Page 2 of 3

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:44 pm
by Fletch
Dow Williams wrote:I can only laugh...humor is the best medicine they say...Summitpost has done everything it can to shun technical climbers...Gangolf and company refuse to feature technical climbing objectives on the main page...it is not just his favoritism bs towards other elfs (look at current selection, not one technical climb...never is) .....rather there is not one elf who is a technical rock or ice climber, never has been. Gangolf or his brethren would have no idea what a classic climbing (no I mean actual climbing) addition would be to SP in any regard.

Folks who climb all the time tend not to spend much time on the internet, thus won't play the photo games...so again, never a good climbing photo gets featured on this site...if a coveted vote garner (someone who trades votes) top ropes somewhere, they might get a climbing photo through the roadside shots, but rarely....even then most current active members would have no clue the difference between top roping at a crag vs climbing an objective. And now.....canyons should appear before routes on "what is new"??? In trying to prove all the climbers who have quit this site wrong, I have hung on....now I am ready to move on as well. The site has nothing interesting to offer currently and will no doubt continue to go the nerd direction since that is who is willing to spend the time discussing any changes, with no objective insight into the varying sports that make up the word climbing. Summitpost does not need to have anything to do with climbing...Mountainproject, rockclimbing and Supertopo already exist. And Mountainproject has made the changes that count. Chris (Supertopo) is heading the right direction as well. That I concede.

Josh Lewis, Matt is impressed with you. If you (or he for that matter) want a paying contract job. I would like my beta copied and developed for google search over to Routepost.com or Gearbeans.com so I can delete it from SP.com. This offer is valid to anyone who is capable. In the end, I will need a programmer and a designer. Since these are paying gigs, I probably need to meet you first, but St. George is not a bad place to visit in the winter. I am, as always, busy climbing and don't really put myself in a position to meet folks to do this kind of work (will be in Jtree most of this week). My email is real easy to find.

Best place to get this done I figure is finding someone familiar with SP and has or can have a working relationship with Matt to make this as smooth as possible for both parties. I am looking to do this with cooperation from you Matt....want to leave in good form regarding our relationship. Always open to work with you, Josh and/or Ryle again someday. The current elf population, causing incredible stagnation to the site, is why I am leaving, not the ownership. Ryle did a great job writing this site up originally and I was really impressed that they did not monetize this thing when everyone else could or would have in the mid 2000's. They have been true to their .org status. I give them that.

Really dude? I'm not disagreeing with anything you said, but really? I thought you took the high road in little shit-fits like this. C'mon man! I'll be the first one to say it --- don't go. Please.

You seem like a heck of a good climber, you are down to earth and appear quite humble. And a lot of people on the site, myself included, respect you without ever having met you.

Do as you will, but take a breather, clear your head, whatever... before you do something big like this.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:54 pm
by mrchad9
I, for one, think it would be more constructive for this site if major contributors like Dow had more input into how the site was being run.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:10 pm
by Scott
I would say Scott is a technical climber, and produces good pages, some of which end up on the front page. But as he has noted, if you put up info for obscure places, no matter how good the info is, it will probably get few votes. The Whitney trail will get more views and votes.


I don't know if Dow would consider me to be a technical climber, but it seems to me that most of the route and mountain/rock pages that I have had featured on the front page happened right after someone (someone else or me) added a detailed trip report to the page. I don’t know who picks the front page routes and/or mountain/rocks (I have never nominated any pages, my own or others), but I’m just guessing that at least some of them are picked because rather than read every page on SP, whoever does it sees what good trip reports were added lately and often picks whatever routes/mountains they were applicable to (if they appear to be of high quality).

It’s not always the case, but it seemed to be the case on several occasions.

Summitpost has done everything it can to shun technical climbers


In the old days of Summitpost, technical climbing routes were considered taboo, unless they reached the summit of a "real mountain". Cragging or wall pages were discouraged by many purist.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:01 pm
by Dow Williams
Chad, Fletch, thanks for the kind words, but I am by no means quitting. Rather I am going to invest in a site that is much more dynamic or join Chris at Supertopo or some other hybrid alternative. I have held my tongue way to long on this crap while watching other climbers leave. Great folks too. I always thought I could change the culture by hanging in here and setting an example, challenge the status quo and they would come back. Not going to happen. The mass exodus is already over.

This fiefdom that Gangolf and others play has just gotten way too old for me and Matt simply does not have time to challenge it or even understand it. I thought Bob Shiler would...seemed like a pretty cool cat to me....but in the end, he was not willing to stand up and challenge this good ole boy relationship either. I want to belong to something dynamic...not hang out at some coffee shop with a bunch of old farts. This site has gotten so stale....and I can see just from the conversations between Burd and Matt about the stupid voting issue (this is what we should be spending all of Matt's new found energy on, really????)...that Matt has no idea what I am talking about in terms of challenging this site to be more dynamic and diverse.....apparently he just is to busy to even have any insight to what is going on at SP..... attract new blood...attract diversity.....just not set up to do it and at this point I now see it never will be.

Scott. I (and others) have climbed many hard technical routes leading to summits, including 20+ pitches of 5.10-11, to summits. Bugaboos, Zion, a variety of hefty north faces, along with some other pretty classic shit in N. America. It is here, just you would not know it. This has nothing to do with the fact I add a lot of walls and ice vs mountains during the winter months if that is what you are alluding to. In the summer I am all over big mountain routes, so have others in the past....I admit, those contributions are far and few between now......this has everything to do with these same old elves with their petty grudges having no interest in promoting the future of SP...it is just a storage site to constantly feature their own boring crap. Stagnant is the word and has been for way, way too long.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:11 pm
by mrchad9
Dow Williams wrote:Stagnant is the word and has been for way, way too long.

I agree. Becoming more dynamic should be the priority above all else. I confess that I believe some changes to the voting system would be an asset in helping future contributions, but don't think it should take priority over making the site more energetic (and I don't think simply changing the look and feel by adding new colors or banners qualifies as an improvement at all).

Just looking at the home page just now... there are 18 total photos on it... only ONE of someone in the process of climbing something. That's bad enough... but what is worse is that 13 of the 18 have or will be there for a week or more, and 80% of the others are just profile thumbnails.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:23 pm
by Scott
Scott. I (and others) have climbed many hard technical routes leading to summits, including 20+ pitches of 5.10-11, to summits. Bugaboos, Zion, a variety of hefty north faces, along with some other pretty classic shit in N. America.


Actually, I already know and have already read much of your pages (and seen many, many of your photographs).

This has nothing to do with the fact I add a lot of walls and ice vs mountains during the winter months if that is what you are alluding to.


No, that isn't what I am alluding to. I just was pointing out that disagreements on technical submissions (or lack there of) are nothing new and existed even when SP was newer, though some of the debates were different, (and that SP was never geared to only technical stuff, though the arguments existed that it should be). In fact, in the "old days" it was even less geared to technical stuff because cragging, waterfall ice, submissions on walls, etc. were sometimes discouraged. To me, it seems more geared towards technical stuff than it used to be.

I wasn't saying that you only did cragging/waterfall ice at all. Those arguments (cragging/waterfall ice) existed at one time, but are no longer debated as they were back then. However, it is good to point out that, the same points you are making in the above posts are actually some of the same arguments (about "getting stale", "stagnant", "keeping it real", "not hardcore enough", etc.) that existed even back in 2003. I'm not arguing with any of your points, but can say that many of them have existed a long time, even when SP was new. I don't think SP will ever be geared to only featuring hard core climbs or routes, at least it never has been since I've been here. The only way to increase the content or percentage of those is by adding them (which you have been doing). I don't know if SP ever was "hardcore". In fact, in some periods of time in the past, it seems even less so (at least as far as technical stuff goes). When I first started here used to be not that many technical mountains/routes at all, except for the mountain pages on the well known big peaks (Matterhorn, Eiger, K2, etc.), and now there are many (although there are also many, many more non-technical mountains/routes as well).

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:26 pm
by MoapaPk
Scott wrote:I don't know if Dow would consider me to be a technical climber,


I am naive about the naming; but you use technical methods to achieve summits. I remember your descriptions of retrievable anchors -- down-to-earth discussions of physics and all-- they were well beyond what a scrambler, hiker, or peak-bagger (even most canyoneers) would know.

but it seems to me that most of the route and mountain/rock pages that I have had featured on the front page happened right after someone (someone else or me) added a detailed trip report to the page.


I guess that makes sense, in a good way. People like the details and up-to-date info from trip reports.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:30 pm
by Scott
I don't know if Dow would consider me to be a technical climber,

I am naive about the naming; but you use technical methods to achieve summits. I remember your descriptions of retrievable anchors -- down-to-earth discussions of physics and all-- they were well beyond what a scrambler, hiker, or peak-bagger (even most canyoneers) would know.


Yes, some people would consider me to be a technical climber. I'm not sure that I'm the type of technical climber that Dow is referring to though (in a different league than what I do) . I guess that's a different topic though.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:57 pm
by Bubba Suess
Dow, if you want to go then that is your prerogative. However, you have obviously invested a lot into Summitpost. Rather than just up and leave, see how the changes go. Maybe it will improve and be more to your liking. If it is not, then safe climbing! Change is obviously afoot though, and you ought to invest just a little more effort to effect change here rather than expend substantial effort or finances to move your contributions elsewhere.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:33 pm
by mrchad9
Montana Matt wrote:Initially I thought it would probably take a week or more to make the changes to the database and code to implement a change to the voting system. But if all that has to change is the way the score is calculated, that should only be a day or two. Once that's done, I can move onto something else.

That is great to hear! I had hoped, and anticipated, that it might not be too prohibitive. I truely do think all that is needed is a change to the calculation formula, not a change to the voting process itself. Perhaps this will end up an even easier change than like/dislike system (which requires an interface change).

Note that if we change the range of page scores, I think at some point it may be worth changing how the power points are calculated for the page owners. Currently (according to the faqs) this is an exponential function for high scoring pages. If we modified this (and even simpler basic formula change) perhaps the concern over high profile pages and their scores would be mitigated. I have some ideas here two but didn't want to pile on unitl you were ready. It's much simpler than the page score calculation. (Also I think less important... since it is more invisible to the users... but the impacts will be seen when folks see their profile pages).

Montana Matt wrote:However, the Featured Pages on the right side bar and the POTX images could be randomized to some degree, based on score and a random element. Let me know if you have concrete ideas of what you'd like to see changed Dow and I promise I will listen very intently.

High level thoughts I have include making at least one third of the featured articles, TRs, and pages change daily. The daily change could be to a randomly selected previously featured page (there are TONS in the database by now, that most users have never had the chance to notice). I would change featured pages more frequently in general. Perhaps instead of having them up there for two weeks at a time, have them for 2 days at a time for 25% of the time over a 1 month period (automatically popping in and back out along with other manually selected pages).

I would also change the layout, to put rapidly changing things at the top (like new members and featured photos) and stale stuff at the bottom (like the 'New to SP' links). We all want new members to see those links, but I don't think we are getting the full value of the home page asset with the links where they are.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:34 pm
by Dow Williams
Thanks Matt. For one, putting Chad in charge of the front page selection process would be huge for summitpost in my opinion, I mean the entire front page. That is bringing in new blood, that is making a big change. Here is an individual willing to randomize the selection process to no selfish interest of his own. That is not the way your volunteer site operators do it now, particulary Gangolf. Maybe adding Liba and another "technical climber" or two to the elf population whilst at the same time asking some of these old white men who have being doing it for 10 years+ to step down. Think youth, think women (horrible representation here compared to MP), even think race. Think diversity.

Matt, my interest in moving on far exceeds trying to compete with SP. Like I said, as far as you, Josh and Ryle are concerned, if anything, I would rather keep a working relationship. However, I refuse to have Gangolf and others continue to run a site into the ground I have so much vested in, whilst promoting their own obscure, work. I put too much effort into it. I have brought other fresh faces like Liba on board only to see them leave eventually because it is so stale and boring.

If Scott and others think folks attracted to the site have more use for German hikes over Red Rock trad climbing (I have yet ever to print a page for a hike, I have printed tons from the internet for beta on climbs), then that is the site you will be, like I said, you sure do not need to be a climbing site.

Josh emailed me, so I might as well get it out there....somebody who is passionate about this stuff might exist here....losing my Google ranking at first does not bother me Matt....folks who need and use my beta will find it again.......over time, it will sort back to the top. I am willing to spend the money to do it right and get it back to the top as well. Unlike you, outdoor adventure is my full time business. I thought it easier that I climb, write and post and you take care of the rest, but that has not happened, the site has gone south instead. This is going to take me forever I am sure...so I am not going any where overnight, will definitely pay attention to your changes. Sorry I have never gotten specific enough for you, I don't speak programmers language. The stuff I notice is glaring to anyone who contributes. I realize from your vantage point, you simply don't see it.

Josh asked me some questions, this is what I wrote to him....

"I want to pay someone, and trust me, I realize this is not a one person job in terms of qualifications, to manage the copy and set up of my data as close to what it looks like now, although of course I am open to whatever design somebody wants to get creative with, to gearbeans.com. It is my intent to eventually make this a retail site where algorithms are set up to reward buyers with store credit for their beta contributions. Been proposing it for ten years....was a huge deal back then. Ten years ago, I had sit downs with the CEO of REI, one of the founders of Backcountry.com (before they sold out to Liberty) and the 2nd man over at Sierra Trading Post. It was a $250K project.

I have climbing partners/friends who work both at SAP and Google. I understand the complexities with which I am dealing. I also understand that they have softened a ton in ten years. Still, it is no easy or cheap venture. But if I never get started, it will never come to fruition. I have the funds, but what I need first is to secure my own beta and make sure it is set up to rank in Google, whatever costs that involve. From there, we can proceed. You are young and appear to be ambitious. Maybe you have interest. Bottom line, I am willing to pay someone to set up a whole new site that performs the same function as SP at this current time, allowing my beta to always be accessed and ranked from true searches."

I need to move forward with this Matt. I doubt highly you really want to shake up your volunteer site administrators, even though in my opinion, they are as responsible for the stagnated condition of the site today as you owners are. The site needs new blood and I just don't see you willing to do that. We might as well work hand in hand. I do trust you, Josh and Ryle, no worries. I am going to keep adding beta as I always have. I just need to get this moved over to something much more dynamite, with partnering websites or on my own. Been talking about it way to long.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:27 pm
by Dow Williams
Chad, making a database of pages only already featured, or making that a minimum requirement, would be a fail in my opinion. Gangolf has never been objective in his selections. That would move from boring selections to randomly boring selections. There are so many gems that he ignores either because he does not understand them (technical submissions) or the submitters are not part of the old guard. Rather select some minimum requirement score...maybe five 10-10 votes (and of course whatever that would equate to in the new voting system)... same with photos....lower the bar considerably. Folks without friends here have made great submissions....if five others have noticed it and gave it a thumbs up (whatever that equates to in the new voting arrangement), it should be worthy of flowing through the random stream. Same with photos. Lowering the bar is the only way to eliminate the games and avatars. Dilute manipulators ability to bore us to death with the same stuff. Making it change frequently will allow many good pages to get noticed. The page should look different every time someone refreshes it, if that can be done within budgetary constraints for Matt.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:46 pm
by Scott
If Scott and others think folks attracted to the site have more use for German hikes over Red Rock trad climbing (I have yet ever to print a page for a hike, I have printed tons from the internet for beta on climbs), then that is the site you will be, like I said, you sure do not need to be a climbing site.


Actually Dow, I am completely clueless as to what you are talking about. My name was mentioned and I tuned in by trying to point out (especially to you, but to everyone else as well) that in several ways, technical climbing pages (and the acceptance of such) have actually increased on SP (using cragging pages and waterfall climbs as an example).

I think it is true that more people look at and climb the easier stuff (such as the Mount Whitney Trail used in an example above) than they do the Wishbone Arete on Robson (which isn’t considered to be an extreme route), but that doesn’t make the information on the technical route any less valuable.

I have said for a long time that the most valuable information on SP were the obscure peaks and routes that aren’t published anywhere else. That still doesn’t mean that those pages are the ones that will receive the most hits, votes, or whatever.

As far as your German routes example, I think it obvious that from the map on my profile, I don’t have much interest in Germany. This is my own wish list (the rest is written; I just don’t have it all in html):

http://www.summitpost.org/scott-s-wish-list/335481

But yes, I do think the German pages do have a place regardless of whether I want to use them or not.

You are correct that there are less technical routes added (or featured on SP front page) than there are class 1-4 routes added. It is simply because more people climb them (or hike them if you don’t want to use the work climb) and add them to SP. It would be nice if everyone on SP was a 5.11c climber, but they just aren’t. As far as the front page goes, I wonder what percentage of technical routes vs. non-technical routes featured vs. added is. I don’t know; I haven’t paid attention.

I have added a bunch of hikes, and even several technical routes (waterfall ice, rock, canyon, etc.), but most of us do not climb as much as you do and aren’t at the same level. The only solution is for technical climbers (such as you) to keep adding more stuff. Personally, I look up to those who climb better than me. I think it obvious that you are one of those who do. In fact, I’ve neglected the Canadian Rockies for so long because I’ve been unable to get time off in summer (in winter, most but not all of the peaks I want to climb might be beyond my experience level). Now the tables have turned and I can. I was going to ask you if I can come visit you in Canmore (you offered before) and it would be great to even do a climb with you, but I am not at the same level as you are. I probably never will be; two kids, a full time job, a lovely wife with heart problems that all take priority over climbs. For you, climbing is your life (correct me if wrong), but for most of us, it’s just a part of our life.

I met you in person and you were a great guy. I am confused about some of the comments you have made lately.

There are so many gems that he ignores either because he does not understand them (technical submissions) or the submitters are not part of the old guard.


I do not know, but I thought Gangolf only chooses trip reports. :?: Is this correct? I don’t know who chooses the mountain pages to be featured. Right now I see one page from Italy/Switzerland, one page from Italy and four from the United States. As far as routes go, there is one class 3 and one trail. Yes, it would be nice if more technical routes were featured, but I don’t think that they should always be the only ones featured. I actually don’t follow the front page much (except for the forum and trip reports).

Few share my viewpoint, but for me, I’d like the obscure places featured rather than the “popular” mountains/routes. That’s only my opinion though.

Anyway, if being featured on the front page is so important to you (not your stuff, but all of the gems), why not nominate them in the thread?

recommendations-for-front-page-featured-mountains-quot-t31663.html

I've never nominated anything there (not important to me), but choosing between 10820 routes and 12220 mountain pages can't be easy. This is just a friendly suggestion, not a complaint.

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:48 pm
by mrchad9
To acknowledge some of Dow's sentiments... I never understood why becoming an elf (or a mod... that is what most of them have been) was a lifetime appointment. Sure some have decided to leave on their own, but I think in general it would be best if it was a 1-2 year gig as a default. Also would be best if the elf activities (meaning dealing with content and not forums) were the primary focus. This would including both working with members, but also working with Matt when he has time available. Creating incentives for new members to participate in online activity and invigorating the home page should be their priorities.

Matt- I could make a front page mockup and get it to you within a week. I assume it is no rush since as you state it is easy to do.

For calculating power points from page scores... I think the following would be much more reflective of pages relative true value versus the current exponential formula. We would need to adjust it depending on the final variables in the page score formula (for example probably change it to a second power function or even less if scores start at 50% instead of 70%). Note I haven't put much thought into the specific numbers yet, but think this format of the score to a power times a constant might be a good one. I would need to look at lots of examples to settle on the variables.

Mountains and Rocks/Areas and Ranges = (Page Score)^3 * 12
Routes = (Page Score)^3 * 10 [this increases their relative value from the existing standard]
Articles = (Page Score)^3 * 15
Albums = (Page Score)^5 * 2
Images = (Page Score)^20 * 5 [keeps most images very low on the score, but the most popular ones worth about 1-2 points]
Other objects = (Page Score)^3 * 8

Dow...
Yes- I agree with your last comment above. Currently there are a lot of slots on the home page, I see no reason to treat all the articles, all the mountain pages, etc... the same. Some could be almost totally random with a minimum criteria as you describe, whereas the next slot might have a slightly stricter criteria. This way score could have some probability of getting selected but every good page would have a chance. And some spots could be manually chosen (if we want to assure the highest quality beta is chosen, some manual encouragement would be good as long as folks have confidence in the individual).

Re: Totally insignificant and probably matters only to me bu

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:17 am
by MoapaPk