molto bella la anche risposta di Traversi (che riporto), in particolare l'ultimo pezzo che molti dovrebbero stamparsi e tenere a portata di mano
"I'm not entirely sure why this topic has received so much attention, but since it has, I feel inspired to provide a little clarity from my point of view. I most certainly agree with Michele's comment and don't see the need to repeat something that was so eloquently written. I think most are also very familiar with my own personal view on grades as well (care of my Jade video rant). However, as someone with a clear stake in the future of rock climbing, I do see the importance of grades and how they will continue to allow the general public to mildly relate to our sport. People like to attach themselves to numbers. This is why I continue to be a member of the 8a.nu community, and will continue to provide my honest and rational opinion when it comes to assigning numbers to blocks of rocks that we find in the woods.
This trip to Switzerland has been my first climbing trip outside of North America and it has most certainly allowed for me to gain a heightened amount of perspective towards the global grading scale. Compared to the USA, the grades in this country don't seem to be too far off. To be honest, this is a bit surprising to me. I have always speculated that this place was quite soft, but I have pleasantly been proven wrong. There is some really hard shit out here. I have tried Vecchio Leone for 4 days now with no send. 2 days on General Disarray, no dice. Voigas took me no less than 6 days worth of effort. High Spirit took me at least 5 days. That's not to say that I feel the need to upgrade these boulders in my personal opinion. They are just really hard for me. I do not base my personal grades on the amount of time it has taken me to climb them. Sometimes I don't find the specific body position on a boulder until Day 3. Knowledge doesn't always come quick. But I do know when things (in my own opinion) clearly don't fit into a suggested grade range. And that's when I feel inspired to give my honest opinion on the difficulty. Particularly with newly established boulders. As is the case with Bella Luna. This is most certainly not a personal issue, and wherever the consensus finds itself, so be it. For me, in all honesty, it took substantially less effort to climb it, than any other 8B that I've ever done. With that knowledge, how could I go ahead and agree with the proposed 8B+? That doesn't make sense at all. Maybe 8A+ is a stiff downgrade. Maybe the consensus will arrive at 8B. Who knows? I just ask that my opinion is taken to heart. Because it is real, honest, and given with only good intentions. First ascents are very, very hard to grade. There is nothing wrong with being conservative. In the long run, I think we all get more satisfaction from climbing something that is considered hard for the grade, than soft. I know I do.
On another note, I find it quite odd that first ascents such a Bella Luna are even being established in the first place. I agree that it is a semi-obvious and hard line into a existing boulder, but it climbs out of a hole that is covered in goat shit. In my opinion, the moves are cool, but certainly not among the best in the area to say the least. I would not have even tried the boulder, had everything else not been wet. I've done a minimal amount of exploration in the Ticino region, and have seen a ridiculous amount of 4 and 5-star projects waiting to be climbed. Yes, they are a bit out of the way. Yes, some of them require hiking and bushwhacking. The future of our sport relies on the motivation of the community surrounding it, and it is self evident that as climbers we will continue to be motivated more by aesthetics than pure difficulty. If you are bent on first ascents, I would urge people to go search out the classics first. The low ball sit-starts can wait till later"