Is it possible to archive a mountain page before it is assigned to a new owner. That way when the new owner has a hissy fit and leaves, deleting the page, management could bring back the archived page. This would prevent the work of the previous owner from being jeopardized and would preserve the summit register and maintain the link to pictures submitted by others.

I think it should be made so that once others sign the summit log you shouldn't be able to delete the page no matter what. This would remedy the situation. They are free to edit and delete their content, but no one should have the capability to delete others' work (including the summit logs).

I'm all for letting people delete their own content.

They don't delete anyone's summit logs, they just happen to disappear when the page is deleted. It's no big deal to go back and sign them.

As far as deleting the previous owner's material, why did they give up the page in the first place? They either abandoned it or gave it away. In either case, it is of no real consequence if deleted. The last thing we need here is more abandoned/empty pages (of which there are many).

If a page is deleted, simply have someone create a new one. There are thousands of members here that would be willing. A fresh page usually isn't a bad thing.

Agreed with Mr. Chad, once a page is signed, it should not be able to be deleted. And if you posted a joke page that did not belong on SP got signed and want to remove it, simply ask the elves to get rid of it.

Scott wrote:I'm all for letting people delete their own content.

They don't delete anyone's summit logs, they just happen to disappear when the page is deleted. It's no big deal to go back and sign them.

As far as deleting the previous owner's material, why did they give up the page in the first place? They either abandoned it or gave it away. In either case, it is of no real consequence if deleted. The last thing we need here is more abandoned/empty pages (of which there are many).

If a page is deleted, simply have someone create a new one. There are thousands of members here that would be willing. A fresh page usually isn't a bad thing.

Scott, there are issues other than summit logs. Some people attach route pages, trip reports, and pictures, and then those pages, some of which might actually be good, are set adrift. The new page creator might not know those pages exist or might not find them through the search engine. And if the authors of the adrift (but good) pages are inactive, they won't see and know to reattach.

Another issue is links. When a lot of Colorado pages disappeared last spring, a lot of links on list pages became dead links. That makes those pages less useful, makes more work for the owners when pages are reposted, etc.

I agree people should be able to delete their written material for whatever reason, but I like the proposed idea that the page itself stays.

That would help prevent the holes some members blow into the site when they go postal.

And if they knew they would have to take the time to erase all written material from pages before leaving if they truly wanted their fingerprints erased from the site, it might make an incentive for some of them to cool off and think it over a bit.

As it stands now, someone with 100 pages can have a fit over something, delete every single page, and then be gone. If the intent is to hurt site management or ownership, that's not what happens. Instead, it hurts users and makes a lot of work for people who were in no way involved in whatever transpired to make the member leave.

Bob Sihler wrote:

Scott wrote:I'm all for letting people delete their own content.

They don't delete anyone's summit logs, they just happen to disappear when the page is deleted. It's no big deal to go back and sign them.

As far as deleting the previous owner's material, why did they give up the page in the first place? They either abandoned it or gave it away. In either case, it is of no real consequence if deleted. The last thing we need here is more abandoned/empty pages (of which there are many).

If a page is deleted, simply have someone create a new one. There are thousands of members here that would be willing. A fresh page usually isn't a bad thing.

Scott, there are issues other than summit logs. Some people attach route pages, trip reports, and pictures, and then those pages, some of which might actually be good, are set adrift. The new page creator might not know those pages exist or might not find them through the search engine. And if the authors of the adrift (but good) pages are inactive, they won't see and know to reattach.

Another issue is links. When a lot of Colorado pages disappeared last spring, a lot of links on list pages became dead links. That makes those pages less useful, makes more work for the owners when pages are reposted, etc.

I agree people should be able to delete their written material for whatever reason, but I like the proposed idea that the page itself stays.

That would help prevent the holes some members blow into the site when they go postal.

And if they knew they would have to take the time to erase all written material from pages before leaving if they truly wanted their fingerprints erased from the site, it might make an incentive for some of them to cool off and think it over a bit.

As it stands now, someone with 100 pages can have a fit over something, delete every single page, and then be gone. If the intent is to hurt site management or ownership, that's not what happens. Instead, it hurts users and makes a lot of work for people who were in no way involved in whatever transpired to make the member leave.

Even if they don't cool off, it could make deleting their work a pain in the ass and might give them incentive to not be such an asshole and just leave it with the site. Otherwise we need to stop calling the content that people add "contributions" and call it "loans."

Scott, there are issues other than summit logs. Some people attach route pages, trip reports, and pictures, and then those pages, some of which might actually be good, are set adrift. The new page creator might not know those pages exist or might not find them through the search engine. And if the authors of the adrift (but good) pages are inactive, they won't see and know to reattach.

Another issue is links. When a lot of Colorado pages disappeared last spring, a lot of links on list pages became dead links. That makes those pages less useful, makes more work for the owners when pages are reposted, etc.

Yes, I rebuilt some of those Colorado pages and had those things happen. I see all those points.

I agree people should be able to delete their written material for whatever reason, but I like the proposed idea that the page itself stays.

That would help prevent the holes some members blow into the site when they go postal.

I see that point and it is a valid concern.

On the othre hand, it could also leave more blank/empty pages, of which there are plenty on SP. Also, what if someone didn't want to leave the site, but just wanted to delete a page? I have actually done this on several occasions for various reasons that had nothing to do with getting angry or fits.

Also, if the page remained, how would they get their name off it?

Also, as far as deletions go, page owners should have deleting privilages for comments posted to pages. We used to, now we don't.

Scott wrote:Also, what if someone didn't want to leave the site, but just wanted to delete a page? I have actually done this on several occasions for various reasons that had nothing to do with getting angry or fits.

Also, if the page remained, how would they get their name off it?

Also, as far as deletions go, page owners should have deleting privileges for comments posted to pages. We used to, now we don't.

When it comes to trip reports, custom objects, ect. we definitely should be given a right to delete them. However, even if a system of not being able to delete a signed log were made, the user could change the page type to a trip report and delete it! Unless of course that was changed to. On my site I limit my users so that they cannot delete mountain pages nor are they able to change the page type which seems to work out just fine.

As for taking the name off, the owner could just transfer it to the orphanage. Doesn't know how? Ask an elf to do it.

Regarding comments, agreed on that one. I've inherited some pages which have had comments from a long time ago that have no relevance to the current work.

Scott wrote:On the othre hand, it could also leave more blank/empty pages, of which there are plenty on SP. Also, what if someone didn't want to leave the site, but just wanted to delete a page? I have actually done this on several occasions for various reasons that had nothing to do with getting angry or fits.

Admins could still do that upon request. Not as convenient as the current system, I admit, but maybe a reasonable tradeoff to avoid the problems some of these departures make for others.

Also, if the page remained, how would they get their name off it?

If they were leaving the site, that's not an issue. The page could go to "Deleted User" or perhaps "Orphanage."

And if they were staying, then an ownership transfer takes care of that as it does now.

Also, as far as deletions go, page owners should have deleting privilages for comments posted to pages. We used to, now we don't.

You can ask elves to delete abusive or irrelevant comments. I'm not so sure I like the idea of people being able to delete comments on their own pages, though. What if they are valid criticisms and the owner is unresponsive or defiant? Remember that guy you took to task years back for totally making up climbing information on peaks? What if he could have just deleted all your remarks, leaving no one the wiser?

Bob Sihler wrote:

Scott wrote:Also, as far as deletions go, page owners should have deleting privilages for comments posted to pages. We used to, now we don't.

You can ask elves to delete abusive or irrelevant comments. I'm not so sure I like the idea of people being able to delete comments on their own pages, though. What if they are valid criticisms and the owner is unresponsive or defiant? Remember that guy you took to task years back for totally making up climbing information on peaks? What if he could have just deleted all your remarks, leaving no one the wiser.

Sounds like Scott is a hypocrite. Just exactly why do you think you should be allowed to delete someone else's comment on your page Scott? No one should be able to say anything unless it is something you approve of?

Just exactly why do you think you should be allowed to delete someone else's comment on your page Scott?

If it's very old or irrevelant, why not? For example, I've had political ads posted on some of my pages and I'm sure I'm not alone. Some people even go back and forth and have a political discussion using the mountain page comments. Do we really need these?

Much more common, how about old post when you didn't even have the page or posts that were long ago taken care of such as "you mis-spelled X" and it was fixed years ago?

Such posts aren't abusive (in fact were well meaning), they are just aren't applicable years after things are fixed and are empty content taking up server space. I usually don't go back and see if all my comments posted to pages (literally thousands of them) were taken care of, so I'm sure I have made a lot of comments on other's pages that were also fixed or integrated year's ago as well.

Admins could still do that upon request. Not as convenient as the current system, I admit, but maybe a reasonable tradeoff to avoid the problems some of these departures make for others.

You can ask elves to delete abusive or irrelevant comments.

Your choice, but it won't make your job any easier.

I wonder how many people have left SP and their deletions caused problems vs how many that might want to delete a page for a different/valid reason?

For example, I've deleted pages because public access has changed and I've combined several route pages into one page (in the old system you couldn't attach a route to two different objects, so had to duplicate each one) and deleted the duplicates. I recently deleted a route page because it was trasferred to me, it was mostly empty, and I hadn't climbed the route.

Scott wrote:

Just exactly why do you think you should be allowed to delete someone else's comment on your page Scott?

If it's very old or irrevelant, why not? For example, I've had political ads posted on some of my pages and I'm sure I'm not alone. Some people even go back and forth and have a political discussion using the mountain page comments. Do we really need these?

Much more common, how about old post when you didn't even have the page or posts that were long ago taken care of such as "you mis-spelled X" and it was fixed years ago?

Such posts aren't abusive (in fact were well meaning), they are just aren't applicable years after things are fixed and are empty content taking up server space. I usually don't go back and see if all my comments posted to pages (literally thousands of them) were taken care of, so I'm sure I have made a lot of comments on other's pages that were also fixed or integrated year's ago as well.

In those situations the mods will delete the comments for you... that's why they are around. Any modification seems to be fixing a problem that isn't there. If every user had the ability to delete the comments on their own then surely you can see it would be abused and people would delete legitimate comments they don't like as well.

BTW you can already delete comments under additions and corrections (presumably once it has been included on the main page). That seems like it would cover most of the situations.

In those situations the mods will delete the comments for you... that's why they are around.

This is true, but for those that have lots of pages, I'd just find it easier to delete myself. If someone tells me "you mispelled x" or "X road was washed out" (but the road was fixed again later), I usually fix it as soon as I see the comment and it seems pointless to have them sit on the page for years. Yes, you could ask the mods to do this every time, but it sure would be a pain for both me and them.

If every user had the ability to delete the comments on their own then surely you can see it would be abused and people would delete legitimate comments they don't like as well.

I don't recall it being a problem before. It was like that for several years.

BTW you can already delete comments under additions and corrections (presumably once it has been included on the main page). That seems like it would cover most of the situations.

Yes, and as far as I know, I haven't seen it cause any problems.

Scott wrote:

If every user had the ability to delete the comments on their own then surely you can see it would be abused and people would delete legitimate comments they don't like as well.

I don't recall it being a problem before. It was like that for several years.

Well then should we be allowed to delete votes from users if we choose? That would be very similar and not cause any problems would it?

Well then should we be allowed to delete votes from users if we choose? That would be very similar and not cause any problems would it?

Not at all the same.

Perhaps an example of what I mean will help. Check out the comment board below:

http://www.summitpost.org/tabeguache-pe ... nts/150374

The access information on the page has completely changed, but the old owner (who was my friend) left SP a long time ago. Since access has changed, the page was outdated so I took over and have begun to rewrite it. All the old comments are no longer applicable. They aren't malicious, they just aren't revelent to anything (and all were posted 5-10 years ago).

This is just one of many examples (I could provide many, many more). I think it would be nice if the comments could be wiped clean, even though they aren't malicious. What useful purpose do they serve?