[nwenzel]

> (and let's be clear: money)

First, we all have bills to pay. Don’t knock someone for their chosen profession.

Second, I was lucky enough to be invited to a small group event to hear him speak. Either all or the vast majority of his fee was sent directly to a charity. Never hit his bank account.

Good rule of thumb is to remember not to make assumptions about people you know nothing about.

[XalvinX]

I know plenty about him and the climbing world, and the history of it, and have been involved in it personally since 1980, and have met many of the same people has, etc.

I stand by my statement. I'm not making assumptions, just observations. If he continues to climb for the audience he will end up dead. And they won't show that on TV, but they should, to be balanced and responsible.

And, yes, 5.11 is 'easy' but there are still hazards that are beyond his control, and 5.11 involves moves that are inherently insecure..that is what the rating means. 5.10a and above implies some level of dynamicism and/or trusting "nothing" holds or some combination thereof.

And, by the way, if he is "giving the money away" then your choice of the word "profession" is poor English.

[rixed]

> we all have bills to pay. Don’t knock someone for their chosen profession.

You should take some time to read this again and ask yourself what powerful emotion powered this though to form and surface.

[zaroth]

Why? It’s a perfectly reason sentiment to abstain from decrying someone’s legal (and even inspiring) profession.

[rixed]

Because with that line you could justify anything as long as it's for money to pay the bills?

I really think it was obvious but given the down votes I am now assuming there is a misunderstanding somewhere.