Let's get things going!

[Pete L.]

Was reading an article about Scott Miltons ascent of "Shock and Awe" at Smith. The article was in Climbing Magazine's on-line site.
They mentioned that the route has a number of filled-in and flattened natural holds but ,at least the way I read it, it was o.k. since the line is so good.
So my question to you is: Is it any different "flattening and filling-in" than chipping or drilling?
Seems a little hypocritical to me.

[MCpl]

Are you asking if it is more acceptable to modify the rock if it makes the route harder?

[bike]

I say cut, chisel, drill and flatten!!!

[Pete L.]

What I am saying is that it seems as though to "Climbing" (perhaps a reflexion of the climbing community as a whole) it is o.k. to manufacture a route if it makes it a better yet harder route, but not o.k. if it makes a route better although easier.
Is this just another extension of the "elitist" attitude?

[Clive kessler]

Speaking of elitist attitudes... I was just up in Skaha. Why is it that those guys who bolted the routes up there will run-out a 5.10 (or even worse make it a mixed route). But bolt the crap out of a 5.12a. It's that type of bullsh*t ethics that is hindering North American sport climbing. I mean, how the hell is someone going to climb those 5.16 lines in the future when they are too afraid to climb a 10?

[dr. send]

As Bike said, any modification of the rock is a sign of poor ethics.