made of breakable material that, like wind blades, would define a course but wouldn't have the "real" consequences of hitting an object like that.

Robin

guest · February 11th, 2002, 07:49 PM

Doggie, for such a smart guy you're such a dumbasss sometimes.

Though you're right... I should said sophistry instead of sophism, though I'd love to know what dictionary you think defines sophistry/sophism/sophists as anything but an argument that SEEMS logical and valid but isn't, since THAT was how I used it (as a verb or adjective and NOT as a noun).

As for my technical skill, of COURSE you have to jump all the time to keep your currency at a barely-able-to-stay alive minimum.

I don't.

As for your suggestion that I get into another sport because "BASE is not about posturing, and appearances, and corporate sponsorship, and "leaders..."

Funny, that's what I said to Dweasel. Try to define his posturing and appearances vis a vis the KL Tower jump in question as anything BUT posturing and appearances in a corporately sponsored environment.

You can't

Which, once again, has been MY point all along on this thread. Do whatever you want however you want to do it, but NOT when you are invited guests of corporations with billions on the line if the people who have posed and postured and appeared to be professionals act like spoiled brats and punks instead.

Really simple concept for anyone except base jumpers apparently: Behave yourself when you're a guest.

As for getting rich, kid, I put in 1,000 hours of time and $7,000 into that project yet Dweasel and the rest of the punks -- and most definitely YOU -- who benefited so greatly from my efforts seem to think I shoouold work for free and spend my own money so they can have fun and then talk ##### about me afterward.

That total lack of appreciation and understanding belies your rhetorical brilliance, Doggie. Suppose YOU work 1,000 free hours and spend $7k of your own money so _I_ can go jump some incomparable object with all MY friends while you stay home and WE make money -- and then we all call you an assshole who ought to go do something else because you don't accomplish anything for anyone in BASE.

Everything that everybody did at Petronas happened because of my ability to put it together over two years, my ability to spend $7k on it, my ability to spend 1,000 hours on it. Without that, there would have been and never would have been jumps made from Petronas, because neither Dweasel, Weasel, Butch or Surfer Boy or any of the other BASE gods (including the IPBC) has never done anything even remotely like it because they're out playing instead of working.

And yet here you are taking a huge amount of verbiage to point out that I'm a worthless putz who contributes nothing to the current BASE world.

It's really hard to believe you're that much of a jerk, Doggie, but all I have to go on is the words you put on this Board.

As I've said numerous times before, I ame more mistakes on the Petronas project than anyone -- mostly because I DID more than everyone else combined. If I had been smarter and wiser, it would have worked out better for everybody, and I accept responsibility for my own mistakes.

It just really makes me sad that people like you are such know-it-all jerks about something about which you are so utterly and totally ignorant.

Love,

Robin Heid
BASE 44

d-dog · February 12th, 2002, 12:12 AM

I'm no kid, old man, I'm a pup to use the proper term. And I do find it endearing to be called a kid (or pup) at this point in my life. It makes me feel not quite so much over the hill. Alas, if only the sobriquet were true. . .

You've now switched from random attacks at phantom enemies to generally feeling sorry for yourself because everyone is so mean to you. That's a bit of a dizzying jump, and once again I have to wonder why we are continuing this thread since it has bounced so far afield from its original purpose and seems only to provide you with a handy straw man, me with something to do when it is too windy to jump, and everyone else with cannon fodder for puerile, amateur, admittedly funny jokes.

If you chose to invest your time and money in bettering BASE (as you claim re Petronas), them be a goddamned man and live with your choice. Be proud of it. Don't expect (as you are continuously doing) the rest of the BASE world to fall over backwards with adulation. I didn't ask you to invest ANY time in Petronas. I've never jumped those objects, and ain't in a big rush to do so. Why should I be thanking you? I was not at Petronas, remember? Nor at KL, last year or this year. I was off jumping in Europe during the latter, and at home recovering from a broken ankle during the former.

Robin, gifts are given freely if they are truly gifts (per Mauss' and Levi-Strauss' theories of social reciprocity). If you had 'given' your time to Petronas, then you would feel GOOD about that contribution. Instead, you are horribly bitter and angry about the whole thing. This provides credence to Dwain's assertion that the only central issue here is your failure to structure a fair business deal for yourself with your business partners in Malaysia. That IS an issue, but not one that justifies your ongoing attacks against nearly every senior jumper involved with either of those events.

How this translates into your vitriolic screed against Dwain, Annie, Mark, and anyone else who didn't join in your self-declared embargo of the event is even now a mystery to me and many others. And, on top of that, you've managed to drag people like me who weren't even AT the event into your circle of anger. What's up with that?

Just stop, man. Let Petronas go. If anyone screwed you there, it wasn't me and it wasn't Dwain and it wasn't any other jumper. Go find your real enemy, if you really need an enemy. None of us are your enemies. Honestly. I, personally, am pissed that you have started throwing random shots at my friends for things I KNOW from direct knowledge they did not do. Call me old-fashioned, but when someone maligns my friends improperly I get my hackles up and I bite. Err, bark. . . or whatever. Sorry, bad metaphor.

You are manufacturing insta-enemies from thin air, Robin. I've nothing against you as a person - heavens, I don't even KNOW you as a person. We've never met. We've never jumped together. We've, in fact, agreed in our past email conversations on many things. But, now, you are attacking me with the same enthusiasm you've attacked so many others in the past. Again, what's up with that?

And, just for the record, it is so wonderfully, refreshingly humorous of you to insist that Dwain is all about posturing. Too good! Seriously, that shows how little you know about the folks you are attacking. Dwain's an irritating little priss sometimes, as we all know and that's why we love him so much, but his idea of posturing is to pretend he's cautious and trick other jumpers into doing spooked-out stuff. It's that whole Aussie "talk quietly and do crazy $hit" ethos. Posturing?

So let's drop this. I'm not a "know it all jerk" about much, Robin. I may be a jerk, sure. I may be a know it all about things that I know it all about: horses, climbing, recreational drug use, drag queen appreciation, queer culture, etc. Other than that, I'm just a common, garden-variety jerk. I ain't no know it all, least of all about Petronas. But I DO know a few things about that event, and those facts often contradict essential elements of your narrative. And I DO know about some of the jumpers you are attacking, and I know that your putative reasons for attacking them generally don't map to their past actions but rather to some other need those attacks must be filling for you personally. And I know I do not like that behavior pattern at all.

I am, indeed, ignorant about a whole bunch of stuff, and proudly so. The more I'm ignorant, the more I get to learn. . . and I take a child's pleasure in learning new things. But being ignorant about some things does not make me ignorant about all things. Q.E.D. A fallacy of recursion.

To close, as you know I have personally donated thousands of hours of my time (more than a few of those hours in jail) supporting causes important to me. I've also donated a whole hell of a lot more than $7,000 to those causes, as well, but then I've been fortunate in having access to financial resources with which to provide assistance to environmental, climbing access, and free speech charities in the past. And, honestly, I've never felt that (for example) environmentalism "owed" me anything for my contributions. Then again, they were contributions and not investments. If you INVESTED money in the Petronas event - and lost that money - then that's a business issue and has nothing to do with the sport of BASE but rather with your inexperience at structuring business transactions in an international environment.

If it makes you feel any better, Robin, I've personally lost tens of millions of dollars due to mistakes I've made in past business deals. Easy come, easy go. That's how we learn, but we don't learn if we merely fixate on our failure and refuse to move forward smarter and wiser as a result.

Nobody's talking $hit about you here, Robin. We're simply responding to YOUR unfortunate tendency to throw roundhouse punches at random people as the mood strikes you. This being a public forum, you are by definition opening yourself to spirited criticism when your attacks transgress others' thresholds. Speaking personally, that doesn't mean I hate you or feel you do not contribute to BASE. It just means I think you went out of line, and that you've earned a little bit of the same medicine you are so eager to dole out to others. The Golden Rule in practice, so to speak.

You've said to me before that we probably have more in common than we have separating us. I believe that. Just last weekend I was in Josh, climbing old Randy routes and dreaming about others. It's a small world, and we two inhabit the same musty corners of it. What's the point of the anger and hatred and spite? It serves no need for me, and is given only in return for what is doled out to me or my mates. Tit for tat, so to speak. Stop the tit, and I'll stop the tat. . . and we can go back to dating ourselves by retelling our stories of climbing funkiness from decades gone by.

Peace,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com

imported_Tom Aiello · February 12th, 2002, 08:24 AM

>You could even have "high-tension wires" made of breakable material that, like wind blades, would define a course but wouldn't have the "real" consequences of hitting an object like that.

I think there is real merit in the idea of fake, "break-away" objects. They would be fun to play with, give spectators a better insight into the real hazards of the sport, and have a good amount of real training value.

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu