And there are those of us, who will vote 10 because we like something and not vote at all if we don't. Taking away points for voting 10 is fine with me, I don't need any power points after all. Zero is fine with me.

Did we all collectivelly forget what SP is or we thought it would be? An information site for outdoor people? If I want to go somewhere and SP has any info on the place, it is 10 for me. Nothing else much matters.

Scott...was there really a ledge that fell away on Temple Mountain??? That is incredible! Makes perfect sense now. Now I am really excited to go back and give it another go this time with the now required additional gear.

Remove "weight" of voters, remove points based on amount of pics you upload, make voting anonymous, add or squeeze in an extra option:
0 Irrelevant
1 The Worst. Ever.
2 Horrible
3 Pretty Bad
4 Poor
5 Needs Additions
6 Fair
7 Good
8 Great Work
9 Wow! Amazing
10 The Best. Ever.

Zero often means no one ever voted, maybe because the page didn't have all the geegaws. I've gotten some of the best route information from "zero" pages.

MoapaPk wrote:Zero often means no one ever voted, maybe because the page didn't have all the geegaws. I've gotten some of the best route information from "zero" pages.

Occasionally I will order the pages by score, lowest to highest, and quite a few 0-score pages (no votes) aren't bad. They may have had a short life on the new submissions list, and just got forgotten.

Just the same, many are one-off pages put up by a very-temporary member, and never got deleted.

BTW I think the SP thinkers could try to fix the fact, that mountain and route pages get written by people who never climbed the mountain or that route. If you want to give advantage to anyone, encourage people to write pages about mountains and routes they did and reward them for it. If quality of content is what you are after, that single issue could help SP quite a bit.

Luc wrote:remove points based on amount of pics you upload

This has largely been already done. Most images are worth about 10-20% of what they were previously. This is why most everyone's power points went down when we switched systems.

If someone wants to get more power points by using images it is going to take them a very long time.

asmrz wrote:BTW I think the SP thinkers could try to fix the fact, that mountain and route pages get written by people who never climbed the mountain or that route. If you want to give advantage to anyone, encourage people to write pages about mountains and routes they did and reward them for it. If quality of content is what you are after, that single issue could help SP quite a bit.

Strongly agree, especially for routes.

Part of the problem is that often route/mountain pages were given up for adoption, and taken over by folks who had never done those peaks/routes. The SP authorities were just glad to have someone care enough to volunteer the time for a minimal rework.

MoapaPk wrote:Part of the problem is that often route/mountain pages were given up for adoption, and taken over by folks who had never done those peaks/routes. The SP authorities were just glad to have someone care enough to volunteer the time for a minimal rework.

True, but I know of at least one member who is basically a hiker but created several pages for technical routes back in the day.

I don't think we have too many cases nowadays of new route pages made by people who haven't done the routes, but there are a lot from the past.

MoapaPk wrote:Part of the problem is that often route/mountain pages were given up for adoption, and taken over by folks who had never done those peaks/routes. The SP authorities were just glad to have someone care enough to volunteer the time for a minimal rework.

In this case I would rather have no one care for the page and put it under the Orphanage until the right person comes along. The Orphanage needs more power anyway.

http://www.summitpost.org/users/orphanage/66446

asmrz wrote:If I want to go somewhere and SP has any info on the place, it is 10 for me.

So it's the best info ever? It's this kind of thinking that is why the most popular pages will have the best score too... even if the page isn't that good. Well I guess if popular is the best, obscure is the worst. I guess that's why I make the worst pages.

Josh I do not have any need for Whitney, Denali, Aconcagua or hundreds of othet popular pages. What I was refering to, were pages for mountains and routes that can be found nowhere else. Those have extremely high value to me and I would give them 10 just out of appreciation for having any data at all. When one just starts out, one is looking for any and all data, after a while, the unusual and the obscure are the most valuable. That would be another criteria for me, if I were to be asked about power ratings. Give most points to the obscure and unusual, remote and unclimbed. That is where value lies...If it is NOT in my (large) library, it has value to me!

Well asmrz, sounds like you got a decent approach for handling obscure peaks. But unfortunately many folks will vote 10/10's on popular peaks too which is where the problem arises.

Josh Lewis wrote: "But unfortunately many folks will vote 10/10's on popular peaks ..."

I'm going to change my vote on Mount Rainier. I was born and grew up in its shadow, but all I learned is it's much BIGGER than I am.

Mount Rainier is just the inanimate remnants of a sleeping volcano, and it doesn't care a rat's ass about me or the votes I have given it ....