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

Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

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

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Arthur Digbee » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:30 am

chugach mtn boy wrote:Josh Lewis wrote:
Not sure if this was already mentioned (a similar idea was), but if submitters had some kind of check box on the page to allow editors, this would completely make "wikifying" summitpost more appropriate because it would then be up to the users. Yeah I know you would still have some users who might not activate it, but I think many would.


If the idea of the check box is accepted, I would suggest having the check box appear next to every section when you are creating or editing a page. You can check the box next to sections you want to open for editing.


That's very helpful IMHO.

That's the only way I could accept any Wiki-like feature. But in some cases it's useful -- I put out a request for help on my Ozarks page and got three takers, as an example. The Adirondacks, Cascades and other ranges would be great for (optional) Wiki features.

Splitting up technical and non-technical routes is also a good idea. It wouldn't hurt to have SP become a leading source for non-technical routes. Existing trail sources suck, such as Backpacker's. Plus, Backpacker already uses SP for beta, most every issue, and making hiking routes more visible would help reach that market.

[Which reminds me of one of my pet ideas, repeatedly tossed out -- a "preferences" menu that would let users control what they see. Technical climbers could turn off non-technical routes and so on and so forth.]
OCCUPY SUMMITPOST !
User Avatar
Arthur Digbee

 
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:03 pm
Location: Indianapolisish, United States
Thanked: 255 times in 173 posts

The following user would like to thank Arthur Digbee for this post
Castlereagh, silversummit

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Rockclimber77 » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:36 am

O.k. maybe we should be looking at this as a more economic forum, as opposed to political, eg. hits per page and popularity on the web....number of visiters... not emotions of contributers this is a business.. what would make this site more popular.. ok facebook vs myspace mountain project vs summit post .... we all know who won the first battle..
User Avatar
Rockclimber77

 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:31 am
Location: montrose, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 9 times in 5 posts

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby lcarreau » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:45 am

Summitpost has a uniqueness unequaled by NONE. Why compare it with other sites? That would be pointless, as we're trying to make it BETTER.

"Hey Jude don't make it bad

Take a sad song and make it better

Remember to let her into your heart

Than you can start to make it better ..."
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 897 times in 674 posts

The following user would like to thank lcarreau for this post
Afzal, Kiefer

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Rockclimber77 » Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:01 am

lcarreau wrote:Summitpost has a uniqueness unequaled by NONE. Why compare it with other sites? That would be pointless, as we're trying to make it BETTER.


I am not comparing it with other sites but i feel with the intelligent and loyal members this site has it should be far superior than mountain project, and i feel that it is... just trying to get the creative juices flowing is all I enjoy summit post.
User Avatar
Rockclimber77

 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:31 am
Location: montrose, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 9 times in 5 posts

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby lcarreau » Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:16 am

Rockclimber77 wrote: I enjoy summit post.


Complete agreement! I'd enjoy it (even more) if people kept their pages updated, rather they be technical or non-technical or whatever. Time for a change.
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 897 times in 674 posts

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

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Scott » Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:38 am

Going wiki is the worst idea I've ever seen proposed for summitpost. If it does go that way, it's a sure bet that many will delete their pages and leave for good.

A much better solution would be to adopt out the poor quality or abandoned pages. It would also help if so many people would quit voting 10/10 on pages that have barely a few sentences and hardly no useful information.
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7478
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 603 times in 325 posts

The following user would like to thank Scott for this post
lcarreau, norco17

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Alpinist » Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:49 am

Scott wrote:It would also help if so many people would quit voting 10/10 on pages that have barely a few sentences and hardly no useful information.

Amen to that.

I do think owners have a responsibility to maintain their pages - or lose them. There are quite a few pages that were really good when first posted, but some haven't been updated in over 5 years and now have broken links and/or outdated information. I realize that a lot of work went into the initial edition of the page. But really, 5 years is way too long not to make any updates. If you're not going to maintain your pages, then you shouldn't create them in the first place.
User Avatar
Alpinist

 
Posts: 6005
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 7:21 pm
Location: Kildeer, Illinois, United States
Thanked: 665 times in 445 posts

The following user would like to thank Alpinist for this post
Afzal, Josh Lewis, lcarreau

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby norco17 » Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:58 am

A wiki style would discourage a lot of people from making pages, and some pages really do not need to be updated all that often. That being said when a page does not have the information that I need I first look in the additions and corrections section. If the information is not their a PM to the author often gets the information.

As far as abandoned pages if a person asks the elves to take over the page then the original author should have six months to revamp the page if necesary (necesity being at the discretion of the elves) especially for a low voted page or a popular page that needs lots of upkeep.

The idea of the author opening up certain sections to a wiki style edit is also helpful, but I think most of this is not really needed because most things can be handled in the current additions and corrections

A route is a route it does not matter whether it is class 1 or 5.17dA6Wi7Ai8M9 VII it is still a route. That being said I see no problem separtaing approaches/hikes from technical climbs. But if that is done it may also be wise to separate ice and mixed out at the same time(we already have a separte categorie for canyons which I don't think is entirely neccesary) and add a search feature similar to mountain projects.
User Avatar
norco17

 
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:53 am
Location: riverside, California, United States
Thanked: 163 times in 106 posts

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Alan Ellis » Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:24 am

Full Wiki: NO!

I've been a major peak page owner for almost 10 years....including three Rockie's state high points and the Grand Teton. As a page owner, I welcome input and changes, and strive to make the pages the most up-to-date resources that this site can offer. If these pages are not up to standard, then I want to know about it and will make immediate improvements or changes if necessary. The point is: I'm on this site every day to make sure that happens. If a page owner is slack and not doing their job, then something needs to be done. In the old days, we would band together, hijack the page, then give the page to a responsible owner. But now the site has grown and seems like something else needs to be done to fix the problem of out-of-date pages/owners.

No matter what procedure is decided, members need to be active and be responsible page owners. If they are not, then give their pages to someone who will keep the page up to the standard that the peak deserves.
User Avatar
Alan Ellis

 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2002 6:42 am
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States
Thanked: 1 time in 1 post

The following user would like to thank Alan Ellis for this post
Alpinist

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:25 am

Scott wrote:Going wiki is the worst idea I've ever seen proposed for summitpost. If it does go that way, it's a sure bet that many will delete their pages and leave for good.

A much better solution would be to adopt out the poor quality or abandoned pages. It would also help if so many people would quit voting 10/10 on pages that have barely a few sentences and hardly no useful information.


People deleting their pages would indeed suck. There are a TON of resources available. For that point, Admin "locking" pages that are well received and important isn't a bad idea, either (making it so they wouldn't be deleted, but maybe opened up to someone who wants to adopt the page, so as to not lose pages.)

Page abandonment/ignoring is a problem, however most people I have worked with add/fix/update/change things, or don't respond at all. Making "abandoned" pages easier to adopt (1 year of ignoring?) might help.

I do like the idea of an "open" box that other people can add info/update, as people do on MountainProject. Then owners can update it,but if it gets ignored for X-criterion, you can adopt it if you want to (or something).
User Avatar
Jeremy Hakes

 
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:09 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Z-Man » Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:50 am

Scott wrote:A much better solution would be to adopt out the poor quality or abandoned pages.


I think this is the major issue on summitpost.

I think a more visible display of additions, corrections, and comments is reasonable.

I think wiki-style editing is a bad idea.
User Avatar
Z-Man

 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:58 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington, United States
Thanked: 0 time in 0 post

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Redwic » Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:57 am

In my opinion, the problem isn't SummitPost. The problem is with some users.

First, many people do not like sharing knowledge of peaks that can be added to pages. In addition, many people who know of updated or better information do not even place "Comments", or "Additions & Corrections", or even contact many page owners. Hence, many pages get neglected.

Second, many page owners/creators either do not log-in regularly, or do not reply to or acknowledge updated information, or both.
------------

Giving basically anyone authority to make page updates and edits sets up potential problems such as page owners feeling attacked, page editors feeling like they can change whatever they want, and pages getting changes that really do not need them.

I would hate for SummitPost pages to lose their individual essences that occurs from different page owners creating such pages. I also would really hate for people to start whipping-out new Mountain/Rock pages with little/no information, and especially if those page owners have not even attempted the peaks in question, just expecting other people to "fill in the blanks". That would mark a new arena for potential pointbagging over providing resourceful information, something that runs rampant already with some SP members. That would be stupid, and then SummitPost would lose a lot of its luster.

I'm not suggesting there is not a viable solution to the concerns mentioned earlier, but the proposals mentioned need some sort of serious tweaking. I do not have the answers for that, but I do know that wiki is a terrible idea.
Last edited by Redwic on Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
User Avatar
Redwic

 
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:16 am
Location: Everett, Washington, United States
Thanked: 15 times in 9 posts

The following user would like to thank Redwic for this post
Castlereagh

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby RobSC » Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:59 am

I think that an open section at the bottom of each page with access from anyone would improve the pages. This would be a great place to note changes, such as the recent experience that I had when I got to an access road and found it closed for logging with no mention of that on the mountain's page.
User Avatar
RobSC

 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 5:27 pm
Location: Louisville, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 3 times in 3 posts

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby Redwic » Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:02 am

RobSC wrote:I think that an open section at the bottom of each page with access from anyone would improve the pages. This would be a great place to note changes, such as the recent experience that I had when I got to an access road and found it closed for logging with no mention of that on the mountain's page.


I think that is a proposal possibly worth exploring, but only with the added caveat that page owners/administrators can remove comments from the open section at will.
User Avatar
Redwic

 
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:16 am
Location: Everett, Washington, United States
Thanked: 15 times in 9 posts

Re: Discussion: Collaboration, Edit/Submit Changes

Postby EastKing » Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:32 am

For almost ten years I have been writing pages on SP! I personal think that making summitpost a wiki site would do total harm to summitpost. I can't imagine myself spending 5 hours a day check all my pages wondering if a troll edited my information and potentially destroyed my page. I had that happen to a trip report on another site where a user went into my TR added his own picture and totally changed the wording of the trip report. That was quiet upseting to say the least!!!!

There are so many ways to improve a page right now. The first thing is to write a PM to the user about either a correction or about adopting or being administrator of the page! If that does not work then write an addition/correction to the page. Finally if the user is inactive and you want the page ask the elves. Usually by then the page will be updated!

Leave SP the way it is. If you are a user and you want to make a page better that is already on SP, use your PM's, addition and corrections, and voting rights to the page. If that doesn't work than outright send a PM to the elves to adopt the page in full. That is my take on the issue.
Last edited by EastKing on Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
User Avatar
EastKing

 
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2002 7:12 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, United States
Thanked: 15 times in 9 posts

The following user would like to thank EastKing for this post
Afzal

PreviousNext

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.