mrchad9 wrote:The above post is an attempt to be considered for the front page.

So is this your way of saying you don't like my trip reports. I suppose I do add quite a few photos, but can't help it because I feel as though it gives people a good visual of what I saw in person.

But really. I once was a admin of a photo sharing website and featured myself once or twice which got one of the members a little stirred up because he knew that I was a admin and could do that. But if admins can never feature another admins work it feels a bit unfair if you ask me. Trust me I know what it's like to be in this situation.

I have no issue at all with your trip reports. Just do not think that trip reports should be selected based on who flatters the mods the most.

And hopefully it isn't.

mrchad9 wrote:I have no issue at all with your trip reports. Just do not think that trip reports should be selected based on who flatters the mods the most.

And hopefully it isn't.

Every time I have filled in for one of the "front page maintainers," I have featured the pages of people who have most recently made flattering comments to my submissions.




(not really)

Looks like I'm an exception to this then. I got featured on one of my pages and didn't post a single comment on Bob's content lately. (It's nothing against you Bob, I just been too busy these days climbing mountains more than I been at home)

How do we know Mr. Chad isn't using his psychology and is saying that so that his recent page he made gets featured.

Josh Lewis wrote:How do we know Mr. Chad isn't using his psychology and is saying that so that his recent page he made gets featured.

You don't know that, but those who select the pages here know me well enough to know that isn't what I am doing.

Earlier today I saw a front page TR about a trip in the Inyo Mountains, did that disappear?

The downside of attempting to achieve fame on a website is 20/20 hindsight that the intended audience will find DELIGHT in discovering the same insane LIGHT on youtube .. ... try saying that really fast!

Lionel wrote:Earlier today I saw a front page TR about a trip in the Inyo Mountains, did that disappear?

The owner apparently deleted the page and then posted a redone version: http://www.summitpost.org/a-love-affair-with-the-inyos-a-double-traverse/735443.

Bob Sihler wrote:

Lionel wrote:Earlier today I saw a front page TR about a trip in the Inyo Mountains, did that disappear?

The owner apparently deleted the page and then posted a redone version: http://www.summitpost.org/a-love-affair-with-the-inyos-a-double-traverse/735443.

It looks to be the same trip report. Maybe it was deleted to remove the 5 pages of comments questioning her decision making and truthfulness. Only one comment is there now.

The Truth ? The TRUTH ???

"You can't handle the darn TRUTH ...!"

you are only mocking Matt's inability to inovate the site, meanwhile losing/not attracking N. American "climber" (folks who actually climb and yes there is such a thing on the "internets" (sic)) contributors and users not too mention so many folks who were willing to contribute at one time or another...

Dow Williams wrote:you are only mocking Matt's inability to inovate the site, meanwhile losing/not attracking N. American "climber" (folks who actually climb and yes there is such a thing on the "internets" (sic)) contributors and users not too mention so many folks who were willing to contribute at one time or another...

The nice thing about SP is that it caters to a variety of interests, including former climbers, wannabe climbers, never-gonna-be climbers, and general mountain lovers. Also, that it's not all about "N. American."

Dow, it would be a shame to lose you, but you could move your content over to your own site. Then you could be featured, not just more often than anybody else, but every single day! You'd be cronies with the owner!

Summitpost is my site of choice for storing and displaying my content, no worries. Folks use my beta here everyday, thus the 6 million hits, etc. The issue I have with the front page is not that my work should be featured, as I stated in the OP as though you really took the time to read it, I realize most folks who peruse the internet and this site do not climb at the level I am climbing. In other words most of the stuff I climb is not mainstream. My work is found and thus utilized via Google (specific beta search), not through SP and thus does not need to be featured.

However, this site could be and should be much more dynamic in attracting not just new contributors whose work could randomly show up on the front page versus being selected via chronyism, but just as important, more users (readers) of beta/content. Right now most folks who visit SP see a bunch of garbage on the front page and move on.

Lets take a look at Gangolf's latest since his contributions are always featured. They were last week, they are this week, they were the week before...whenever I look, there is some obscure German/Euro walk featured. But today's selection is such an example of why there are no dynamics, no new blood, even while old valued contributing members continue to leave. Gangolf adds the page that is featured this week, prob been featured several times, who knows, who cares. It is a climbing crag yet he does not climb. It is akin to some youngster (not many mature adults would even do same) adding City of Rocks to SP even though they don't climb. Adding a climbing contribution to SP when you have not personally climbed at the location has always been frowned upon and if it was a new member, he/she would get hounded. Gangolf? he gets 80 confirmations of what a great job he did. Seriously? that is why there are no real climbers from Germany adding content. No first person beta. Last I checked this site was suppose to be something different than wikipedia. Obviously it is not.

As for my content, I use summitpost more than summitpost uses me. It serves my purpose well. My only gripe is when I look at the rest of the site outside of my own work, it falls well short of what it could be and is stale and seems to be dying a slow death in terms of real participation from new folks, whilst losing quality climbing/real sport members, with zero innovation to curb same. Old fashioned cronyism, patting each other on the back and telling each others all so sensitive ears what they want to hear will not change that. Only real change I know comes from effort and work versus bullshit patronism.

The reason the site doesn't have a lot of contributors from Germany is that the site isn't in German, it's in English. Same for French and Italian. Not because Gangolf wrote his article about the Südpfalz. I understand you want to put overwhelming force behind your arguments, but c'mon.

Still, like you, I'd like to see the site be more friendly for technical climbing. At times I've argued for a wiki approach...because according to my theory, there are many more thousands who want to just write up a little bit about what they know, and not to meet the super-high standards set for mountains and routes. But at least one of the poor, left-out, taken-for-granted North American "real" climbers you allude to was horrified at that idea, as were many others. So we've been having these kinds of conversations but just haven't found a consensus. You don't seem to have any problem making excellent pages either.

This is actually a really complex problem, and trying to address it by picking on Gangolf won't solve anything. I guess you imagine a horde of real climbers waiting in the wings but too discouraged to contribute because of the contents of the front page...which they are monitoring for cronyism, euro-bias, anti-climber bias and all the other accusations you make. I doubt this contingent of people are real.

mvs wrote: I guess you imagine a horde of real climbers waiting in the wings but too discouraged to contribute because of the contents of the front page...which they are monitoring for cronyism, euro-bias, anti-climber bias and all the other accusations you make. I doubt this contingent of people are real.

Does not do the site any great service in attracting new blood, maintaining valued members...and yes....if SP membership condoned folks adding, particularly non-climbers, climbing based content/beta for the areas I climb, I would not be interested in contributing. I definitely would not want my first person/first hand climbing contributions floating around with observations from folks who have not climbed the objective.

If the site was designed to be more dynamic and random=interesting, it would go a long way of eliminating the items you state above and maybe real sport enthusiast participation would at least rise to some previous level if not surpass it.

You folks sure do rise to the occasion if some young new contributor adds content to which they have not climbed...but when one of your own, me or anyone for that matter, they should not be above the fray.