Against my better judgement I'll allow myself to enter in to this particular debate again (groan) - sorry but I think there was a big misunderstanding about 'folding numbers' . For me the whole discussion was really about what rules we have/need in fell running, whether or not we give the race organisers the courtesy of doing what they ask, and whether or not some people think they apply to everyone else but themselves. Folding numbers was just the topic it happened to surface under - it could equally have been (and has) whether or not we carry required kit, follow flagged sections, actually know how to navigate, bolt Broad Stand or jump queues at stiles. These topics often attract a lot more heat than light because I think we are generally a laid back lot who take umbrage when someone tells us to do something we dont necessarily personally agree with - but if that someone is a race organiser then I'll do what they ask in return for them being prepared to organise the race in the first place. This whole series of issues arises in my opinion because once 'rules' exist, unless very clear from the outset (remember the debates over what is 'waterproof'?) they are open to personal interpretation - and we all have different views on this and I'm sure we all think we are right, and we can probably all think of examples where we have seen people apparantly blatantly ignoring them - but they themselves might think they are not. Then we all get heated about it and have a long debate on here!
More good sense from Cougar.
The essence of the "cut down numbers" issue as far as Pete Bland and Jonathan Broxap (and me) are concerned is actually that the numbers are on your chest so they can be CLEARLY seen by marshalls and particularly those at the finish who may have runners arriving in close formation. Cutting them down, wrapping them round your groin, etc makes this task difficult and defeats the whole purpose of having numbers.
Cougar you make some good points here. Let me tell you the problem with most of the threads that escalate into everyones random opinions and stances on this forum, and any other for that matter. We simply lose sight of the underlying wisdom or virtues of the original topic. Let me explain. Practical wisdom results from moral will and moral skill. The problem with rules and the expansion of these rules is that is an attack on peoples ability to exercise moral skill and hence we get a vibrant debate. However alot of posters lack the foresight to look deep anough into the underlying virtues. If that folding numbers thread had been retitled 'who thinks it is a good idea to make it difficult for race organisers and marshalls to do their job?' you would see a different debate, as you rightly point out, fell runners tend to be a respectful bunch.
All very true, Roy. It's also a product of the weakness of the medium. If all the forumites on a thread were physically present in a room and privy to the body language and intonation of a discussion in real time, you'd be much more likely to come to a generally accepted conclusion, because there would be a visible demonstration of justifiable leadership by the end of it. The internet is a manifestation of the atomisation of modern society, everybody has an equal input, so you often just end up with mush.
LOL! I first learnt that in about 1980 and yet I still do it. About 3 weeks ago, Stickle Tarn down to the New Dungeon Ghyll.
When you get given a top secret list of the possible championship races for next season, don't post it on the forums yourself. Instead get some youngster to post it, then they'll get told off.![]()
Cougar i'm not being awkward here but i'm struggling to clearly see your angle. Are you in disagreement the way that issues involving the ruling of an RO are openly debated by runners? As in: it's not the decision of the runners so why are we banging on about it? Sorry if you think i'm being pedantic i'm just trying to understand you more clearly.