Summit Journal Chat

The issue wasn’t whether he used a picture that wasn’t his, that was obvious years ago to anyone who followed his climb and knew the colours of his team outerwear. The speculation was over what this picture meant to his summit claim. IMHO, at issue was that neither side could prove whether a summit had or hadn’t been achieved. Also at issue was the use of the term "questioned" and the implications even that has to reputation. And unfortunately even a “libel-chill” lawsuit costs money to defend. Now going back to one of my original points and joining it with one of yours. If you believe that forums create content for organizations, and in turn that content is used to attract audience and with it revenue, it is acceptable to believe that the organization should be concerned about the nature of the content. Quite simply, if slanderous things are being posted, then those who “profit” from them are responsible for any damages, or at the very least have to pay to defend themselves against charges. That simply doesn’t make sense to accept that much hassle for what is really just a sideline to your primary focus. It makes even less sense when as an organization you’ve moved beyond the original issue.

Rose, I know had belonged to a couple of other groups through her interest in Mallory and Irvine. These groups’ trajectory through the ether is identical to ours. Once connected to bigger entities only to be cut loose when the risk exceeded the reward.