Page 1 of 2

Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:06 pm
by mrchad9
First the current process...

Users PM and email the page owner and ask for page ownership if they want to work on a page. Sometimes the owner denies the request, sometimes the ower offers the page up, and often the request is ignored (usually because the owner is inactive). If the request is ignored for a month and the owner appears inactive, the elves give the requester the page.

Givens: The process works (I've done it a few times myself, and have gotten all three of the above results) and the process is not a burden for the elves (this doesn't happen a lot and takes very little time). Also a given... the process needs improvement and should work better. I think the biggest burden here is that members are often reluctant to request a page because they don't want to intrude, especially if the page is weak (rather than horrid).

Matt has a couple of good ideas here. The exact mechanisms haven't been worked out. Any other ideas? Or thoughts on the details?

1) Allow users to apply to get update permissions.
2) Pages come up for adoption if not up to date (as voted on by the community -- this would require adding a way to vote whether or not a page is sufficiently up to date).

EDIT:

Also... feel free to comment or vote on the idea here:
http://summitpost.uservoice.com/forums/ ... or-adoptio

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:28 pm
by Bob Sihler
Not wild about #2 or some other kind of open system. There are a lot of pages that are okay but just don't look as pretty as some would prefer, and I see a bunch of claim jumping taking place, plus manipulation of the process.

I think the current system works well as long as one is willing to step up and make the request. And if the owner has been long inactive, I usually don't bother with the waiting period or the PM/email request.

The main problem with the current system, as I see it, is this: page owners who are active but who refuse to transfer bad pages or make corrections/updates when they are pointed out. This may require more aggressive administrative action, but I'm curious to hear members' thoughts on this issue and suggestions for how to address it.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:36 pm
by Woodie Hopper
I'm concerned about #2 as well. I do think though that maintainers of pages who ignore requests to update/correct information should respond to reasonable requests for updating and/or correction. Reassignment of pages should not be decided or voted on by non-administrators.

My $0.02.

Woodie

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:51 pm
by Kiefer
Yah. I no likey #2.
If a page is allowed to sit for an indiscriminate length of time while the parties involved wait for the page owener to respond, nothing may ever happen.
If a page sits untouched for 4-9 years...or for how ever long, I think THAT pretty much speaks for itself. Waiting an extra few days won't do anything but prolong.
Like Bob said, take action now.

BTW: I like all this new, recent "ownership" in SP lately. It's drastically improving the site and increasing the 'accountability.'
Image

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:53 pm
by mrchad9
I too have concerns about pages being taken from people based on a voting process. But what if there were a more automated way to request ownership so folks were less reluctant to try?

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:25 am
by Josh Lewis
Bob Sihler wrote:The main problem with the current system, as I see it, is this: page owners who are active but who refuse to transfer bad pages or make corrections/updates when they are pointed out.


Bob nailed it in this post. I've contacted many individuals within my time here on SP about them improving pages. I get 1 of 2 people typically. The first set are overly nice and give up the page without even asking for it (which isn't a bad thing considering that they ask if I'm willing to maintain it). The second set of people are those who are "active" but do nothing with the page that hasn't been updated in years. I send a request for them to add a detail... "naw man, it's fine the way it is". :x The active members who post stuff frequently listen to me. :) Unfortunately they don't own the pages that need it the most from my experience.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:12 am
by Scott
I too have concerns about pages being taken from people based on a voting process. But what if there were a more automated way to request ownership so folks were less reluctant to try?


Sounds like a good idea, but as mentioned, one must be cautious with #2. If the maintainer hasn't logged in for two or more years, it's pretty much a given, but if the maintainer is active, it's a tougher issue.

Would it be possible for #2 to kick in after a maintainer hasn't logged into SP in say, at least two years (for example)? Or would the programming required to do this be too complex?

A seperate way to vote on whether a page is up to date or not is a good idea in many ways. Sometimes a page may have an excellent score, and was excellently written, but an important update happens that needs to be added. The score alone wouldn't flag whether or not the page is up to date or not.

I recently adopted the Tabeguache Peak page in Colorado. The page was actually written quite well before recent adoption. It had a high score as well. Unfortunately, the maintainer (whom I used to go on some climbs with and was an excellent contributer) left SP and hasn't logged in for several years. Although the page was excellent when he wrote it, access routes and trailheads completely changed. The standard route on the mountain changed as well (the old page was inaccurate on which trailheads were open and closed). Although the page looked good, it needed to be rewritten and updated.

A way to vote that a page is out of date could be a very good thing.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:20 am
by Josh Lewis
Scott wrote:Would it be possible for #2 to kick in after a maintainer hasn't logged into SP in say, at least two years (for example)


I don't see why this would be necessary. If a page owner has not logged in for two years, typically the page is up for grabs considering that they seemed to have moved on. The advantage to requesting is that it is slightly more effort (which I consider a good thing) because it shows that perhaps the individual getting the page cares for it enough to specifically ask the elves. I don't see much advantage to inactive member pages to be automated to be given up. I suppose that makes the elves completely free of being ranted at. :wink:

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:42 am
by Scott
I don't see much advantage to inactive member pages to be automated to be given up. I suppose that makes the elves completely free of being ranted at.


I didn't necessarily mean automatically given up, but flagged for adoption if it were both the page owner hadn't logged in and if voted out of date (by a certain amount of members). Just a thought though. The current process works pretty well as long as people are willing to ask. Perhaps having some kind of tag on the page about adoption on an outdated page may encourage some to do this? Just a thought.

The advantage to requesting is that it is slightly more effort (which I consider a good thing) because it shows that perhaps the individual getting the page cares for it enough to specifically ask the elves.


Fair point. It wouldn't be good for someone to adopt a bunch of pages unless they are going to improve them. Some people would do that under SPv1 (adopt a bunch of pages and never improve them; it was automated back then).

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:51 am
by Josh Lewis
Scott wrote:Perhaps having some kind of tag on the page about adoption on an outdated page may encourage some to do this?


I think this is a very valid idea. I personally am in favor for something like this.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 6:09 pm
by Kiefer
Yah. I like Scott's idea as well. I've recieved pretty much the same responses as Josh on pages I'm keen on taking over. Two years is a long time. Some pages and user log-in's have even greater time elapse.
If someone who owns a page isn't willing to updte it or refresh it, then obviously, to me anyway, they have no interest in the site as a contributor.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 6:48 pm
by mrchad9
So I am hearing two things...

1. Allow members to flag a page somehow as being outdated, but it has no effect other than as a sort of notification.
2. Develop a more automated way for members to request adoption, but do not automate the actual handover. To actually adopt the page, the owner must still do the handover or an elf can assist if the owner is unresponsive.

Yes/no?

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:37 am
by Bob Sihler
Yes.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:43 am
by Bob Sihler
Kiefer Thomas wrote:Yah. I like Scott's idea as well. I've recieved pretty much the same responses as Josh on pages I'm keen on taking over. Two years is a long time. Some pages and user log-in's have even greater time elapse.
If someone who owns a page isn't willing to updte it or refresh it, then obviously, to me anyway, they have no interest in the site as a contributor.


If the owner has been inactive for a year, I typically hand the page over without requesting the prospective owner to send email or PM. Typically-- I have made some exceptions.

If it's been under a year, I usually do request the PM/email approach, especially if the owner has logged in in recent months even if the page hasn't been updated in years.

I've had very little trouble with this system. As far as I can remember, I've had to deal with only one case of an inactive member returning to find his pages adopted and being upset about it. But even in that case, I didn't transfer the pages back. I left it up to the new owner to decide, and he ended up transferring a couple back, but not all.

Really, I don't think the current adoption process is that much of an issue.

Re: Changing the Page Adoption Process

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:47 am
by Fletch
Could there be a list of pages that are up for adoption that people could go in and vote on? Then, when a page gets below a certain points score (say 50% or 40%), it becomes officially "up for grabs"? There would need to be somebody to "sign off" on the transfer (say, an Elf) just to make sure that people aren't ganging up on a page so somebody can take it, but I think that could work --- it essentially lets people take a page based on the quality, not on how long someone has or has not logged in...

The way I see it, if a page is getting enough bad votes, then let the system do its job...

But I predict that by 2050, every page will be owned by Josh Lewis... [shudder]

Kidding!