SummitPost.org

Dow Williams wrote: If something you contributed does not get ranked first {on google} and foremost, then either it was unhelpful to the public (poorly written and organized) or unnecessary and of no use to the internet public (outdoor enthusiasts/climbers) at large to begin with.

My search of google for Morey Peak Nevada put my summitpost page second, after a google map. I doubt this is so much due to the number of hits, as the fact that there is very little information about this destination anywhere.

Google rankings are a mystery to me; they must rank 1st the site with the most hits, be that number small or big. Often a search for an obscure place will turn up a lot of robo websites suggesting real estate and amenities near some mountain in the middle of nowhere; quite odd. But your conclusions strike me as debatable. A popular destination gets a lot of hits (e.g. Mt Whitney trail), but a description on summitpost is for completeness only, because the information is so widely available elsewhere. It is really the odd peaks and routes that are found nowhere else, that should be on SP.

Dow Williams wrote:To be honest Moapa, I would have assumed you had more common sense than to let a character like 1000 pks motivate you to delete your beta/writings no matter what he said or did.

It was trivially easy to reconstruct the page; I had foreseen his odd behavior. I thought he was beginning to get rational then, and I was wrong. His brain was permanently wired with a mean streak.

I have gotten thanks from people who have used my pages. I've also see strong evidence they were used by some of our SP luminaries; at least I know the information did someone good.
(edit: grammar and clarity)

ZeeJay wrote: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.

Yah. Contacted him twice about it via PM. Explained SP's purpose and that his submissions are not in line nor even make sense in a mountain/canyon sense. More of a snippet that belongs in a travel guide really. Once, no response. The second time, he just thanked me for looking.

yatsek wrote:

Kiefer Thomas wrote: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.

6/10 That's right-wing, chauvinist and authoritarian.

Hey! I have a left wing too!

MoapaPk wrote:If you give a low vote, say why in the comments section, and indicate how the page owner might improve the page.

ABSOLUTELY!!!

yatsek wrote:

MoapaPk wrote:I don't think SP can escape the current binary voting system of 10/10 or nothing. In a fair world, a lot of good pages would get an 8/10 or 9/10, but with the current system, that would sink such good pages below a lot of crap.

Sure. But some pages deserve to be sunk - with anything from 1-9/10.

And what will happen is that a lot of crap pages will still get 10/10, and few good pages, that people actually read, will get a few 8/10.

Before the FOIA, it was possible to include negative things in reviews of former workers or former students. In that time (say the 1970s), the average review for government workers was about 70%. After FOIA, the average review shot up to about 95% I remember getting a lot of letters of recommendation in the 90s that said vaguely positive things, then ended with "call me." During the call, you would discover all the nasty stuff not mentioned in the vague glowing review.

My route comes up first result in Google. You were comparing ranking with quality which I assumed you meant SP with votes. If you meant Google, since when did the quality of your submission play a role in your ranking. I thought it had more to do with the overall site reputation and the seo (search engine optimization) quality of the site.

Dow Williams wrote:you want google recognition, you have to earn it...and either that is your sole purpose for contributing here or you are truly wasting your time...

How about neither. I'm not striving for google recognition, although it is certainly a nice thing to have. And I'm pretty sure I'm not wasting my time contributing if people are using my beta... am I mistaken? Well at least I have fun making pages.

MoapaPk wrote:And what will happen is that a lot of crap pages will still get 10/10, and few good pages, that people actually read, will get a few 8/10.

My thoughts exactly! I've had some of my best work getting 7/10's which I was fine with. This is why it's becoming increasingly important for a 9/10 in the system to be more gentile so that people can vote more honestly.

Josh Lewis wrote: Well at least I have fun making pages.

Josh .. THAT'S what it's all about. If you're having FUN and putting in the time and passion to do something, you can ONLY get better.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I don't give a rat's ass 'bout Google. Once again, I ENJOY what I'm doing, and LOVE to make my images look good.

If y'all don't want me around, I'll always be "blessed" with a CHOICE of packing up my images and leaving the Site. Yes, I believe in Free Choice.

Once again, I did give that "Dude in question" a low vote because I (really) can't understand what a pipeline has to do with any peaks or mountains ...

http://www.summitpost.org/pipeline-utah/745612

Don't get me wrong! Though pipelines have NOTHING to do with mountains, I think PIPES would be MUCH more appropriate for summit adventurers ..

SORRY, but can ANYBODY EXPLAIN to me what THIS GUY is talking about ????

http://www.summitpost.org/pipeline-utah/745612

Are there any engineers or budding geologists in the House ???

I think we should continue the experimental analysis. I wonder what a hamster would vote for, IF A HAMSTER COULD VOTE ..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOHwjjhFTac[/youtube]

MoapaPk wrote:Before the FOIA, it was possible to include negative things in reviews of former workers or former students. In that time (say the 1970s), the average review for government workers was about 70%. After FOIA, the average review shot up to about 95% I remember getting a lot of letters of recommendation in the 90s that said vaguely positive things, then ended with "call me." During the call, you would discover all the nasty stuff not mentioned in the vague glowing review.

I used to teach at a high school/college and I watched these changes coming over here, to Poland, in the 1990's.

Kiefer Thomas wrote:

yatsek wrote:

Kiefer Thomas wrote: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.

6/10 That's right-wing, chauvinist and authoritarian.

Hey! I have a left wing too!

I thought so. I also have two wings, which is exactly what makes me right-wing (and chauvinist, authoritarian and fascist).

Kiefer Thomas wrote:

MoapaPk wrote:If you give a low vote, say why in the comments section, and indicate how the page owner might improve the page.

ABSOLUTELY!!!

Most of the time, "Please study this" will be enough.

borutbk wrote:

yatsek wrote:Most of the time, "Please study this" will be enough.

Imagine a page with quite a few 10/10 votes but you can prove to an admin that it's a bad page. The admin will promptly delete the page.

Sure. I've done this several times. But when it comes to new people, it'd be too harsh on them.

Josh Lewis wrote:... One of my better photos I posted recently had 0 views. SP works kinda like facebook, something goes unnoticed until someone comments on the page... then suddenly everyone notices it.

A daily limit - say ten photos per person per day - is badly needed.

yatsek wrote:

Josh Lewis wrote:... One of my better photos I posted recently had 0 views. SP works kinda like facebook, something goes unnoticed until someone comments on the page... then suddenly everyone notices it.

A daily limit - say ten photos per person per day - is badly needed.

To Josh and Mister Yatsek ... THIS explains it! Instead of voting, they were watching THIS on Big Screen TV ...

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.

That used to somewhat work, but going through the first few what's new pages, there isn't much correlation any more.

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.

I believe it was already addessed somewhat by the staff. The submissions used to be added as mountains/routes/trip reports, but the staff changed them to custom objects and the submitter followed suite. Since then the comments went away or were deleted and it wasn't as big of a deal anymore since they were only custom objects. There is an old thread about it somewhere. As to the intention purpose of the pages, no one seems to know.

lcarreau wrote:I think we should continue the experimental analysis. I wonder what a hamster would vote for, IF A HAMSTER COULD VOTE ..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOHwjjhFTac[/youtube]

Great! Thanks, Icarreau.
The only other way to distract me from the REAL TOPIC is to either put pictures of hot women with 6 more abs than
I currently have or cute & fuzzy things dancing around.
Thank God the teletubies got left out!

But at least I now know .0065% more about pipelines than I once did. So there is that!
Is there anyway one can connect or find links between the Higgs-Boson Particle and Mt. Rainier?