Better standards for SP membership?

Minimally moderated forum for climbing related hearsay, misinformation, and lies.
User Avatar
scramblingbadger

 
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:28 am
Thanked: 11 times in 5 posts

Better standards for SP membership?

by scramblingbadger » Thu May 24, 2018 1:30 am

I saw this comment posted to one of Afzal's photos: https://www.summitpost.org/view_object. ... 146#503146 This is not the only criticism this character has posted about member's contributions.

Why do we allow "members" who can enter the site and post all kinds of crap, yet not give us a hint or clue about themselves? Is this really a sign of good membership standards for SP? Reminds me of a request I received from a SP "member" last year for a commitment for some hiking in the Black Hills. This person was not even willing to give any information about themselves whatsoever. If SP is to be taken seriously, how about tightening the requirements for membership? Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

User Avatar
ZeeJay

 
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:04 am
Thanked: 55 times in 40 posts

Re: Better standards for SP membership?

by ZeeJay » Fri May 25, 2018 7:54 pm

You asked, so here are my thoughts.

I looked at some of his other comments and he seems to be somewhat of a plant expert. The comment to which you refer comes across as abrasive and not well meant, but he is perhaps right. (I wouldn't know.) He seems to be treating SP as though it were a scholarly journal or some such thing. I suspect that all of his comments are 100% accurate but could be put more diplomatically. I also suspect that he is in the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent of meticulous beings and most people would find him quite grating, but if he were to add anything himself, it would be perfect.

As to "This person was not even willing to give any information about themselves whatsoever", he at least provided his real name which is more than can be said for you or me.

I don't think he should be booted from SP. I don't think his comments are crap, but do find them abrasive, but for all we know, the author of the page could have asked him for feedback or id help and he was expressing frustration at there not being the appropriate kinds of pictures from which to id the plants.

As to membership standards, I think there is more concern at the moment of members becoming inactive.

The following user would like to thank ZeeJay for this post
butitsadryheat


Return to Ethics, Spray, and Slander

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests