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

10/10 pages?

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

10/10 pages?

Postby Scott » Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:41 pm

Entire Mountain Page:

Lezoon-east (Piazchal), 3540m, and lezoon-west, 3585m, are the easternmost peaks on the main part of Tochal ridge. Tochal ridgeline is very long, and the main part of it which is entirely higher than 3500m starts from Piazchal and continues westward all the way to Bazarak pass, and from there it goes towards NW to Bazarak Peak. The following pictures show a part of the ridge.

I will finish the page tomorrow.


That's the only text added to the mountain page. Six 10/10 votes. Can't you at least wait to vote after seeing if the page is going to be any good? Or are you saying that the above is all the effort that should be put into a 10/10 mountain page? More is supposed to be added to the page later, but why not wait until something else is added before voting?

Eight 10/10 votes:

White Clouds Peak 11,272 is located 0.6 miles due south of Cove Lake in the Big Boulder Lakes basin. It is a class 2-3 climb with a surprising, multi-vertical walled summit. A summit register was placed in 2006. The rocks are brown and granitic, with many loose, large blocks that can pose for tricky footing. Peak 11,272's geology differs considerably from its white limestone and altered limestone neighbors DO Lee, WCP-9 and Caulkens, and provides for a uniquely different climb by comparison.

From Stanley, Idaho, drive NE on Hwy 75 past Lower Stanley and Clayton. About 4.4 miles past Clayton, turn right onto East Fork Road. Follow the signs to Big Boulder Road, which bears to the right off EF Road. Park at the large Livingston Mill trailhead which has a good pit toilet. One could car camp at this trailhead if they do not mind dust and traffic. Some 20 cars were parked here on Aug 3, 2012, and a Forest Service crew was apparently camping out.

A six mile hike or backpack in from Livingston Mill trailhead, which is an hour and 45 minutes drive from Stanley. The last hour is on good dirt road along the East Fork Salmon River. No car camping is available along this dirt road, but there are many campground sites between Lower Stanley, Clayton, and there is even a CG across the road from the EF Salmon River road turnoff.

Camping sites can be found around many of the Big Boulder basin lakes. Alternately, one could backpack or dayhike in from Slate Creek and Big Horn Basin, but the convenience and stunning beauty from camping at Cove or nearby other Big Boulder lakes is recommended. NOTE: NO CAMP FIRES ALLOWED.


That's all that is added to the mountain page.

Another 10/10 mountain page:

Hiked the Ledge Trail at Yosemite with fiance Rick on August 4, 2012. It was manageable until we came to a washout of the trail about 3/4 up the ledge. There we encountered flat and loose rock at a very steep grade. Rick considered possible routes to get by this area and back onto what looked like a decent trail up ahead. The lack of certainty about which route to use safely and the loss of strength from our scramble thus far made him choose to abandon trying to go any further. I agreed with the decision although I thought I could succeed by scaling the rock (a false sense of security?). Although I had some concern about going back down the ledge, my scaling rock skills are nil so heading back seemed the right path. This area where either one or both of us could have become a new stat in the death at Yosemite records, instead became a victory for sane and sober thinking decision-making on the trail. (Rick has other thoughts on this I believe) We ended up having very little problem going back down the ledge from there. Suffered a few minor scrapes on knees, lower legs and sore quads, easily dealt with.

Come on guys, this is getting rediculous. Voting 10/10 on everything, regardless of quality is not only rediculous, but it really detracts from the quality of SP.

This may be beating a dead horse, but quality control is getting worse and worse on SP. If you vote 10/10 on everything then your vote is entirely meaningless.
User Avatar
Scott

 
Posts: 7478
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:03 pm
Location: Craig, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 601 times in 324 posts

The following user would like to thank Scott for this post
Alpinist, Arthur Digbee, Bob Sihler, Josh Lewis, Kiefer, Lolli, Matt Lemke, norco17, yatsek

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Alpinist » Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:54 pm

I agree Scott. I long ago accepted that images are voted 10 or not at all but mountain and route pages should/must be held to a higher standard to maintain a high level of quality on SP.

People should not be afraid to critique the work of others. This can be done constructively. It doesn't have to be confrontational or insulting.

I don't own this website but I have enough sweat equity in it that I feel like one of the owners. I want it to be the best mountaineering site on the web. Don't you?? People should critique pages as if they owned the site.
User Avatar
Alpinist

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

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Josh Lewis » Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:45 pm

I very much agree with Scott. I've had a page recently under construction which I got a "10/10" and though "really?". I would not have given myself a 10. :wink: Later that day I fixed up the page and made it a whole lot better. 8) When a page is new and lacking in detail I give it "immunity to down voting" but if a page is well voted and is lacking in details on a major summit, I don't hesitate to vote a 8/10 or lower. :twisted: :) (or else that person is getting undeserved good votes) In the end I realize that the votes of summitpost mean almost nothing, the system is rigged, and that a vote now days represents who liked something. So vote honestly but give good pages the 10's they deserve. :wink: (I still see outstanding work go under appreciated)
My Websites: Alpine Josh · Alpine Ascent · AceMaps
User Avatar
Josh Lewis

 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:12 pm
Location: Lynnwood, Washington, The Cloudiest Place on Earth, United States
Thanked: 495 times in 327 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby mrchad9 » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:16 pm

Alpinist wrote:People should critique pages as if they owned the site.

If everyone acted like they owned the site then we would cease to have any members, nevermind any that are critiquing any pages.
User Avatar
mrchad9

 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:01 am
Location: San Ramon, California, United States
Thanked: 1214 times in 823 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Catamount » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:20 pm

Been away from the site awhile and it's still the same old stuff. No matter how hard you try, you will never be able to divorce socialization and the need for approval away from human nature. For me, the way I have always differentiated the good pages from the so-so is not by percentage of 10-star votes, but by the total number of votes as measured against the popularity of the submitter. An OK page will get a handful of 10-star votes whereas a great one will get at least 30 or 40. If it's a popular member, double that number. It's pretty simple. And there is always the comments section, where a user will get a much better feel for quality than a ton of positive votes. If I look at a page and read a couple of comments that say "I got lost trying to follow your directions" then I know that it's probably not the best source of information.

The system works; you just have to factor in the curve. :wink:
User Avatar
Catamount

 
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:13 am
Location: Tech Valley, New York, United States
Thanked: 789 times in 509 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Josh Lewis » Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:28 am

Catamount wrote:The system works; you just have to factor in the curve. :wink:


Obscure peaks are an exception to this. Right now my Sherman Peak page is featured which the peak itself is some what popular due to it's position with Mount Baker. But a obscure peak page that I put just as much effort on will not be as voted on (or have as good of a score) as a casually done page on a famous peak. My point is sometimes it's who you are (The Peak) and not what the quality is. It seems to me people like voting on what they are familiar with. But regardless to this fact I prefer to post quality over quantity and attempt to make SP and our information as good as possible. That should be the main purpose of why we post!

Diagrams and maps on this site go under appreciated in my book, yet in many cases they are more informative than a paragraph of words. So appreciation is nice, but usefulness to the climbers goes way beyond what any vote could ever do. 8)
My Websites: Alpine Josh · Alpine Ascent · AceMaps
User Avatar
Josh Lewis

 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:12 pm
Location: Lynnwood, Washington, The Cloudiest Place on Earth, United States
Thanked: 495 times in 327 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby lcarreau » Sat Aug 11, 2012 1:41 am

mrchad9 wrote:
Alpinist wrote:People should critique pages as if they owned the site.

If everyone acted like they owned the site then we would cease to have any members, ...... NEVERMIND ....


User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 895 times in 672 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby lcarreau » Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:13 am

Mister Bean ... 10/10 !

Image
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 895 times in 672 posts

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

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby MoapaPk » Sat Aug 11, 2012 3:01 am

Portions of this thread help explain why I rarely vote on pages any more, and why I don't contribute pages any more. If there were no voting, I would still contribute. Voting was supposed to keep people from just adding crap; but that doesn't seem to work. But one doesn't want to see one's hard work go to the bottom of the heap, so there is a subconscious urge to bloat pages, to make them "pretty."

Most of the summitpost pages that I use are actually from pre-2006, and are often very simple, but have a few good route photos. My paradigm for a good page is this one:
http://www.summitpost.org/north-couloir/159920
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7650
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 756 times in 490 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Josh Lewis » Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:50 am

But he left the text "If you have information about this route that doesn't pertain to any of the other sections, please add it here." :wink: (no big deal, but is not very useful to the reader. Many people do this)
My Websites: Alpine Josh · Alpine Ascent · AceMaps
User Avatar
Josh Lewis

 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:12 pm
Location: Lynnwood, Washington, The Cloudiest Place on Earth, United States
Thanked: 495 times in 327 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby lcarreau » Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:58 am

Josh Lewis wrote:But he left the text "If you have information about this route that doesn't pertain to any of the other sections, please add it here." :wink: (no big deal, but is not very useful to the reader. Many people do this)


Harlan has a valid point, however .... the vast percentage of members try to make their work look ... "pretty."

User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 895 times in 672 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Kiefer » Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:27 am

Likewise, I completely agree with ya Scott and Josh and MoapaPk.

Votes do certainly help with keeping content up but folks have gotten lazy, too laisse-faire about content and just vote everything 10/10.
I don't know if thinking the site were 'yours' to keep content repectable b/c if THAT were the case, we'd have more Facebook bullshit, Linkedin-
lint and other 'cotton candy games' clouding the homepage.

Folks need to look at a page and decide if the quality is something they want to be represented by & vote reasonably and accordingly. I think that's
the trick. People may be afraid of voting honestly & so they vote 10/10 as to not ruffle tail feathers or come across as harsh.

But, hey, sugar-coating doesn't do ANYONE any good. People just need to be more understanding and learn to accept [good] criticism as a tool
for improvement
. 6/10 shouldn't be viewed as a personal attack...it's representative of the time & quality put into a page. Nothing more.

Some things like these horse drool pages by this goober should be simply deleted.
User Avatar
Kiefer

 
Posts: 535
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Estes Park, Colorado, United States
Thanked: 116 times in 65 posts

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

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby Josh Lewis » Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:39 am

I treat voting on SP objects like I vote in real life for elections. If I cannot make up my mind on what to vote, I just don't vote. :wink:

Mr. Bean wins a 10/10 from me. :)
My Websites: Alpine Josh · Alpine Ascent · AceMaps
User Avatar
Josh Lewis

 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:12 pm
Location: Lynnwood, Washington, The Cloudiest Place on Earth, United States
Thanked: 495 times in 327 posts

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

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby lcarreau » Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:34 pm

Josh Lewis wrote:I treat voting on SP objects like I vote in real life for elections. If I cannot make up my mind on what to vote, I just don't vote. :wink:

Mr. Bean wins a 10/10 from me. :)


Image
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 895 times in 672 posts

Re: 10/10 pages?

Postby ZeeJay » Sat Aug 11, 2012 6:01 pm

Regardless of what you think of another person's pages, making fun of him/her serves no useful purpose. The individual derisively referred to as Goober has received only 4 comments on all of his stuff. One of them was a constructive criticism which was responded to in an appropriate manner.

He's received quite a few negative votes but not a single one of the people who down voted him has bothered to tell him why or suggest improvements unless they did so in a PM.

As to the original topic of this thread, yes I agree with you Scott.
User Avatar
ZeeJay

 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:04 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
Thanked: 39 times in 28 posts

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

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.