|
dingus
Jul 12, 2006, 2:41 PM
Post #1 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Particularly since I was told only last night that my request to edit my own content on the thread in question wouldn't be allowed because it's sufficiently buried and no one really reads it anymore.
Do we own our own data, or not? It is cut and dried, that simple.
And the answer on rocknannys.com is the same as it has always been...
NO.
We do NOT own our own data on this site and apparently never will. You hit the send button and they own it. For a sthat lives breathes and dies on user input this is SHAMEFUL.
You need to start paying people for their submission, imo.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 12, 2006, 11:32 PM
Post #2 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Dingus, you'll be interested to know that Tim the code guru is now writing code so that even in locked threads a user can edit their own content.
The thread that Amber refers to was locked around 2 years ago with her full knowledge and approval. This was done to protect her information which was bieng drowned by some rather ugly and nasty trolls. The thread was indeed dead and buried under 2 years worth of posts. We did this with the best of intentions and as mentioned with the full knowledge and blessing of the OP. Now 2 years later the OP wants the decision reversed talk about fickle. I feel like I have had sand kicked in my face over this. Yeah please protect me from the bullies, oh OK, zap, the thread is locked. Now 2 years later I'm getting dogpiled for something that we did to accomodate a user.
Well the thread may just be unlocked and everyone can have at it. No way am I going to make that mistake again. Sheesh, try to do the right thing and it is never right. Reminds me of that saying, if a man asks a question and a woman is not around to hear him, is he still wrong? Damned if I do and damned if I don't. Tell me dingus what would you have done? I tell ya I need the wisdom of Solomon in this job.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jul 12, 2006, 11:38 PM
Post #3 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Hey Phil, no good deed goes unpunished, eh?
But to say it's fickle to change your mind 2 years later... well, a lot can change in two years. There might be unanticipated consequences, that you want to correct. There might be a NYT article. And you might go back, thinking you are entitled to edit your own posts, per site policy, be denied, and be annoyed about that.
But anyway...
I'd like to echo dingus's statements in the other thread about you, tim and jay. I don't always agree, but I think you guys do a good job most of the time.
Cheers,
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Jul 12, 2006, 11:41 PM
Post #4 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ philbox ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wouldn't it have been shorter and more to the point to just admit that there was a bug/oversight in the code and leave it at that? :?
I commend you for staying relatively sane while the mods are being shat on, but if at the end of the day it was a technical 'glitch' that prevented someone from editing their post, then that is what it was and it wasn't your fault.
Asking Dingus for advice isn't going to help you :wink:
Edit, 'cause someone posted between phil and me....
Edit x2, what would appear to be 'fickle' behavior may well be just that, but it would have gone completely unnoticed by all if the OP had been able to edit her post from the beginning (and, as I understand it, the way it should have been).
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 12, 2006, 11:49 PM
Post #5 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Tell me dingus what would you have done? I tell ya I need the wisdom of Solomon in this job.
Hmmm, about the good Dr I presume?
Setting aside the validity of some of his issues with the management AT THAT TIME, what would I have done?
It woulda been wrong back then probably. But now I have come to believe in the supertaco 'Whack-A-Mole" moderation.
Its very simple... a user goes over the line and management doesn't like it, that user and all her posts are gone gone gone, no explanation necessary or expected. A total whack job, gone in 60 seconds, one or two SQL statements I suspect.
Anyway, no need for elaborate policies or 'fair enforcement.' No need for hand wringing or committee meetings. Just whack the fucker and bury the dead. But the thing is, at ST its the site owner that does it, not a 'volunteer.'
Summitpost took the original approach of keeping all mods anonymous. They were so anonymous that I didn't know there were any for over a year! They were doing their puritan mod thing and I didn't know about it and neither did anyone else. A slip of the fingers outted the policy and well, it still works but they've had their challenges.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? You see what I'm hinting at here Phil?
Now that has nothing whatsoever to do with my beef against site policy about user owned data. Competely different topic.
There is no justification for the lack of a user controlled delete button.
Now finally, back to the good Dr. It isn't fair to take his final days out of context without the leadup. He had mnajor problems with climbing noobs lording it over more experienced climbers, and all the little puritan things that went on back then. Amber was certainly a big part of that.
While he was (is) mean spirited, he didn't attack Amber because she fell off a mountain and we all know it. He attacked her because she was management and it served his meanness to do it, as well as make his central point.
I always felt that as long as mods and admins kept their prying fingers off my posts, I didn't care how experienced they were. Still don't for that matter.
But that was at the heart of it. It wasn't *just* him being a vicious asshole, though that was certainly the hemmeroidal part of it.
Rambking I know, you caught me off guard,.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:07 AM
Post #6 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Just so we are all clear, locked threads meant that nothing could be done in those threads including self editing. This will change when Tim finishes writing the code to allow self editing even in locked threads.
Dingus, we too have a whack a mole type site function. We can nuke a user and all of their posts and their profile are gone gone gone. We usually reserve this for the mrs. gumsunto's from Nigeria who is offering to give us millions of $. Our other tool is to use the perma tarpit, this way the users posts are preserved for all time thus showing the other user what a tool they have been. We rarely use this tool. One has to have had a long history of being a complete tool for this to have been used. We usually give far too many second chances.
Mostly we rely on user moderation and self moderation. In other words the users know best what behaviour they like to see around here. I trust the users to keep the other users in line through self policing of threads. For the mods all they really need to do is have a quiet word in the thread and things usually get back on track.
This policy has stood the site in good stead. We now no longer need to play net nanny as it should be. There is less of a need to have huge numbers of mods pouring over every post looking for small infractions. This is a good thing that we no longer have to do that.
We still need mods to move things around to more apropriate forums and to innject some advice from time to time into threads. We also need to remove double posts that the site somehow manages to drop in to threads from time to time. Of course we also reserve the right to hit spammers and scammers right between the eyes with the aforementioned nuke button.
We DO listen to the users, people of your standing dingus are listened to more intently, same goes for jt512 and others of his long standing connection to the site. I very much do apreciate the fact that you will spend the time to participate in making the site a better place. Same goes for all who participate in these types of threads. We can't improve if you don't voice your opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 12:18 AM
Post #7 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: Now 2 years later the OP wants the decision reversed talk about fickle. I feel like I have had sand kicked in my face over this. Yeah please protect me from the bullies, oh OK, zap, the thread is locked. Now 2 years later I'm getting dogpiled for something that we did to accomodate a user.
That thread was locked and removed, while we were told (lied to) that it was deleted and could not be recovered. A huge rue ensued, followed by a couple of weeks of debate, followed by decisions, folowed by the thread *magically* reappearing in Community, with orders to edit/remove any images or context that was "presumed" to be inappropriate. -- Inapproppriate for whom; the Pope or Ron Jeremy..? The thing is, there was nothing in that thread that was even remotely beyond PG-13 and/or isn't shown on prime time television every night. Hell, daytime soaps are far far worse, then there's Jerry Springer!
But hey Phil, you've now called Amber "fickle" in 2 different threads this evening (clearly kicking the sand in her eyes!), so I hope you feel good about yourself and the official Admin stance you've taken.
Go ahead and kick some more sand in Ambers face, because I doubt she's had enough lately! :evil:
{edited, because it isn't fucking worth it!}
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 12:19 AM
Post #8 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
You asked me what I would do. I wouldn't lock threads, edit posts, none of that crap. If I deciced a poster was over the line. WHACK! No explanation, no 2nd chance, GONE. And I wouldn't wring my hands about it after the fact. I wouldn't leave their bloody entrails as an example either, as I don't think what was done with ptpp was right either.
A poster goes, all her posts should go with her, every last one of them. GONE.
That's what I would do.
Now how bout that delete button?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:23 AM
Post #9 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
It's happening dude, just gotta give the code guys the time to write it.
tgreene, huh, water under the bridge now mate, keep on dredging though.
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Jul 13, 2006, 12:34 AM
Post #11 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
In reply to: The thread that Amber refers to was locked around 2 years ago with her full knowledge and approval. The thread was indeed dead and buried under 2 years worth of posts.
Now this concerns me.
I would like to think that the crap I pull out of my ass and post on here will be around for everyone to scratch their head at for years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:52 AM
Post #12 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
In reply to: In reply to: tgreene, huh, water under the bridge now mate, keep on dredging though. Water under the bridge for whom..? You'll notice I removed portions of my post, but you made my point for me. How can something so unresolved, ever be considered water under the bridge..? :evil:
So feel free to PM me with any unresolved issues and I will gladly try to resolve said issues. You should understand though at the outset that I am in an advanced stage of Alzheimers, in other words something that may be a huge deal for you may in fact not be that big a deal for me and in all likelyhood I may well have forgotten a lot of the background to the issue.
That said if I have insulted you in the past then let me apologise unreservedly. Yes we do discuss issues in the mods and eds forum and undubtably your name may have come up in relation to certain threads. As dingus pointed out I am quite opinionated, I have never seen myself as such so I may have to take a closer look at how I post so that I do not overwhelm others. You too are fairly strongly opinionated and attract your share of detractors. I've never seen myself as amongst those.
I have defended you in the past tgreene when issues came up. I can't remeber the specific instance that you mentioned but then edited out as to who said what aboutn whom. You obviously got something third hand and took it to heart. As I said, sorry if you got a bad impression of me. I do like to think that I try to be likeable to all, I don't succeed at times. The current broohaha is a case in point. I let things get to me, I'm only human like the rest of you.
Do I need to justify my continuing position as an admin to you, nope. I do try to be fair and to make the place a better place for you the users to enjoy. I do this without recompense. I don't get paid to waste my time here, same as you, same as pretty much all of us. I spend my time hanging out here because I enjoy the friendly repartee with people like yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 12:56 AM
Post #13 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
Gimmie a handjob, and we'll call it square! :boring:
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 13, 2006, 1:27 AM
Post #15 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
If you are gonna have a kill button that powerfull it would be nice if you gave posters a chance to repent before you killed them. Everyone drivels something bad once in a while. late, tired, drunk whatever. Give em one chance to repent and if you don't like the tone of their reply then you kill em.
|
|
|
|
|
wideguy
Jul 13, 2006, 1:41 AM
Post #17 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15046
|
This part of the conversation is pretty pointless.
What you put on the web is permanently recorded in probably a hundred different places within 36 hours of you posting it. Edge nailed it, if you think you might even remotely possibly regret your words at a later date, better not put it out.
If it gives someone the warm fuzzies to be able to edit their words on this or any other site, I say let them go nuts. The original words are still out there, somewhere, and they will crop back up again if it interests someone.
Let Amber edit, don't let Amber edit, it doesn't matter. Her words will still be out there.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 1:58 AM
Post #18 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
So Wide, are you actually suggesting that soliciting a handjob from Phil may come back to hurt me..?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I guess he'll just have to use more lotion then! :mrgreen:
|
|
|
|
|
ddt
Jul 13, 2006, 4:26 AM
Post #20 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 2304
|
While this post does not answer the question (yet), it does share some thinking on the topic.
DDT
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Jul 13, 2006, 7:20 AM
Post #21 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
not editing anything in a locked thread is a standard property of phpbb. it just didnt backfire before so nobody saw a need to change it. now we all see that need and theres no need to start bickering about it.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Jul 13, 2006, 12:00 PM
Post #22 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
as for owning data...here's my take on it:
when i post something on rc.com, or myspace or wherever, the sentences and words i post are changed into digital form, ultimately represented by zeros and ones. put them together in another way--the 0's and 1's that is, not the words--and you basically get a really big number.
one single number.
how can i own the number 45?
it's an interesting question, dingus, and i'm not being cute.
but with this (relatively) new form of communication, message boards, forums, usenet, etc, comes new protocols for how things work. and despite having been around for decades, i think the internet/www is still in it's infancy.
things won't start to gel, i don't think, until we see the kids who are just getting out of diapers now hit maturity. i'm guessing most of us who use this site are all old enough to remember a time before email was an everyday office and home thing. before google and myspace and everything.com.
of course, since we all remember that, when we become/became exposed to this new internets, we based how we interact on what we did before. telephone calls. written letters. actual thumbtack and paper message boards. this works on certain levels, and on certain levels it breaks down.
my point about things not gelling until the diaper brigade grows up has to do with them not remembering other forms of communication. memos, typewritten forms, film cameras. to them, the internet has always existed.
when cars first were introduced, someone had to decide which side of the road to drive on. since horse drawn carriages were typically driven with the driver on the left, someone put the steering wheel on the left. this is a sensible transitional thing, as you need to steer both a carriage and a car. but what about speed limits? parking? licensing? surely what worked for the horse and buggy would and did not transfer over. and along the way, i'm sure some mistakes were made in the decision making process...
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 2:45 PM
Post #23 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Wow how funny and ironic to see Dingus support CENSORSHIP aka Whack-a-mole. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Yeah well roughster you can't EDIT THESE WORDS.
You were the poster child of meddelsome people editing words that weren't yours, often AFTER arguing with the participants of a particular thread.
You were replaced with a string of computer code. The code does a much better job than you ever did.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 13, 2006, 3:57 PM
Post #24 of 35
(9114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: not editing anything in a locked thread is a standard property of phpbb. it just didnt backfire before so nobody saw a need to change it. now we all see that need and theres no need to start bickering about it.
Bingo. I added a few lines that make an exception for the original author of a post (and no one else) to edit even in locked threads or fora. I believe the diff was about 7 or 8 lines, nothing special. The changes have been live since yesterday around lunchtime (when I had time to make them).
This issue simply hadn't come up before. I'm kind of reluctant to work on the old codebase when I ought to be spending any available time on the new (Gossamer) plug-ins, but this was obviously necessary to bring the workings of the current software in line with our expressed policies.
To wit: You own your words; we republish them on the web. You can edit them (or remove the text entirely), but you can't un-write them. Once they're out there, and other people read, quote, or respond to them, you've set events into motion that cannot be undone. I don't think this is unreasonable, especially since there's nothing we can do about realities like the Googlebot caching the text of your posts at any given point in time.
Nonetheless, we have always maintained that authors (and only the authors) are free to edit the stored text of their submissions as they see fit. (Furthermore, we do not delete the text of posts that moderators mark 'deleted'; they are simply not retrieved from the database when a topic is viewed. So the griping about heavy-handed deletions within the thread are also irrelevant -- they can be reversed with one line of SQL. The only person who can irrevocably destroy a post is the author.) The workings of the software (some of the small fraction of the original phpBB code that remains in our deployment) were inconsistent with this, so I patched it to bring it into line with our policies and expectations. Feel free to verify this yourself by editing a post of your own within a locked thread. And please quit pointing fingers at people like Phil and Jay who had nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 4:10 PM
Post #25 of 35
(9112 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dingus, You can try diversion tactics all you want, the fact remains your flip-flop is nicely recorded on the net. The high and mighty Dingus supporting censorship, what is the world coming to. You want a little ketchup with that crow?
Sure, catsup and crow sounds fine. So what? I've modified my opinion a slight bit. I've changed.
But I see you haven't. Edit THIS.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 4:44 PM
Post #26 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dingus in order to tell me I have or haven't changed or even know where I stand on any particular issue, you would need to have the slightest clue as to what I am all about. You don't, and no amount of pretending will make it so.
Point taken. I'll eat my crow. I'd rather see whack-a-mole moderation to what was here in your time though. Now please pass that ketchup roughster, crow by itself is a little gamey.
Cheers ya bastard!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 6:26 PM
Post #27 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I'm not keeping score Dingus, just surprised to see you waffle on something that was always such an almighty and unbending core tenant of your paranoia.
Its very simple roughster. This site doesn't own my words, nor do the volunteers. If they want to own them they need to buiy them. This site lives off freely submitted contributions. I've seen some mountaineering sites built 100% from user input, where user copyright and data ownership are respected. Users can leave and take their marbles with them. To my way of thinking that's how you run an open source site.
DMT
ps. I know it seems like paranoia to you, but I saw the results of human mods. Had these mods exercised some restraint I wouldn't feel so strongly about it. The climate of rc.com has improved markedly since auto moderation replaced the nannys.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Jul 14, 2006, 6:38 AM
Post #28 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
man, i REALLY miss some of those ppl. especially rrradam and passthepitonspete. i was really sad to see them go.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jul 14, 2006, 3:55 PM
Post #29 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: I'm not keeping score Dingus, just surprised to see you waffle on something that was always such an almighty and unbending core tenant of your paranoia. Most of the times it is seems like you would cease to exist if there weren't evil moderators to fear. You know doing silly stuff like removing posts and comments like, " f--- your momma!!!!!!" over and over. And lets not forget this was when moderators were tasked to do exactly that by the Admins... Now that you have joined the rank and file, who will fight the good fight? Who misconstrue the obvious and point it out to the stupid? Who will rally against the people who actually made the site worth visiting? DDT should be wondering why the content of the site has gone down hill to be absolutely a joke and yet people like Dingus remain as active as ever.
This post is totally insane.
Content gone downhill, eh? In YOUR (worthless) opinion maybe.
People like Arno and sterlingjim are not on that OLD list, they didn't even start really psoting til fairly recently in terms of the site starting, yet they do a lot to make this site worthy.
Rgold is not on the list.
Karl baba and Brutus of Wyde are not on the list.
Healeyje is not on the list.
Subtle is not on the list.
There are a lot more I can't think of right now, but you get the idea.
These guys may not have a million posts, or a lot of photos, and they don't start a lot of threads, but when they do post is it worthy, and they contribute far more than most of the people on that old list.
NOW, rc.com in it's heyday???? Give me a break, rc.com has not hit its heyday yet.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 14, 2006, 4:42 PM
Post #30 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: This site doesn't own my words, nor do the volunteers. If they want to own them they need to buy them. This site lives off freely submitted contributions.
No argument here. I've always maintained that was the case; in the instances where users were functionally prevented from editing or redacting their input, I have made the necessary changes to bring the software into line with user expectations. Daniel and his wife, perhaps more than anyone else involved with the site, are acutely aware of the vagaries of copyright law, and no claim has been made that the site somehow 'owns' your works. That claim would be untenable in a court of law, and any decent lawyer would tear it to shreds. So this and the following statement strike me as straw men.
In reply to: I've seen some mountaineering sites built 100% from user input, where user copyright and data ownership are respected. Users can leave and take their marbles with them. To my way of thinking that's how you run an open source site.
I (heart) SummitPost too, but you can't realistically believe that your data is particularly safe over there. Try getting in touch with Josh, for example. Furthermore, I'd like to see some concrete examples where, as a matter of policy (rather than technical impediment), the sites have diverged on the matter. We are obligated and bound by law to respect user copyrights.
At every opportunity along the way, I (and others involved with managing the site) have taken steps to strengthen authors' sole control over the text of their posts, articles, and photographs, whilst removing temptations for anyone else to interfere with the works. The decision is reduced to a judgement call -- shall we pay the bandwidth costs to re-publish this item, or is it in conflict with the goals of the site? This is no different from the decisions made by SuperTopo or SummitPost. Trolls there get no more respect than trolls here; it is intellectually dishonest to pretend otherwise.
Aaron (roughster) put a lot of energy into improving the site, its tenor, and documenting the routes he developed. For that reason alone, you might give his argument some weight. Nonetheless, Aaron is mistaken if he believes that the tools for a moderator to change the visibility of posts, threads, and photographs, or to merge and split collective works in a rational way, have been diminished. If anything, they have been expanded, to permit finer-grained control over the actions taken. Perhaps this contributes to the less visible nature of moderation. Threads can be marked as "do not echo to the front page", split, merged with similar topics, or their collective title changed without affecting the content -- these actions do not provoke the sort of outcry that more heavy-handed interference traditionally has. (Users who claim they possess a divine right for their works to be republished on our tab are sorely mistaken. Please do take your marbles elsewhere if you must make that claim -- there are plenty of free blog services on the Web.)
The perceived lack of moderation is mostly a result of scale; we have enormously more users today than even a year ago, to say nothing of the explosion of new users and content that took place between 2002 and 2005. Meanwhile the ranks of the moderators have not increased apace with growth. One approach which I have proposed is randomly handing the controls to a sample of the top-ranked contributors, beginning with the forums and perhaps expanding elsewhere, to do with as they please, simply because, as a proxy for the overall tenor of the user base, they may well know what's best. In addition, since all of their actions are audited and reversible (just like regular moderators), there are no long-term ramifications that can't be undone. In my view, the major benefit of this strategy would be greater user self-interest, and better awareness of the balance between freewheeling chaos and stifled "high-quality" discourse that the site attempts to strike. As with vote allocation, the degree of uncertainty might help to motivate people to exercise their powers as they see fit, and of course the same feedback loop ("foo_bar deleted your thread Fucking Shitpiss!!!1" in the perpetrator's inbox, and so forth) exists as for appointed moderators in the current system. If nothing else, it would be interesting, and the allocation of mod priveleges is a once-a-day process so it wouldn't slow the site down any further than it already is.
Every so often I get an idea like this, and most of the time they turn out to be worthless, but once in a while something sticks (the tarpit, the user vote feedback loop, PM notification of moderator actions, and so on). At least as often, a user proposes something and it turns out to be a great idea. That's always been the primary impetus for progress on the site. (How else?!?)
You (Dingus) and Aaron (Roughster) represent the two sides of the coin -- is anarchy preferable to fascist autocracy? Both have their pluses and minuses; personally, I find that neither is an acceptable long-term solution for the majority of the site's visitors.
In reply to: ps. I know it seems like paranoia to you, but I saw the results of human mods. Had these mods exercised some restraint I wouldn't feel so strongly about it. The climate of rc.com has improved markedly since auto moderation replaced the nannys.
The climate may have improved, but the signal-to-noise ratio seems to have suffered a bit. If it were possible to address both concerns, this site might really hit its stride. My interest in the site (aside from a steady supply of alpine partners) has often centered on how to harness individual self-interest to better serve a common goal of increased information quality. (As I've often noted, I'd rather see a quality troll than inoffensive pablum.)
If we find something that ''works'', sustainably, that will be a major step.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 14, 2006, 5:12 PM
Post #31 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
tim
Thanks as always for the measured reponse.
Just a few comments:
1. I acknowledge roughsters considerable contributions to this site. He and I have a personal history that predates rc,com and it used to get in our way. He's cool (now that his finger is off the edit button)
2. There are many, many factors that affect signal to noise ratio.
3. You can be as autocratic as you want. The more of that you have, the more original content you will have to dream up yourselves or buy.
4. I'm not suggesting this site 'be like summitpost.' But I think the contrast is appropriate. A long time member there, ID irrelevant, put in ptpp amounts of work into building mountain pages. He was also had an irristable urge to troll and flame viciously. This led to numerous flame wars and long term grudges. Like has happened hear with a few prolific flame lords, he eventually deciced it was best to withdraw from the site.
When he departed he took his work with him. This was a butt load of work and it defintely 'hurt' the site when he deleted it. But management did not try to stop him, other than through the power of persuasion. The holes he left were adopted by others and life went on. But summitpost showed its true colors in tha moment, sticking to principle when it really counted.
Data safe? Safety isn't the issubuddy, control is the issue.
When folks like ptpp here were aked/decided to leave, they were either prevented or some significant obstacles were put in thier paths to prevent them from taking back what was theirs all along.
THAT ATTITUDE MUST DIE if you want to truly respect user owned data. When an admin presumed to edit ptpp's work while ptpp was prevented access, well that scared me and scarred me. Now we're past all that and things are much better.
But this thread didn't come about just because of the huge fall post. Not to point fingers but a prominent admin responded by saying we needed more accountability and we should stick by what we post, or words to that effect. It was just a statement of opinion on his part, but it was that management attitude to which I reacted.
Its still extremely difficult to withdraw data from this site.
Cheers
DMT
ps. Routes database, I think the SP model, with html page blanks and single adoption rights for particular areas, is the way to go forward.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jul 14, 2006, 7:05 PM
Post #32 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: Gimmie a handjob, and we'll call it square! :boring: Ahahahahaha, too funny.
It would *really* have been funny coming from pinktricam.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jul 14, 2006, 7:53 PM
Post #33 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Please pardon the thread drift, but Dingus, I disagree that the ownership issue is the primary problem.
I think the low signal to noise ratio here these days is more to do with the fact that rc.com seems to have passed a tipping point of noob usership. It now seems that the only folks who feel comfortable are noobs, those who prey on them, and those who cater to them. Most other folks are slowly wandering away.
One exception: some of the communities. There are subtents here under the big tent that are thriving. Especially those that are not in direct competition with mountainproject (such as massclimbers and euroclimbers).
Just my $.02
Happy weekend everyone - be safe and get in lots-o-climbing!
GO
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jul 14, 2006, 9:27 PM
Post #34 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
In reply to: In reply to: ps. I know it seems like paranoia to you, but I saw the results of human mods. Had these mods exercised some restraint I wouldn't feel so strongly about it. The climate of rc.com has improved markedly since auto moderation replaced the nannys. Lets see if I can summarize RC as of late: Tightly moded site = Lots of good info, original posts, and easily the #1 climbing resource on the net. The Aholes were shot down immediately, the good content was left to shine. Code run site = Not a single thing worth reading in several months, and the number of good posts over the last year being able to be counted on one hand (hell you could even use someone who has lost one finger).
Respectfully, words cannot describe how vehemently I disagree with you.
In reply to: The useless and meaningless posts rule the roost, and it shows in a big way, since there may be good posts lurking in the heaping pile of feces but who has the time to wade through and find them??
It seems as though that is a direct contradiction to your first point. What, pray tell is an example of a good climbing site? A sawbuck says that if it had as many active users and posts per day as this one, it would be worse.
In reply to: The people who MADE this site worth visiting are either gone or leaving. Go back and look at RC in its heyday. It was always a few people putting out the quality material and those same people who were filtering out the crap that runs rampant now on the front page.
Here you go.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...he_rock_warriors_way
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...ety_test_discussions
http://www.rockclimbing.com/photo/photo_list.php
http://www.rockclimbing.com/post/1404413#1404413
Off the top of my head, there's your four-fingered hand. If you like, I'll provide more examples of unique, useful, and NEW content.
In reply to: IMO you and a few of the other more paranoid users got their wish, aka the removal of the very people who made this site what it was in the first place. And now you are left with the usual day to day s--- we see here day in day out.
But by your own admission, you're not here day in, day out. I'm not trying to be flippant or contrarian. I'm just trying to figure out on what your opinion is based, since none of us ever see you around here much anymore. Your friends are gone? The people you respected are gone? I'm sorry to hear that, but many of those I still enjoy and respect are still here.
Perhaps no more than ever the phrase, "it's what you make of it," is appropriate. You have presented your opinions about the site as if they are fact incarnate, when really, they're only your opinions. They're valid opinions, to be fair... but they're still only opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
anson
Jul 16, 2006, 4:28 AM
Post #35 of 35
(3261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Posts: 658
|
In reply to: You want to see who made this site? ( Here) In reply to: Top Contributors by Points: Who has added the most content? Your guess is as good as mine. But if you could possibly quantify the amount of content people add, the following people could be on your list in the following order.
FWIW, the "ranking" system was either turned off or broken a long time ago. The list quoted is an artifact of an earlier time, and of no use whatsoever in evaluating who has contributed meaningfully to the site to date. It wasn't even a particularly effective measure even when it was actively maintained; that's why it was discontinued.
-aB
|
|
|
|
|
|
