0
jimmyh

Why some jumpers (me) don't take others (you) seriously.

Recommended Posts

Quote

***
The towers are very strong. We had one get struck by a Cessna and the Cessna lost the battle, badly.



Funny, we had a cessna hit a 1700ft tower here a few years ago and both the Cessna AND the tower lost. They are not as strong as you think they are if you hit them in the right spot;)
At least something good came out of that incident....A bigger LZ and a taller tower!!
We have also had a few go down from ice, which isn't very strong at all:P

Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Dude, you have no idea how good I am at what I do...You could pull my reserve handle, turn my camera off, unzip my jumpsuit, give me a paper cut and poor lemon juice in it all on jump run, hell, even after the green light's been turned on, and I'd still be on the ground smiling with with a product that that tandem student will cherish. And regardless of your attitude about the whole thing, I just might thank you for making my day interesting.



Just an observation from an outsider looking in - your talking about attitudes?....................



Obviously you have never jumped with or been around Jimmy when he jumped. He would do exactly what he posted one way or another B| Attitude is a state of mind, and when Jimmy has a camera on his mellon look the flip out.


Fire Safety Tip: Don't fry bacon while naked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bla bla bla bla bla. You go way for a weekend of jumping and look at all you miss.


A word on the pioneering post: Other than Dwain, and the early wingsuiting, there hasn't been too much pioneering in the sport for a long time. Lots of people doing the same stuff that others have been doing for a long time. Its fun to do, and it might be pushing personal limits, but pioneering it isn't. As for a certain someone's second rate rip off of the truly pioneering Cronicles videos, they are just that, rip offs of an original and not nearly as good. I look forward to seeing something original again, someday.

Nice to see I didn't miss much though. Keep up the good work.

Cya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thank you for illustrating my point.

you definately are part of the second wave. i.e. the settlers wishing to tame and control. you seem angry since you can not. you care what happens.

Jimmy does not. he'll take risks that many won't. if you don't share his spirit, you can't understand.

and yes, Jimmy has not proven to be a positive force. do you think it matters to him?
DON'T PANIC
The lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
sloppy habits -> sloppy jumps -> injury or worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that your personal attacks are getting old!! one maybe two are fine but this is insane!. you have already made your statement, now get over it. you are just making yourself look stupid by constantly bringing this up. so quit trying to get attention and drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Jimmy definately thinks more like a pioneer. his critics focus on how he deviates from a defined path. they try to establish conformity. he chafes at restrictions.



A person who is ignorant of the past and does not acknowledge or respect a lot of what went on, and then just repeats what has already happened is NOT a pioneer. He is only an ignorant, lazy, arse (ass for you Northerners).

Wandering aimlessly around away from the masses it not necessarily pioneering either. That person might just be lost.

It is kind of like the episode of the Simpsons where Lisa compares the intelligence of a rat with Bart. Bart keeps getting electric shocks whilst the rat learns to not touch anymore. There are a LOT of Barts in this sport.

Look for posts titled along the lines of "lowest BASE jump ever - 246 ft". Punch in a few words into a search engine and you will know before you post where the current record may lie. Ditto for training youngsters and people with little to no parachuting experience. Sub 100 ft low jumps have been done on NUMEROUS occasions in the past. Advertising that feat in the 21st century and claiming to be a pioneer just shows that you have not bothered to do any research, communicate with anyone in the BASE scene, have ego problems, you are just plain dishonest, or . . . . some other reason.

Similarly, BASE ethics have been developed for a number of reasons. History has shown that certain locations become very difficult to access due to a lack of respect and selfishness, people get injured repeating the same mistakes over and over again, etc. If you consider and follow a few simple "ethics/rules/freds", a lot of the heartache, angst, and pain can be prevented. This is beneficial for the sport. More importantly, it is beneficial for individual jumpers, their families and friends, and the community.

I am sure that most jumpers would like people to consider then as an intelligent, courageous person for participating in BASE, not an idiot. Each one of us can influence perceptions by BOTH our thoughts and our actions.

- - - - - -

I do not know Jimmy personally and I am open to the possibility that he has/can/will make great contributions to BASE. But the information currently coming from dz.com media and his responses do not inspire any great confidence in this possible outcome.

A person of greatness usually rises above the crap that surrounds him/her, he/she does not add to it.

- - - - - -

Regarding ethics - lets look at it fundamentally:

Caveman: "you steal my food, I kill you".
BASE jumper: "you steal my rock (building, antenna, span, earth, whatever), I will kick your arse (ass)".

- - - - -

There is a lot of talk about thought and action in this thread - knowingly doing something that others consider improper/unethical/wrong (or whatever semantic you want to choose), IS DIFFERENT to unknowingly doing it.

Some examples:

1 - a soldier who kills because he honestly thinks he is fighting for freedom and justice versus a soldier who kills knowing that he is fighting for greed/power/control.

2 - a person who has sex with a minor who looks/acts/confirms that they are legally/psychologically old enough versus a person who has sex with a minor who tells them they are underaged.

3 - a politician who gives a speech/election promise based on data (s)he has available that is later found to be incorrect versus a politician who knows his data is incorrect but continues to make the same speech.

4 -

5 -

.
.
.

n - a BASE jumper who makes an error in protocal versus a BASE jumper who knows what the protocol is for a site but intentionally ignores it for personal gratification and gain.

This is where the ethics debate comes in. If you think the latter is acceptable in the above examples, it just shows that your morals/values/ethics/freds (some other term you want to use because you do not like the word ethics) are on the extreme edge of the spectrum of society. Most people fit somewhere near the middle of the bell curve and you like living on the edge (of the curve idiot, not BASE jumping skills ;)).

This can be either productive for society (such as in the examples of Edison, Newton, Marconi, Mozart + Boenisch, Weston, etc), or counterproductive (such as Hitler, Bush, Bin Laden + the naughty boys and girls of BASE).

Typically, people who are inwardly focused and extremely self-oriented, live on the outer spectrum of the bell curve, etc, generally believe that ethics are a distraction or hindrance to their personal goals. Hence they will typically be opposed to them - rightly or wrongly (;)). For some, it is a game - akin to devil worshippers taunting Christians. For others, it is some way of gaining recognition or acceptance for actions & THOUGHTS that they consider outstanding.


Quote

pioneers need to be bold, independent, and indifferent to the common views of the day. Copernicus, Gallileo, Columbus, the Wright brothers, Carl Boenish, etc. all boldly thought outside the box.



Pioneers need to respect the past and know something about it. They also need to respect other people, despite any differences of opinion. I agree wholeheartedly that the world needs people to challenge the status quo and to not accept everything they are told or believe.

A reply along the lines of "with all due respect . . . I have considered . . . . and my research/data/etc show that . . . . . " is a lot more professional than something like: "f#$ck you, I will do what I want and I know that I am right".
Stay Safe - Have Fun - Good Luck

The above could be crap, thought provoking, useful, or . . But not personal. You decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


A person who is ignorant of the past and does not acknowledge or respect a lot of what went on, and then just repeats what has already happened is NOT a pioneer. He is only an ignorant, lazy, arse (ass for you Northerners).

It is kind of like the episode of the Simpsons where Lisa compares the intelligence of a rat with Bart. Bart keeps getting electric shocks whilst the rat learns to not touch anymore. There are a LOT of Barts in this sport.


as I don't know Jimmy, I'm NOT trying to defend him.

he is a non-conformist who does not care what others think. history is written by the victors. therefore only SUCCESSFUL non-conformists are lauded as pioneers. the great mass of non-conformists get beat down. (how many people suffered through the inquisition? Gallileo survived, most did not.)

by using the term "pioneer" I did NOT mean to imply that his actions are inherently good. I referenced a certain mindset, an attitude.

remember, native populations rarely greeted "pioneers" as heroes. (think of Tasmania's aboriginal population...)

when these non-conformists succeed, they get applauded and the conformists will follow in their wake. these represent the majority. conformists like to control and protect. most of your examples illustrate that point. it prevents anarchy. they focus on the greater good.

the two mindsets just don't get along well. there is inherent friction. Jimmy is NOT a conformist, and avoids playing by those rules. it is doubtful that all the ranting and raving in the world will change him.

again, I was only trying to offer perspective, not condone or defend.
DON'T PANIC
The lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
sloppy habits -> sloppy jumps -> injury or worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

again, I was only trying to offer perspective, not condone or defend.



Perspective? Here? :S

Less sarcastically, no one has yet addressed the issue first presented.

rl
If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Less sarcastically, no one has yet addressed the issue first presented.



Can you restate the issue for us?

As I understand it, the issue is:

"Why do some jumpers get more flak for ethical abuses than other jumpers?"

I think that several people have taken pretty good stabs at that, including (most recently) Tom, about 4 posts up.

BTW Tom, despite my ADHD, and perhaps because I am a big nerdlinger/geek/dork who likes to (gasp!) read, I enjoy your posts, and appreciate the fact that you don't try to compress them into a sound bite that will fit into a 10 second break between music videos.
-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Less sarcastically, no one has yet addressed the issue first presented.



Can you restate the issue for us?

As I understand it, the issue is:

"Why do some jumpers get more flak for ethical abuses than other jumpers?"



I think the question is "how does one justify giving some jumpers more flack than others over ethical abuses."

Quote

I think that several people have taken pretty good stabs at that, including (most recently) Tom, about 4 posts up.



I guess I'm not very satisfied with the answers. Or maybe I'm just confused because the thread keeps veering. Also, those are two very different questions up above.

Quote

BTW Tom, despite my ADHD, and perhaps because I am a big nerdlinger/geek/dork who likes to (gasp!) read, I enjoy your posts, and appreciate the fact that you don't try to compress them into a sound bite that will fit into a 10 second break between music videos.



Totally agreed.

Unlike most people who make longs posts, Tom understands how to use whitespace, and the content is always worth the time it takes to read it--which isn't all that much.

rl
If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
per Tom A:
Quote


"Why do some jumpers get more flak for ethical abuses than other jumpers?"



per RL:
Quote


"how does one justify giving some jumpers more flack than others over ethical abuses."



per me:
Jimmy's original post seems to be a commentary, not question.
he pointed out an apparent hypocrisy that annoys him. he was making an attempt to explain his attitude. he was planting a flag, not opening a discussion. any drift comes from second guessing him.

oh, and I agree with Tom's post, especially the bell curve anology. maybe I communicated it poorly, but I read much agreement. sure, he seems to associate "hero" or "good guy" with the term "pioneer" and I do not. I also tried to give Jimmy credit for being around since 1989 (predating most people on this forum). that does not negate the areas of agreement.
DON'T PANIC
The lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
sloppy habits -> sloppy jumps -> injury or worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I did my first base jump at 18 in 1989.



Jimmy, can you give us a rundown on your BASE progression since then?

In other words, how many jumps did you do in 1989? In 1990? In 1991? And so on? It seems like your BASE jumping activity has picked up a lot in the last 2 or 3 years, and I was wondering if that's the case, or if it's just that your visibility has increased recently?

Thanks!
-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Jimmy has been around since 1989, why does the number of years in sport say "15?" I made my first skydive at 19 in 1991 and my first base at 20 in 1992.
Looks like a death sandwich without the bread - Steve Deadman Morrell, BASE 174

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Jimmy's original post seems to be a commentary, not question.
he pointed out an apparent hypocrisy that annoys him. he was making an attempt to explain his attitude. he was planting a flag, not opening a discussion. any drift comes from second guessing him.



Jimmy doesn't explain himself too often. A question does not always end with a question mark.

Regardless of how he put it, I can't find any justification for cutting slack to one group or person if you don't allow the same leeway to any other group or person, regardless of "attitude."

I have this feeling, being somewhat oppositional-defiant myself, that it is this attitude towards attitude that exacerbates the discussion of the already-volatile events that arise from time to time.

The trouble with making exceptions is that the non-exceptions resent it--rightfully so--and in most cases, offer up even more non-conforming behavior in response.

rl
If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My BASE progression since 1989. (If any one cares)

Good question. Very little activity until '99-2000. The last 3-4 years have just been more videoistically apparent.

Reason #1

I did very few jumps between the time of my first BASE jump and around '99 because I percieved BASE jumpers as reckless A-holes who were generally on beer and meth, and would just as likely leave you for dead as help you out of a gnarly situation.

Reason #2

I had thought that BASE jumping wasn't a desireble sport compared to skydiving because it appeared to me that people were falling off low shit and pulling a parachute before they hit the ground. I din't see the body flight skills that I enjoy so much as a skydiver.

Then in 1999 enter Aussie Pete. That kid not only showed me that there were a whole new breed (my perspective) of jumpers that were unlike those I had experienced before, but they were also "flying" their bodies in sub-terminal air as opposed to just falling off things. I was amazed at what I saw Pete doing and BASE jumping appeled to me for the first time as a respectable way to spend time and energy.

But I was always around the sport. I wasn't an active BASE jumper, although I had a few, but I have been around this joint for a bit. I was very good friends with Frank, even before Miles started jumping.

Dennis McGlynn showed me how to film tandems, and Harry Parker and I have had a few good times back in the day.

Wheter I'm right or not, I've been watching this sport and it's participants for half my life.

I just wonder who's in charge of making the decisons about who's ethical and whos not. The scale seems to slide all over the place. Not a big deal, just what I see.

It seems attitudes offend more than actions,and that's fine but the word ethics is getting old. THat's why I was using "BASEicaly Correct" like things that are "politicaly correct," you never know when it's gonna change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

A reply along the lines of "with all due respect . . . I have considered . . . . and my research/data/etc show that . . . . . " is a lot more professional than something like: "f#$ck you, I will do what I want and I know that I am right"



Yes, the former is a lot more professional than the latter, but in the end, both people are knowingly doing something that goes against the "rule." In each of your examples (about soldiers, sex with minors and politicians) there is an operative mistake or misconception prior to the act, with the implication that the person under that mistaken impression would not have done the act if he or she knew the truth. But that's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about people knowing that they are breaking normal BASE protocol and still making the jump, but then getting different reactions from the BASE community after the fact, based on their attitude. That's a different deal, and it is one that is tough to justify.

Having read this forum almost daily for several years, it's seems to me that the different reaction among the BASE community to people like Felix/Jimmy/the Red Bull crew on the one hand and people like Jeb on the other simply comes down to their attitudes, not their actions. Various members of the former group are brash, arrogant, in-your-face, while Jeb is much more easy going, friendly and inclusive of others in the BASE community. That may provide a very reasonable basis to like Jeb and not like the members of the first group, but it does not provide a reasonable basis to conclude that the members of the first group are acting "unethically" when they day-blaze an object and put it on a commercially distributed video but Jeb is not when he does the same thing. Either they both are or neither are, but whether they are assholes or good guys should have nothing to do with that determination. I think that was Jimmy's point, and so far, I haven't seen any compelling refutation of that. In fact, most of what I have seen in this thread confirms that that is what is going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

"Why do some jumpers get more flak for ethical abuses than other jumpers?"



I think the question is "how does one justify giving some jumpers more flack than others over ethical abuses."



I think, then, that we are perhaps having two different discussions. The question I was trying to answer was this one:

"I have observed that different jumpers engaged in similar actions get widely varying reactions from other jumpers regarding the ethics of such actions. What is the explanation for the variance in reactions I have observed?"


The question you are trying to answer is this one:

"Do I think that different jumpers ought to get different reactions from other jumpers, when engaged in roughly similar activities?"


The latter (you question) is one about what we "ought" to do.

The former (the one I attempted to answer) is about what is really happening, and an attempt to observe and explain why the reactions are different.

I had read Jimmy's post (which has various statements about what "is" happening) as an attempt to explain the observed phenomena--rather than an expression of a desire to discuss what any of us would like to observe.
-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I just wonder who's in charge of making the decisons about who's ethical and whos not. The scale seems to slide all over the place. Not a big deal, just what I see.



Everybody is in charge, individually. It is a personal call for every jumper to make, so the scale does slide a bit.

If you are still interested in the original question, i think your actions are mostly ethical. They are often lame and annoying, and produce mediocre videos when compared to the same examples of Jeb (or Iiro, Norgies, etc) but generally you are as ethical as those guys.

bsbd!

Yuri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually don't think Jimmy was posing a question at all. I think what he was simply saying that people should drop the ethics pretext as the basis for cracking someone who day-blazes objects and publicizes his or her jumps or otherwise tries to draw attention to him/herself because generally it is not the breach of BASE ethics that people making a fuss are really pissed about. Rather, it is simply that they don't like the jumper(s) in question--because of their attitude or some other reason. And if that is that case (and it appears that more often than not, it is), people should just say that--just go ahead and say that guy's an asshole and I hate him--instead of rolling out the moral indignation at their egregious breach of BASE ethics.

Of course, given the rules of this forum, people can't really do that when the jumper in question is a registered user (unless they don't mind taking a timeout), so maybe that is one reason people don't do that. I doubt it, though. I suspect the main reason is that being honest and just saying you think someone is an asshole and you hate him makes you look a lot worse than if you can pass off your attack as outrage of ethical breaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0