Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Suggestions and comments about SummitPost's features, policies, and procedures. Post bugs here.
 

Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Bob Sihler » Wed Nov 02, 2011 1:49 am

I'm requesting feedback here to get a sense of how the community feels.

When there's a request to adopt a page by a long-inactive owner (more than a year) and the page is weak, it's an easy call. Recently, though, there have been a few requests by different people to adopt pages that are decent-- not great by any means-- and are by people inactive for more than a year. These people have much they want to add; they're not just seeking points or accolades.

I'm not fully comfortable with adopting out such pages because I respect the effort the creators put in. On the other hand, I don't want to discourage eager members from improving the site. Since a full-wiki approach is not going to happen, this issue will not likely be adequately addressed under the editing changes most members seem to prefer.

Which should weigh more heavily, the efforts of inactive members who helped build the site or the interests of currently active members who wish to step up? Remember that I'm not talking about bad pages here.

Thoughts?
"Some men just want to watch the world burn."
User Avatar
Bob Sihler
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Thanked: 1683 times in 962 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby mrchad9 » Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:40 am

For me it would be a choice between two options:

1. If an effort has been made to contact them and failed, and they have been inactive for over two years, then turn the page over, regardless of how good or bad it is.

2. Alternatively, if they have been inactive for two years and there is a problem with handing over their content, then delete all their contributions from the page and turn over the empty remains to someone committed to make it better. I'd do the first option btw (if they had such an attachment to their content, they should have taken it with them when they left).

Bottom line, it really is not appropriate to lock down a mountain page because someone submitted it and has subsequently left the site. It's time to move on.

Of course, if there were a means for users to submit edits to a page that bypassed the owner after a 45 day wait neither of these steps would be necessary.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

The following user would like to thank mrchad9 for this post
Bruno, Josh Lewis

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Scott » Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:44 am

One year might be a little soon, but two might be plenty.

Just as a compromise, you could make the new owner a joint owner with the old one. The old version of the page are automaticially saved by SP anyway. If the old owner ever came back and wanted joint ownership of the page, they could have it and their old page would even be saved. If the old owner never came back, it wouldn't matter an dafter waiting another year or two, they could be dropped from ownership by the current page owner.
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7354
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 473 times in 265 posts

The following user would like to thank Scott for this post
chugach mtn boy, kamil

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby lcarreau » Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:00 am

Suppose there's always a chance the old owner will come back, but if the original owner is HAPPY and APPROVES of the updates and corrections,
then both owners will be able to move ahead with their LIVES and take pride in knowing SP will benefit because of what ultimately became of the Page.

In other words, sometimes it's best to see the glass as being half FULL.

Image
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 814 times in 614 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby SoCalHiker » Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:23 am

Bob, it's a difficult issue. If the page is in fact decent and has good information and considerable writing, I think new information should be added to the additions/corrections link. If we feel the ownership should change, I think the new owner should completely remove the "old" writing and replace it with his own words. Even if somebody did not sign in for years, it is still his page and I would assume he has copyright to his page. If the owner changes but not much is added/rewritten to the page it might become a bigger problem.
User Avatar
SoCalHiker

 
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:12 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
Thanked: 147 times in 88 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby mrchad9 » Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:27 am

Moot point...

SP FAQ wrote:Note, however that you are giving up the right to prevent modifications of your work: you are agreeing to SummitPost's policy of maintaining the site. You are giving the maintainer of a SummitPost page a license to make changes to your text as he/she sees fit, and to move your photos from one section of the page to another. You agree that someone else may someday become the maintainer of page(s) you create.


Seems like we are debating something that is already clear.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

The following user would like to thank mrchad9 for this post
Bruno, Josh Lewis, lcarreau

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Bruno » Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:47 am

Bob Sihler wrote:Since a full-wiki approach is not going to happen, this issue will not likely be adequately addressed under the editing changes most members seem to prefer.

To my understanding, a full-wiki approach has never been proposed by any member. It is just scaring people, but it is not an option that has been discussed.

The missing option in the opening post (as well as in the opening post of the other related thread) is to automatically open (e.g. after having sent an e-mail to the last known address of these inactive members) these abandoned pages for edition by "senior" members with a certain minimum power. I think two years inactivity would be fine (one year is a bit short).

Not likely to happen? Why being so negative? Here are Matt's own words:
Montana Matt wrote:
mvs wrote:Man, Matt'll never do this stuff.

Oh, don't be so sure about that ;) I've had the desire to do something similar to what is being discussed here for a while, but I've not really had a good clear idea of how it should be implemented.

[...]I read mvs' article here and what is outlined there is definitely something that I could do.

Cheers,
Bruno
User Avatar
Bruno

 
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Swaziland
Thanked: 110 times in 74 posts

The following user would like to thank Bruno for this post
mvs

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Bruno » Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:53 am

Scott wrote:One year might be a little soon, but two might be plenty.

[...]The old version of the page are automaticially saved by SP anyway.

Agree with you about the two years. Regarding the old version, only the last three edits are currently saved. All other ones are automatically deleted from the database. But I guess it wouldn't be so complicated to change the coding in order to permanently save the last version before transferring ownership/editing rights / etc.
User Avatar
Bruno

 
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Swaziland
Thanked: 110 times in 74 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Josh Lewis » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:08 am

Well perhaps the the page code could be copied and given to the original author. This way, no "original page" code would be lost in the process. But of course we are talking about decent pages. Lame pages... well, don't need the code saved. :wink:
My Websites: Alpine Josh · Alpine Ascent · AceMaps
User Avatar
Josh Lewis

 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:12 pm
Location: Lynnwood, Washington, The Cloudiest Place on Earth, United States
Thanked: 437 times in 307 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby mrchad9 » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:14 am

Bob, you know what the best thing to do here is, and what's more it is already consistant with the SP FAQs. If you look for people to give you a list of excuses not to improve the site, you will definitely find those people. Many of them. You aren't going to get full support to do anything really beneficial with this site. Gotta just step out and do something.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1187 times in 800 posts

The following user would like to thank mrchad9 for this post
Josh Lewis

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Bob Sihler » Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:47 am

Respectfully, changing the code is not an option here, and suggestions for such are not that helpful (not in this thread, anyway). People have lots of ideas that would require a ton of work for Matt, and he's made it clear that he has limited time. I'm trying to work within the existing system since that's what I'm limited to.

As Bruno, pointed out, only the last three versions are saved now, so a new owner or admin could, purposefully or not, delete the previous owner's versions very easily. I could make and keep copies of original pages, but that would be tedious.

I think two years is too long and feel one is sufficient-- keep in mind we're talking about a year since logging in, not a year since editing the page-- but the question that nags me is whether we need to transfer decent pages by inactive owners.

My leaning is to transfer the pages to trustworthy members eager to contribute, but I also worry about opening the floodgates to people who want pages just for their own sake.
"Some men just want to watch the world burn."
User Avatar
Bob Sihler
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Thanked: 1683 times in 962 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Bob Sihler » Wed Nov 02, 2011 11:22 am

mrchad9 wrote:Moot point...

SP FAQ wrote:Note, however that you are giving up the right to prevent modifications of your work: you are agreeing to SummitPost's policy of maintaining the site. You are giving the maintainer of a SummitPost page a license to make changes to your text as he/she sees fit, and to move your photos from one section of the page to another. You agree that someone else may someday become the maintainer of page(s) you create.


Seems like we are debating something that is already clear.


And there it is. The question for me is the need in the type of case I've described. I guess that's what I'm seeking opinions on.
"Some men just want to watch the world burn."
User Avatar
Bob Sihler
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Thanked: 1683 times in 962 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby Baarb » Wed Nov 02, 2011 11:37 am

Am I wrong in thinking that most people back up their webpages? Only have SP stuff myself but I have copies of most of it just in case something happens. If the inactive members aren't making sure that they have a current email address listed for contact, don't maintain their page info, and don't save their pages 'just in case' then given the FAQs bit above I'm not sure what argument they would have, especially if the new owner or co-owner improved a whole bunch of stuff. Maybe my position is biased as all my pages are for rarely visited peaks such that any info is useful. There aren't likely to be arguments about route grading, presentation style, or picture choices between anyone making contributions. (Copyright issues I have no knowledge of.)
User Avatar
Baarb

 
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: The Village with Three Corners
Thanked: 42 times in 29 posts

Re: Decent Pages by Inactive Owners

Postby lcarreau » Wed Nov 02, 2011 12:52 pm

I say : Open up the Floodgates! ... but ONLY if the page owner has not logged into the site for TWO years.

This time-line could vary if the owner is unresponsive to all e-mails, telephone calls, smoke signals and passenger pigeons.

Image
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4037
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 814 times in 614 posts

The following user would like to thank lcarreau for this post
Luc, mrchad9

Next

Return to Site Feedback

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.