Quality Slipping?

[Bubba Suess]

In the past, when bad pages were submitted on Summitpost, it seemed that people (myself included) pounced on them and they were either improved as a reaction or deleted. This was an obvious good, since the user screening kept the standards for submissions higher at the front end and prevented a bunch of crud from cluttering up Summitpost. It seems to be that things have gone lax and nowadays pages make it through that never would have in the past.

A few examples:

Bennett Mountain

Mount Carmine

Mount Harriman

The first page is worthless. The second and third pages at least attempt to have some content and images but there is a general paucity of both. Of the content for these two, the bulk is a quote from another site, an offense that would have produced a strong reaction in the past. I am sure there are other pages like these, but these are the ones I remembered off the top of my head (it does not hurt that two are near me and the third is in my hometown). I think the Bennett Mountain page should get dinged right away while the author of the other two should be encouraged to invest a little more into his pages.

This is not intended to be a "Summitpost is doomed" post. Rather, I want to encourage people to maintain the site's standards and vote down on garbage or leave comments exhorting improvement.

[Josh Lewis]

I will second what Bubba says. There needs to be a standard. Or else not only will it "clutter SP" but people who are willing to do a great job will not be able to post the proper information. This is perhaps the biggest down fall of SummitPost. (Every site out there has it's down falls)

[lcarreau]

Hint to the Elf Masters ..

I don't think the "quality" is slipping with members like this ..

http://www.summitpost.org/users/dolly2008/102755

[Josh Lewis]

She even made a post in plans in partners: http://www.summitpost.org/plans/climbin ... peaks/9635

[Bubba Suess]

Hint to the Elf Masters ..

I don't think the "quality" is slipping with members like this ..

http://www.summitpost.org/users/dolly2008/102755

Does anyone else think this is creepy?

[Baarb]

Supposedly 'incomplete' pages were to be deleted by the powers that be within a couple of days of being first put up up to avoid this issue. Or so I thought.

Regardless, I think helpful comments rather than a barrage of 1 votes is more likely to engender more positive contributions in future. Certainly the FAQs section is too hard to find and the general expectations tricky to gauge if one is a new member. Further, usually at this stage in SPs life if a Mountain page doesn't exist already then it's likely that the only person that cares too much about the mountain is the person that makes the page so it's also understandable a little if the info is a bit scant initially. It can be the case one just wants to put something up to contribute a little of something they know. They don't necessarily expect a lot of attention.

[Josh Lewis]

@ Baarb. I know where your coming from and will agree with you to some level. (there are still many cases were new mountains are popular but are hard to get to which is why they were not already posted here) This is why I personally was and am still not a fan of private content. Quite a few of my pages I've pumped a lot of work into, but I wouldn't mind if members could add even more to it.

Regarding the first page, the owner logged in and showed interest in doing some work to it. Well see what happens.

[lcarreau]

Supposedly 'incomplete' pages were to be deleted by the powers that be within a couple of days ...

Very possible that the "powers that be" are on their HO HO HO Christmas vacation right now ... they'll get around to it after the Holidays ...

[Fred Spicker]

Hint to the Elf Masters ..

I don't think the "quality" is slipping with members like this ..

http://www.summitpost.org/users/dolly2008/102755

Does anyone else think this is creepy?

Yes, it appears that Icarreau has trouble dealing with women on this site - he occasionally posts very inappropriate comments with obvious immature sexual overtones. (I won't even get into how sick I am of the stupid little pictures that he has to post to nearly every forum.)

The follow up by Josh Lewis is particularly out of line, especially for someone who used to post on nearly every northwest climbing site on the Web searching for someone to climb with and was even banned from SP for a considerable period of time for lying about his background to get partners.

If you look at this woman's post it clearly states that she is a beginner trying to get into the sport, that she is taking a class and has a husband who will be joining her - she is not here trolling for dates and should not be subjected to ridicule.

In fact, here it is:

I am looking for climbing partners to climb local peaks such as Adams, Rainier, Cascades with me in early 2013 through September. I want to build a climbing resume and need some buddies. I am entry level. I am taking a beginning mountaineering course in May. My husband is entry level as well and will be climbing with me. So if there any of you beginners out there or just some climbers needing an extra climber, Please let me know.

[Bob Sihler]

Hoo boy...

Let's start with the OP.

Each elf has things he pays more attention to than others, and I think I'm the one most invested in checking on quality of new submissions; I especially watch the mountains, areas, routes, and canyons, and trip reports to a lesser extent. I pay virtually no attention to the other page types unless someone calls attention to them.

However, sometimes I miss something or see an incomplete page go up and forget to check up on it a couple days later. That's why it's helpful for members to point out bad pages.

I agree it's better for members to attempt to help rather than just ignore the bad stuff or wait for the elves to nuke away. More than one solid SP member started out as a shaky one who got some good help from seasoned members. For me, it was the much-respected, much-missed SaintGrizzly who stepped in and helped me out.

After seeing this thread yesterday, I was going to delete submission #1, but now that the author has logged back in, added a map, and pledged to improve the page soon, let's give the benefit of the doubt and wait.

As far as submissions 2 and 3 go, I can't see too much of an issue there. It's disappointing that the author copied so much text from another site, but he did at least credit the site rather than try to pass off plagiarism. And it's disappointing that he hasn't worked to display the pictures in the text on the main pages, but given the presence of pictures in the gallery and the attached route pages, all the necessary info is there and the pages fall under the guidelines of what a complete page is.

Could the pages be better? Yes. Are they deficient? No. Maybe it would be worth trying to work with the member to put more into the pages. On the other hand, keep in mind that maybe one can only do so much with peaks that are bushwhack routes to heavily forested summits; these are not alpine skyscrapers we're talking about, so opportunities to wax poetic about the beauty of the route or make us drool over stunning pictures may be extremely limited.

As I've said before, I sometimes worry that the proliferation of pages that go way beyond the tools SP provides seem to set a standard that is at once too high for most and perhaps intimidating to new members. It's great that some people put so much work into their pages, but let's not give the impression that every page needs to be a work of art.

I'm not insensitive to the concerns-- there are some pages on SP that went up just days before I climbed those peaks, and I was disappointed to see the pages fall far short of what I would have done with them, but in all cases, the pages were still sufficient, so I found other ways to communicate my knowledge and passion for those peaks. This meant route pages, trip reports, and photographs with informative captions.

Now the other issue.

Spammers and scammers often use undersized profile photos, and often of women, in order to appear more legit, and the better ones will put sneaky little links into seemingly legit posts, so I could understand an initial impression that this account is a phony one. However, nothing else about the account or the post, and this includes the email address and IP address, suggest anything false. If I end up wrong about that, so be it, but for now, I think that person may deserve an apology and a removal of the snarky post.

And Fred has a point about comments, and I'm not singling out lcarreau here. A number of times, I've seen and deleted inappropriate comments (on photos) made by strangers to female members about their looks and their bodies. It may seem harmless since it's between strangers over the Internet, but we ought to be more careful about what we post and how people may perceive it. While I am sure some members may appreciate such comments, I happen to know that some don't, and for them, it makes SP an unwelcoming place when all they wanted was to share and receive information about mountains.

We all like a pretty face, and it's not surprising or bad that attractive women seem to garner more votes and "Welcome!" comments to their profile pictures, but we should still keep in mind what's appropriate and what's not. So I'd have to say that the post about this new member, unless there was a valid belief that the person might be a spammer, wasn't a good idea.

[Matt Lemke]

Sad thing is...I have seen MANY pages much worse than the three the OP posted.

[Josh Lewis]

(I won't even get into how sick I am of the stupid little pictures that he has to post to nearly every forum.)

The follow up by Josh Lewis is particularly out of line, especially for someone who used to post on nearly every northwest climbing site on the Web searching for someone to climb with and was even banned from SP for a considerable period of time for lying about his background to get partners.

Larry is one of the most colorful members of SummitPost. I think your post is quite mean. I could see how you would be annoyed. I personally sent Larry a private message thanking him about a post he made yesterday. He uses humor and pictures to break up the craze that goes on in the forums. A bit different? Yes. But so am I! In real life I use a sense of humor that at times some might find strange. But in the end I know that I am uncompromising of being myself. I'm not hiding behind a mask to hide the autism that I have. So before you go out trashing Larry consider why he makes his post.

Regarding myself now. How was my post out of line? I mentioned that she made a post. I threw in the cool face icon because I thought it was cool. However it could have been interpreted as me trying to be inappropriate. I do not always expect people to think of my words in the worst case scenario. Or are you talking about the fact that I support a Wiki for SummitPost (deeming it out of line).

Fred, did you really have to wake that issue? Well here goes: I was banned October 23, 2007 for cheating the system for voting on 5-7 of my own pictures using a trick I knew. But in that I was not given a second chance because of my age. I was on the top 100 members. The person who banned me even said "I would have given him a second chance, but these teenagers, they never learn". I returned over and over because I wanted to prove a point. I wanted to show what happens when you ban a passionate mountaineer, writer, and photographer. There's more to it than that, but that's the story in a nutshell. In 2009 was the worst year in my entire life. I re-joined SummitPost under the identity "HikeMan". After climbing Mount Baker I wanted to climb Rainier very badly. I was sicked by the ideal that people could pay guides who have never set foot on a mountain in their entire life yet I been climbing mountains for years and was not supposed to climb it? Before the climb I practiced Z-Pully, prussiking, and have had training from friends of mine. Granted it would have been nice to have more. My big mistake was that I said "I'm willing to lead the way up Rainier". I should have said "wanting to climb Rainier". Too bad the evidence of the public thread is gone too because I actually had a decent case. On Baker I led the way, but was actually the lesser experience on glacier travel (my partner knew and was fine with it) which I unfortunately thought "well I led on Baker I can lead on Rainier". I was not clear enough with explaining the full situation. It's going to be a while, but I plan on actually writing an article about this whole conflict. So to wrap this part up I'll end by saying one of my favorite quotes:

"There's battle lines being drawn, nobody's right if everybody's wrong." -Buffalo Springfield

I did some things back in the day that were a bit crazy. But most climbs who climb with me now days respect me and continue to climb with me. I am not a mis-guided adventurer enthusiast. And while in the past there have been a lot of crazy things that happened in my time, I have come a long long ways! I have endured a lot. Some mountaineers were "born". And some were made.

[Bob Sihler]

Sad thing is...I have seen MANY pages much worse than the three the OP posted.

Please report bad pages. If you don't want to do it publicly, then send a PM to me or the elves.

But also keep in mind the purpose of SP, which is to provide first-hand beta. Some of us, myself included, frequently invest a chunk of our souls into the pages we make. Others are here just to share beta, and that is fine.

We who pour our passions into our pages need to remember that such is not the rule of the site. For a mountain page-- Does it tell some general information about the peak's significance? Can I get to the trailhead with just a map and the directions on the page? Either on the page or on an attached route page, can I learn about distance, elevation gain, and difficulty? Is there at least one picture showing us the peak?

When the answers to those questions are "Yes," then the page is adequate by the minimum standards. Weak, maybe. Deficient, maybe not.

It always sucks to see an underwhelming job on a nice peak. But that's why page transfers happen. Most who have worked with me would agree that with few exceptions, I am more than willing to transfer abandoned pages by inactive owners. The thornier issue is bad pages by active owners, and unfortunately, there is no easy answer to that one.

[Josh Lewis]

I agree it's better for members to attempt to help rather than just ignore the bad stuff or wait for the elves to nuke away.

This is one of the best statements in this thread. He's completely right. SummitPost is not like Facebook where they have a paid staff that removes bad content. It is up to us the members of SummitPost to help ensure this where ever possible. Whether it be by being a critique. Giving some helpful pointers in private. And perhaps down voting a page that deserves it. Obviously the admins play a important role, but so do we!

[chugach mtn boy]

... it appears that Icarreau has trouble dealing with women on this site ...

C'mon, Fred, he thought she was a spammer. I certainly would have.

Poor Larry has had a bit of trouble with being misunderstood lately.