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

Object possession: Owner or Caretaker?

Collaborate with other users to plan SPs structure. Talk about the linking of parents, children, and related pages.
 

Object possession: Owner or Caretaker?

Postby atavist » Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:29 am

Anybody know what happened to the Adam's Peak page from Sri Lanka? I can only guess that a disgruntled owner left the site and deleted all his objects. Now all I can find is two route pages with no parent:
http://www.summitpost.org/route/159914/carney-route.html

What is the rationale for letting people destroy their objects as a parting gesture to SP? I consider this is a major flaw of the SP design. This site a great place for people to collaborate and share. In fact, many pages have been started by one user and grown by other users. The structure allows for other users to expand and link pages together. Works great until someone starts playing Jenga and pulling out the pieces.

My feeling is that if someone is willing to delete all their contributions and walk out the door, then I'd rather them not make any contributions in the first place.

If someone makes a page, I consider them a caretaker not an owner. They have the privilege to decide what information is published on that page but they shouldn't have the right to delete.

SP contributions should be permanent and belong to the community. Or would this dissuade you from contributing? Let's hear it: For or Against.
User Avatar
atavist

 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 3:38 am
Location: Puxi, China
Thanked: 8 times in 7 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Tue Jun 01, 2010 6:16 pm

The rationale is that people post their hard work for free, so they still own it, and are free to keep it and take it with them if they so choose.

SP FAQ page wrote:you hold the copyright to your own work
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby atavist » Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:27 am

I'm not arguing that this violates an SP rule. And definitely no one should be able to profit from other members' contributions. I'm arguing that it is poor form. Especially since SP is collaborative. Objects are sometimes passed from one person to another for improvements. Members attach pictures, routes, and sign logbooks for existing objects. Removing objects leaves holes and diminishes the value of other people's contributions.

If someone wants to remove their pictures or trip reports, that seems fine because those are personal. But to delete mountain or route pages is different. Of course I appreciate the effort required to build an informative and accurate page, but is there some artistic value worth protecting? To remove pages just seems malicious.

When someone posts information, they volitionally decided to share. Besides, if Britney Spears was to suffer a bout of ridicule, she couldn't just retract all her crap music and go shut her door, despite how much I might wish she would.
User Avatar
atavist

 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 3:38 am
Location: Puxi, China
Thanked: 8 times in 7 posts

Postby Scott » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:42 pm

Anybody know what happened to the Adam's Peak page from Sri Lanka?


It was mine and I deleted it.

Here is the history:

At first the page was of very poor quality and it was asked by the staff if someone could improve the page. Because I was planning on climbing the peak soon, I took on the tasks, but the political problems scrapped my plans and I cancelled the trip. After I found out that I wasn't going to climb it, I left a note on the page saying that someone else should take it. When the staff found out that whoever adopted it was an avatar of Josh Lewis (which I didn't know when I trasfered it), they PM'd me and asked me to take the page. I took it, fixed it up and kept it until a new owner could take it. I asked anyone who signed the summit log or added a photo if they wanted it, but no one did. After a year or two I hit the delete button since it was the only peak left on my profile that I hadn't climbed or attempted and thus didn't want it on my profile any more. Most people on SP (including myself) are against having a page on a peak you haven't climbed. I should have waited until after I climbed the peak to volunteer, since plans never materialized.

I guess I didn't realized the route page was left hanging. It's gone now.
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7480
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 612 times in 329 posts

Postby atavist » Thu Jun 10, 2010 1:35 am

@ Scott,
That's cool. I first heard about the peak from Summitpost only a short while ago. Then I happened to be in Sri Lanka within the last month and couldn't find the information anymore. It's a very popular mountain, at least during the 'climbing' season, so I didn't have much trouble getting there or getting to the top. Do you still have the pages cached somewhere? I would not mind adopting it. I have quite a lot of pictures and new info to add as well.
User Avatar
atavist

 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 3:38 am
Location: Puxi, China
Thanked: 8 times in 7 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 1:46 am

I agree that in most situations, as you said, it is poor form, even malicious. Good that this situation is different and it seems something good will be worked out.

Unfortunately the example of Britney Spears' music is different. People pay for her music, so she would have no right to take it back. The unfortunate part being that people paid for it. 8)
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 2:30 am

Who is Josh Lewis?
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 2:36 am

Thank you sir, but I guess what I'm asking is, what was the issue between you and SP?

Nice photos btw...
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 2:51 am

Thanks. I assumed that there was something about putting up crap pages, with little to no information, but I knew that couldn't really be it. Since there's plenty of folks like that around now....
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby mrchad9 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:13 am

Yeah- there's worse pages than that still around- still being produced even. Unfortunate there is not a good way to address it.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4205
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Postby Scott » Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:27 am

Do you still have the pages cached somewhere? I would not mind adopting it. I have quite a lot of pictures and new info to add as well.


No, I got rid of it completely, but you can always add the page on your own.

Should be a good one. How are the political problems there BTW? Still pretty hot?
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7480
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 612 times in 329 posts

Postby Scott » Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:48 am

I have not adopted a mountain page on summitpost since about 2007


Actually, 2007 is what event I was refering to. That's when the staff transfered it to me and asked me to take it again. Other than that, I have nothing to say.
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7480
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 612 times in 329 posts


Return to Taxonomy Planning

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

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