Neophiteat48 wrote: Let's say for example, a route page has a score of 89%. And there are 40 votes of "10" from SPers that have not climbed the route. And there is 1 Sper that has, and he/she gives a "9". There is far more credibility to the 9.

Your point is very good.

But, your hypothetical situation would never occur on SP. C'mon, who would ever vote a 9? Never seen anything less than a 10.

jdzaharia wrote:

Neophiteat48 wrote: Let's say for example, a route page has a score of 89%. And there are 40 votes of "10" from SPers that have not climbed the route. And there is 1 Sper that has, and he/she gives a "9". There is far more credibility to the 9.

Your point is very good.

But, your hypothetical situation would never occur on SP. C'mon, who would ever vote a 9? Never seen anything less than a 10.

Because a 9 lowers the score. Might as well go all in and vote a 1. There's a few of those out there.

Neophiteat48 wrote:I'm saying that if you do not read the book, you can not critique it. So, if you haven't climbed the mouintain, how can you read a mountain/route page and know if it is accurate, helpful, etc.? It may look great but that doesn't make it so and you do not have any experience of that mountain/route fo know.

But, I'm not saying there is a right or wrong answer here. Just that what I'm suggesting make some sense. Let's say for example, a route page has a score of 89%. And there are 40 votes of "10" from SPers that have not climbed the route. And there is 1 Sper that has, and he/she gives a "9". There is far more credibility to the 9. You have 1 person who puts up the page and we all utilize some of the info when planning climbs. Especially us NooBs and there would be more credibilty for the pages when they have been rated by those who have made the climb.

I have rated a few pages that I haven't experienced yet but it kinda' makes sense to me that the page rating becomes more credible when those who have done it, vote on it.

It's extremely naive to think that a score of less than 10 has anything to do with the credibility of the person who voted that way. That would mean that you trust what people do on the internet... big mistake normally. There are a few people here though who I would trust in terms of their rating and opinion of the page. But not many. The most informative info on a mountain or route page for me is a map or GPS track, which is absent on most pages anyways.

I generally agree that one should only put up a page (mountain or route) if she/he did it. Voting is completely subjective and in my eyes should not be taken as a token for credibility... ever. Most votes are sympathy votes anyways or "I vote for you, you vote for me" votes...

SoCalHiker wrote:Most votes are sympathy votes anyways or "I vote for you, you vote for me" votes...

I think that is more true for photos than for other items like mountain pages. But what is a sympathy vote? Vote for someone because you feel sorry for them?

BTW- I really liked the flower you posted today... booo....

As I recall, the rule on SP is not to post a page unless you've climbed it. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule. You might say don't vote on a page unless the submitter signs the summit log, but that doesn't work because you have people like Corax who puts up the best stuff on this site (in my opinion) and does not sign summit logs. When I vote, I vote on content, and not accuracy. In the past, after I've climbed something and found inaccuracies, I make it a point to contact the submitter and ask that he correct it.

If you post a mountain or route report I think it's best to have climbed it yourself. But then there's the case of Elizabeth Hawley who is the undisputed expert on Himalayan mountaineering in Nepal. World famous climbers often ask her advice on the history of a route before attempting a great peak. Elizabeth is 87, lives in Nepal and has never climbed a mountain in her life!
I believe the same holds true of Kurt Diemberger's father.

mrchad9 wrote:I think that is more true for photos than for other items like mountain pages. But what is a sympathy vote? Vote for someone because you feel sorry for them?

BTW- I really liked the flower you posted today... booo....

True, it's more relevant to photos in general. It's more like sympathy-gathering votes, I guess.

Anyhow, the whole voting system is flawed anyways, but that's a different story.

I vote for content and presentation on a mountain/route page. If I was there and detect inaccuracies I will comment on it.

Thanks... post a pic and I will vote without looking at it

mrchad9 wrote:Go climb Mt Barnard or Morrison this summer. A fun outing and then you can post some snarky comment on the quality of Chief's pages. (such as on his not very robust directions for the Tobacco Flats 4x4 road!)

OK, that reminds me to go sprinkle a few 10-votes around the Morrison page. But you'd have got the votes a lot sooner if the Tobacco Flats access road had been in giant red letters, so maybe I wouldn't have decided to go up the east slope variation and down the regular east slope route, not exactly the solid Sierra granite you guys are always braqgging about.

BorutKantuser wrote:I don't get it.

If you want to say: I climbed this or that, you use the Climber's Log.

Or you spray by voting on the route quality, which should be a garanty that you climbed the route (or that you bailed because it was too loose, f.i.).

The power votes are page votes .

You can also make a Comment to a vote you just made

etc, etc

I think there's a lot of ways of expressing oneself on SP, from simple to very complex.

Just imagine what so many people would give for the right to vote

Wow, prety deep BK

FAQ 2.4 & 2.5.

Whether you vote before or after you climb the mountain isn't that important, unless it's important to YOU. If you find the page is really good or lousy AFTER you've climbed said mountain, certainly vote accordingly. You could vote a 10 on the page, go climb the mountain, find out the page sucks and come back and change your vote. There's really no right way or wrong way to vote.

Most seasoned SP folks will/should vote on content and amount of information. IF they feel so inclined.

On route pages, you can vote on the QUALITY OF THE ROUTE (stars) if you feel so inclined. This is NOT A VOTE FOR THE PAGE ITSELF, but for the ACTUAL ROUTE and what you thought of it.

Voting on photos is a very subjective thing so I won't get into that.

From my point of view, as an ancient SP contributor:

Voting helps devoted contributors determine what they need to do to improve their page and overall contributions. It's SP's measuring stick (although flawed) so content can be presented in searches comprehensively, such as by score, hits, etc.

If you're a lurker, if you could care less about contributions, if you're not that concerned about realibility of information, DMT's right. It matters not a hoot.

But Borut has the right idea. People like to be part of something, they like to be interactive in a community of like minded folks. SP is certainly that. Voting is one avenue for folks to be a part of SP without putting the work into a contribution. And for the contributors, it's nice to know when your hard work is appreciated, or when your work could be improved, too.

Like it or not, flawed as it is, voting does have an important part to play in SP's daily operation. If it's important to you, that's great. If not, then don't vote. That's the beauty of SP. It can be used to whatever degree that best suits the user at that time.

Good discussion!

DMT:

What I said was the SP voting system serves no useful purpose.

For you, yes. For others, no.

The votes do not indicate some particular mountain or route attribute. A score in and of itself cannot be used in any useful way of making a mountain or route selection.

Agreed.

Its been underway some time now, but SP seems no longer to be dominated by the couple of dozen contributors that once represented the core group focus. BUILD OUT!

Agreed. This is a good thing.

Now its evolving into a users group and as such the vote system is completely useless. It was never designed for the users, has always been a plaything and a club, of the contributors.

It's certainly been used as a club in the past and will continue to be used as such in the future, regardless how we feel about it, It is also used by the contributors for any number of positive purposes. Most new contributions aren't voted on or receive very few votes, and that's fine too. The de-emphasis on voting has certainly arrived. People who like using it will continue to do so. De-emphasis on the voting though isn't bad, either.

Thanks for clarifying for me.

Very well said Aaron, especially liked your first post. Agree with it 100%.

Good ole boys-that's pretty good. We still have the good ole boys here at SP. Most of'em are pretty good folk, too. I've had the pleasure of meeting and climbing with a fair number of them too. No wonder SP has turned out so well!

I suppose when SP was getting started, it had to be that way. I joined the good ol' boys shortly after they got SP going. It was the only way back then to get SP going.

So yeah, the club was there. Still is.

And yeah, the club has been used to clobber folks in the past. Some had it coming, others did not. Sarah.simon has made a real good post in the Bad Submissions section about being helpful to new contributors. This is certainly how it should be done now on today's SP. The "good ole boys" days are in the past. With so many good examples of good contributions out there to show as examples, it's the best way to go about it.