|
cracklover
Aug 30, 2004, 2:11 PM
Post #1 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
I think the long-term goal of the beginners forum as per defined by Curt, Jay, and Tim is to have a set core group of experts.
Here's an idea: Have a sort of audition. Anyone who feels they're qualified to answer beginners' questions must submit an answer for the FAQ. For now, at least, Alpineclimbr1 has agreed to sort through stuff. That would get lots of good text for his FAQ. And it would give whoever makes the call on "appropriate" beginners Gurus plenty of applicants to choose from - and some writing to help tell who's willing and able to keep a topic clear, concise, and interesting. Tim, Curt, JT, Phil Box, what do you think? I think it's a win-win solution.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
chronicle
Aug 30, 2004, 2:41 PM
Post #2 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 664
|
So then would you only allow these hand picked people to reply to posts in the Beginners Forum?
If anyone can post a reply, then I think you end up at the exact same point you are now.
I had an idea at one point, but never stated it. It would be a "Ask the Expert" forum. Where there are hand picked "experts" that answer questions. The forum would be set up so that you could post a new question, and reply to your own thread. The only people that can reply to all the threads are the "experts".
Is that what the Beginners Forum is going to become?
|
|
|
|
|
itakealot
Aug 30, 2004, 2:46 PM
Post #3 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 382
|
what about placing the newb forum on a completely different URL, and charge for it, then taked the money and give it to the Access Fund?
|
|
|
|
|
pedro_burrito
Aug 30, 2004, 2:55 PM
Post #4 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2004
Posts: 142
|
You don't need an FAQ, you don't need a group of experts, you need to have a stock reply to any question in the beginners forum: read Freedom of the Hills. Anything written in response to a question in the Beginners Forum is either redundant to what is in Freedom of the Hills or it's wrong. If it's redundant then it's reinventing the wheel. If it's wrong then it's dangerous.
So, if someone wrote: "What's the best knot to tie two ropes together? "
The answer would be: read Freedom of the Hills.
That way there's no discussion of EDK's, figure 8's, double fishermans, how lame the American Mountain Guides Association is, how worthless the anchor is, etc.
Maybe RC.com can get a deal to put excerpts of Freedom of the Hills online and hot link to it.
|
|
|
|
|
fredrogers
Aug 30, 2004, 3:10 PM
Post #5 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2003
Posts: 288
|
FOTH is a mountaineering text. It is not the end-all-be-all of rock techniques. Yes, it's a good starting point but it's written from the point of view of Cascade mountain climbers.
That said, you're right that it could answer 85% of noob questions.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 30, 2004, 3:14 PM
Post #6 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: what about placing the newb forum on a completely different URL, and charge for it, then taked the money and give it to the Access Fund?
Would you pay money to be insulted by jt512?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
chronicle
Aug 30, 2004, 3:16 PM
Post #7 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 664
|
While FOTH is a great text, it doesn't answer every question. Some questions may come from someone that read all of the books available, and still can't find an answer to their scenario.
If you are looking for a forum to answer questions from gumbies, then (IMHO) the "Ask the Expert" idea would provide some solid information, without the chatter/flaming/off-subject talk that becomes of a lot of threads.
If you are looking for text for the FAQ, then I think FOTH can provide a lot of that.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 30, 2004, 3:16 PM
Post #8 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Man, ya gotta move fast around here!
In reply to: Here's an idea: Have a sort of audition for beginner's guru. Anyone who feels they're qualified to answer beginners' questions must submit an answer for the FAQ.
Cracklover, I love you like a brother man, I do. But I am about to skewer your idea anyway, sorry Bro.
An audition. To be qualified to post an answer to a beginner question to an internet forum about climbing. Answers that have all been asked and answered before, ad infinitum.
No offense, but you folks have gone round the bend with this beginners thing.
An audition. For a forum. Will you issue merit badges and anger management certificates too?
You good people are taking this beginners thing, and yourselves, WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. Chill out and you'll see, beginners aren't dying as a result of the reams of misinformation promulgated by rc.com. With a modest down side the up side will be of similar amplitude. The world's noobs are not going to be beating down your doors to submit ever new and interesting questions. So you're just working at making yourselves feel better about what is inherently 'internet blather.'
A great sound and fury for what will be a sandbox for 4 - 5 control-oriented people. And you've already seen a taste of their management styles, The Emperor's Decree. Very conducive for noobie posts, ayup.
Didn't use the right word? Try AGAIN!
Repetitive question? Search the freaking FAQ!
Modeator had a bad day? Your question is REJECTED!!!111
Becomes a Supreme Court and just getting your question heard will require a professional advocate wearing a white wig no doubt, to assist the clueless noob in formatting the question to suit the judges pecularities (beesty of course leaps to mind). Just figgering out 'who is moderating today' will be vitally important in getting one's questions before the panel.
Best to wait a day if jt512 is logged on.
Auditions... WAY TOO SERIOUSLY FOLKS!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 6:49 PM
Post #9 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: what about placing the newb forum on a completely different URL, and charge for it, then taked the money and give it to the Access Fund? Would you pay money to be insulted by jt512? DMT
If he did, I'd be rich.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Aug 30, 2004, 6:54 PM
Post #10 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
... nah .. bad idea ..
there are lots of people here who are qualified to answer questions ..
let anyone answer questiosn.. usually when someone gives a bad anaswer it gets pointed out quickly ...
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 30, 2004, 7:03 PM
Post #11 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: If he did, I'd be rich. -Jay
Lol! Touche'. I have always admired your ability to laugh at yourself. My respect for you as a climber and as an internet dweeb remains intact.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 30, 2004, 7:50 PM
Post #12 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: Man, ya gotta move fast around here! In reply to: Here's an idea: Have a sort of audition for beginner's guru. Anyone who feels they're qualified to answer beginners' questions must submit an answer for the FAQ. Cracklover, I love you like a brother man, I do. But I am about to skewer your idea anyway, sorry Bro.
No sweat - I threw it out there for comments. Just don't expect me to agree with all your skewering! :lol:
In reply to: An audition. To be qualified to post an answer to a beginner question to an internet forum about climbing. Answers that have all been asked and answered before, ad infinitum. No offense, but you folks have gone round the bend with this beginners thing. An audition. For a forum. Will you issue merit badges and anger management certificates too? You good people are taking this beginners thing, and yourselves, WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. Chill out and you'll see, beginners aren't dying as a result of the reams of misinformation promulgated by rc.com.
Blah blah blah - the question is - would Jay and Curt's suggestion be better or worse than what rc.com has now? I agree with you that what's there now isn't all that broken, but I also think their idea has some merit. What it lacks is a way to determine who's an "expert". That's the piece I'm adressing (as well as the FAQ issue).
In reply to: With a modest down side the up side will be of similar amplitude.
I don't follow you there.
In reply to: The world's noobs are not going to be beating down your doors to submit ever new and interesting questions. So you're just working at making yourselves feel better about what is inherently 'internet blather.'
A good FAQ would help somewhat. My suggestion would, I think, help create that FAQ.
In reply to: A great sound and fury for what will be a sandbox for 4 - 5 control-oriented people. And you've already seen a taste of their management styles, The Emperor's Decree. Very conducive for noobie posts, ayup.
I agree that having just 4 or 5 "experts" might be restrictive. This is a way to open up the pool. If it works, you might have enough good people to have a rotating pool, with say 4 or 5 people at a time, and a potential group of a hundred or so over the course of a year. Who's on the auditioning commitee? To start, I'd say that would be everyone. You submit an article, and folks vote it up or down. Those who get plenty of positive votes are in. At least that would get the ball rolling.
In reply to: Didn't use the right word? Try AGAIN!
In reply to: Repetitive question? Search the freaking FAQ! Modeator had a bad day? Your question is REJECTED!!!111 Becomes a Supreme Court and just getting your question heard will require a professional advocate wearing a white wig no doubt, to assist the clueless noob in formatting the question to suit the judges pecularities (beesty of course leaps to mind). Just figgering out 'who is moderating today' will be vitally important in getting one's questions before the panel. Best to wait a day if jt512 is logged on. Auditions... WAY TOO SERIOUSLY FOLKS!
Perhaps there could be several people answering questions at any one time. This would allow the beginner to get several opinions.
Anyway, I'm not so much advocating their idea as I am floating a way to implement it that would also help out the FAQ. Clearly the FAQ and beginner's forum should work hand in glove. This is a way of formalizing that partnership.
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
iridesantacruz
Aug 30, 2004, 8:04 PM
Post #13 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2002
Posts: 594
|
i say do that idea but make it a different forum..... make an "Ask the Experts" forum.
-chris
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 30, 2004, 8:11 PM
Post #14 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: With a modest down side the up side will be of similar amplitude. I don't follow you there.
I didn't explain it very well. Here's what I meant... people are not dying as a result of the beginner's forum, ergo there is no huge downside to this "problem."
Know what the problem really is? The forum bothers a fairly small number of people, enough that they want to change it. That is the bedrock truth. There was a similar yet correspondingly smaller, community on rec.climbing a while back.
Upside? What do 'we' stand to gain? Noobs aren't dying from bad advice, then they won't be standing to gain all that much from good advice. People don't learn to climb from the internet anyway. They're not dying, but they're not flying either. Pretty much same as it ever was in terms of noobs, but with more focus on correct phraseology and theoretically at least, much less wading through superfulous threads to find an answer. They will be more focused on the protocol of the forum than the protocol of climbing!
The REAL upside is the forum will be less bothersome to that same fairly small number of people that wanted to change it in the first place.
Just what is it you're trying to fix? With a modest downside and a modest upside, a vetted experts panel is a lot of energy and time spent to solve a minimal problem.
I wish the same people, creative, intelligent climbers ALL, with solid typing skills and some command of the language, I wish those same people would work on typing some CONTENT, instead of worrying so much about what other people type.
See, I think that is the BEST way to solve THE PROBLEM. I have always thought that. The forum is ill? Take the bull by the horns. Alpnclmr1 seems to have the idea down pat. There are plenty of others, beesty included. Pretty much anyone who accurately conveys an answer already knows the best method to fix what ails this or any other forum. Personally, through direct contribution.
Designated experts will result in less contributions and less useful information getting out, not more.
Cheers Bros!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
uasunflower
Aug 30, 2004, 8:17 PM
Post #15 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2003
Posts: 1563
|
what about adding an "expert" or "FAQ Expert" title after a user has his article accepted as a FAQ? Then keep the beginner forum open, but show "expert" or "non-expert" on replies...just a thought...
On another note, I was enjoying the beginner forum (being beginner myself), as it reminds you of basics, and even stupid questions/comments often lead to valuable discussions. Most of the time adults are able to tell reasonable from suicidal advice, and are aware not to take everything at face value - especially where their life is concerned - so I think the whole issue of non-expert answers is a bit overblown, and everyone should be aloud to post in one way or another...
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 30, 2004, 9:02 PM
Post #16 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: what about adding an "expert" or "FAQ Expert" title after a user has his article accepted as a FAQ? Then keep the beginner forum open, but show "expert" or "non-expert" on replies...just a thought... On another note, I was enjoying the beginner forum (being beginner myself), as it reminds you of basics, and even stupid questions/comments often lead to valuable discussions. Most of the time adults are able to tell reasonable from suicidal advice, and are aware not to take everything at face value - especially where their life is concerned - so I think the whole issue of non-expert answers is a bit overblown, and everyone should be aloud to post in one way or another...
Perfect suggestion. Much less cumbersome than my solution. And I agree with with Dingus's (and UASunflower's) observations: the system is not very broken, so the smaller the fix the better. I like UAsunflower's suggestion very well - gets the writing on the FAQ done, continues to allow the wide range of posts for the beginner to read from, while helping the beginner distinguish the users who are more likely to be posting correct info.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 30, 2004, 9:07 PM
Post #17 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Actually, I came up with an idea that is in the works:
My thought is to do away with the beginner's forum as it is and have more of an "ask the experts" thing where moderators will be able to view queued questions, answer them, and release them to the wolves. The idea being that the answers start out being correct so they can't go south too quickly.
This sounds like the fifth circle of hell to me, since I approve photos and sometimes there's just so many I want to die, but there are plenty of people on this site who wouldn't mind helping out and doing this, it may just work. It doesn't censor anyone, it just gives beginners a decent answer to start out with.
|
|
|
|
|
chronicle
Aug 30, 2004, 9:31 PM
Post #18 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 664
|
I like maculated's response. It is close to what I mentioned previously. Basically that is the goal, is to get some good information out from the start. What direction it takes after that is up to the user, however in approaching it with this method, you have a clear question/answer combo to start the thread, making it easier to find the information. This of course would also help in the FAQ creation.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Aug 30, 2004, 10:02 PM
Post #19 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
I think you guys are just setting yourself up for a lot of headaches. But if you have the time, here's another suggestion.
Have one forum that is completely moderated. Topic posts and all replies have to be viewed and approved by a moderator before they post. Any "rejected" responses automatically get sent to another thread. So all replies are visible but there is one thread that stays on topic with good respones.
Downsides: responses are going to be slowed because they will have to be reviewed. However, if the the person asking the question and/or responding don't want to wait, they can always ask/respond on a non-moderated thread.
The moderators are going to have to review a lot of responses, but it appears that they are doing that anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Aug 30, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #20 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
First, in answer to the proposed queueing of questions, I asked Tim if this was easy to implement and he advises me it is a nightmare to code so it aint gunna happen.
Second, I would like to take us back to first principles and to the basic premise of why I first started to agitate for change in the beginners forum. We were becoming concerned that the beginners forum was turning into something of an internet chat room where the clueless were expounding on the worth of their clueless ideas to other clueless n00bs.
Lots of noise and barely any signal.
Dingus thumps the lectern with bible in hand.
In reply to: I wish the same people, creative, intelligent climbers ALL, with solid typing skills and some command of the language, I wish those same people would work on typing some CONTENT, instead of worrying so much about what other people type.
Preach it brother, hallelujah brother, amen. [/southern baptist voice]
The thing is that the beginners forum now has a fairly high profile and a lot less noise obscuring the signal. We DO have some high quality voices expressing opinions in that forum now. This is something that I have personally been advocating for some time now.
We may at some stage institute an ask the experts forum which will be an entirely different beast than the beginners forum. That is not a forgone conclusion so don`t hold your breath.
In short to answer dingus, yes, we have been trying to solve a problem and by and large the answer is already upon us and perhaps we have not recognised it yet. Dingus eloquently put the answer in a nutshell and that is that we simply need quality content in there.
The clueless will always be with us and I hope that the experts amongst us will be patient with those that are genuinely seeking to glean wisdom from the experts. We all started out as being clueless and we all needed to learn from others let`s remember that when we see a clueless question.
The wider problem really is the clueless answer although this is not so much a problem when the clueless answer is dissected and exposed for what it is, the logic should be plain for all to see.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 30, 2004, 10:11 PM
Post #21 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Actually, I came up with an idea that is in the works: My thought is to do away with the beginner's forum as it is and have more of an "ask the experts" thing where moderators will be able to view queued questions, answer them, and release them to the wolves. The idea being that the answers start out being correct so they can't go south too quickly.
With a few notable exceptions, the moderators here are hardly the "expert" climbers. So, how would the answers start out being correct under that system?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 30, 2004, 10:17 PM
Post #22 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
I would propose different beginner forum moderators, but if Tim doesn't code it, it won't come anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
beesty511
Aug 30, 2004, 10:22 PM
Post #23 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 336
|
How about banning curt and jt512 completely from the forums? I think that would elevate the quality of all the forums. They seem to hate everyone that has a question anyway.
Or, only allow people to post to forums in which they have politely given "correct advice". Every question could be assigned a category, and for instance, curt would only be allowed to respond to Community type posts or shoe threads. Because of his history, curt would not be able to respond to any question that involved climbing techniques or quantitative answers.
And, jt512 could be given his own forum called something like "Time Out"--to which he would be wholly restricted, and no one else could respond to questions displayed there. Copies of the most irritating and repetitive questions could be posted to the Time Out forum, and jt512 could rail away to his hearts content and not bother anyone else.
Or, shut down all the forums and have people email questions to alpineclimber1, jt512, and curt, and they can answer them. The rest of us can look at the pretty pictures.
Just some ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 30, 2004, 10:23 PM
Post #24 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: I would propose different beginner forum moderators, but if Tim doesn't code it, it won't come anyway.
Ahhhhhh. Gotcha. :wink:
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 30, 2004, 10:29 PM
Post #25 of 105
(6765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Beesty, this isn't a "stroke" specific users thing. This is simply a "how can we avoid death advice to people who don't know anything better" discussion. Chill.
And personally, whether you like Curt or Jay, they know their shit and I for one am glad that both have answered my questions along the way.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 30, 2004, 10:33 PM
Post #26 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
So, if the flamers can have freedom to post. then people with bad ideas should have freedom to post. Everyone is pretty good at correcting bad advice, so I don't believe folks are not going off uninformed.
Once you start "editing" or controlling peoples posts, where does it stop? And who gets to decide what gets controlled? I think you should filter the flamers before you filter the beginners. If there were less worthless flaming responses to everyones posts it would be easier for the beginners to find the good advice.
EDIT: correct for content
|
|
|
|
|
chronicle
Aug 30, 2004, 10:50 PM
Post #27 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 664
|
I think in order to get your "experts", they would be a panel voted on by their peers. In order to get fair votes, each user would be limited to only one vote per panel expert. Peers would have to be defined as a user of RC.com having xxx number of posts. Otherwise a person could set up many accounts and vote for/against a certain panel member.
If this were to take foot and start happening, the first thing would be to comprise the anticipated panel. I don't know how to come up with the list. But once the list was comprised, there would be a post to rate the panel participants. maybe rate them from 1-5. After the voting was complete, the top xxx panelists would be chosen as the "Experts".
Once you have the experts, the forum is then set up with rules similar to what maculated posted. When a question is asked, it first goes to the panelists. Anyone of which can answer it. Once answered, the thread can then accept posts from any rc.com member. Again, this sets up the question/answer pair at the beginning of the thread (no more wading through mindless chatter to find an answer).
From time to time the panel members would have to be evaluated to make sure that they are not abusing thier status, and that they are giving good, honest answers. With the forum set up in this manner, it would be easy to guide someone to a post that has been asked time after time after time.
Again, just another idea on how this thing could work. Honestly, I think the "Ask the Experts" forum would be a good addition to rc.com.
PS. I enjoy curt's posts. His sarcasm is hilarious. Plus he and jt know thier stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 30, 2004, 10:56 PM
Post #28 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: How about banning curt and jt512 completely from the forums? I think that would elevate the quality of all the forums. They seem to hate everyone that has a question anyway. Or, only allow people to post to forums in which they have politely given "correct advice". Every question could be assigned a category, and for instance, curt would only be allowed to respond to Community type posts or shoe threads. Because of his history, curt would not be able to respond to any question that involved climbing techniques or quantitative answers. And, jt512 could be given his own forum called something like "Time Out"--to which he would be wholly restricted, and no one else could respond to questions displayed there. Copies of the most irritating and repetitive questions could be posted to the Time Out forum, and jt512 could rail away to his hearts content and not bother anyone else. Or, shut down all the forums and have people email questions to alpineclimber1, jt512, and curt, and they can answer them. The rest of us can look at the pretty pictures. Just some ideas.
That time of the month, eh beesty?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jpearl
Aug 30, 2004, 11:02 PM
Post #29 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2003
Posts: 517
|
How about this for the Beginners' Forum (only a brainstorm, not a suggestion):
When linking onto the forum, the user should first be taken to an inital page reminding them that the information posted in the thread is not to be taken as professional guidance or and absolute truth, but rather just reference, suggestion, and feedback from other climbers. They should be informed that as beginners, part of climbing is the accumulation of knowledge and the process of putting it to real world usage, first by extensive research, then by experimentation or instruction in a safe and controled environment.
Another suggestion is this: We should all put a little thought into our responses in the beginners' forum. Not that member's of the RC.com community haven't earned commendation for helping new climbers, but if there is one place that flames and extraneous responses do not have a place, it is the beginners' forum. Yes, we will always have grit our teeth to give first-time shoe advice and explain what a "toprope" is, but we were all beginners ourselves and we've all advanced in a sport and lifestyle that at its core is grassroots with nobody to rely on but ourselves and each other.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Aug 30, 2004, 11:03 PM
Post #30 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: In reply to: Actually, I came up with an idea that is in the works: My thought is to do away with the beginner's forum as it is and have more of an "ask the experts" thing where moderators will be able to view queued questions, answer them, and release them to the wolves. The idea being that the answers start out being correct so they can't go south too quickly. With a few notable exceptions, the moderators here are hardly the "expert" climbers. So, how would the answers start out being correct under that system? Curt
I think this is an important consideration that the noobies fail to recognize. Moderator? Must know what he's talking about. Wrong.
Good thing you guys axed Roughster. Can't have those pesky climbers who know what they're doing around, now can we? :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 30, 2004, 11:11 PM
Post #31 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Oh CI, you had to go there, didn't you. ::shakes head disappointedly::
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 11:13 PM
Post #32 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Good thing you guys axed Roughster. Can't have those pesky climbers who know what they're doing around, now can we? :roll:
Would you two get a room already.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Aug 30, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #33 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
heh heh heh. I love how the mere mention of his name draws the ire of the mods so quickly. :lol:
I'd like to go read the thread that ruffled so many feathers, but something happened to it. :P
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 11:26 PM
Post #34 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: heh heh heh. I love how the mere mention of his name draws the ire of the mods so quickly. :lol:
Ire? That means anger. My making fun of your embarrassingly effusive admiration of Aaron is not anger.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Aug 30, 2004, 11:27 PM
Post #35 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: In reply to: Good thing you guys axed Roughster. Can't have those pesky climbers who know what they're doing around, now can we? :roll: Would you two get a room already. -Jay
Is that what you do with your friends, Jay? :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 30, 2004, 11:30 PM
Post #36 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
The "death advice" stuff is way over-dramatic. Dingus is right---noobs aren't killing themselves. Nor is rc.com such a primary source of information that this should be taken so seriously.
The Beginners forum should be axed, because it sucks. Let beginners ask questions in the appropriate other forums, where more people read. If the question sucks, let them get flamed and let the thread go nowhere---there's no need to moderate the f_ck out of it.
And as far as an FAQ---why does rc.com need to duplicate Dawn's FAQ? It's quite good (I basically read the whole thing when I first started climbing), particularly since it has dissenting views so obviously documented (contrary to what appears to be popular belief, many safety questions do not have a single correct answer, or the traditionally "correct" answer is not really correct (e.g. the dropped gear issue)). The google rec.climbing archives are also a much better source than trying to use the sh:tty rc.com forum search.
Either the noobs are smart enough to find and use those things, or not---either way it's not rc.com's problem. And if they get hurt, too bad---climbing can hurt you.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 11:36 PM
Post #37 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Good thing you guys axed Roughster. Can't have those pesky climbers who know what they're doing around, now can we? :roll: Would you two get a room already. -Jay Is that what you do with your friends, Jay? :lol:
No, but I don't embarrass myself by making idiotic statements like this either:In reply to: Good thing you guys axed Roughster. Can't have those pesky climbers who know what they're doing around, now can we?
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 11:42 PM
Post #38 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: The "death advice" stuff is way over-dramatic. Dingus is right---noobs aren't killing themselves. Nor is rc.com such a primary source of information that this should be taken so seriously.
Rc.com, and the internet generally, is becoming a primary source for information on many subjects, including rockclimbing. Just look at how often we get questions from beginners who don't anything about climbing. Secondly, this trend is going to continue. The internet will become an increasingly important source of climbing information. There is no inherent reason why rc.com cannot be as good or better a source of primary information than any beginner's book on climbing. Look at alpnclimber1's outline for a FAQ. The objective is to raise the bar around here.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Aug 30, 2004, 11:42 PM
Post #39 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Oh Jay, I just can't take any more of your terse wit. I'm tempted to change my email account to kissmyassjt512@rockclimbing.com, but then I wouldn't be able to log in to watch you slash your way through those grigri threads. :lol:
And I wanted beesty511 for my troll account, but it was already taken. :P
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 30, 2004, 11:44 PM
Post #40 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
In reply to: Look at alpnclimber1's outline for a FAQ. The objective is to raise the bar around here.
Actually, if you go to the website FAQ, you'll see it's no longer an outline, but an actual FAQ-in the making. Thanks alpnclmbr1. I just have to get motivated to cut and paste, cut and paste.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 30, 2004, 11:47 PM
Post #41 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Or, shut down all the forums and have people email questions to alpineclimber1, jt512, and curt, and they can answer them. The rest of us can look at the pretty pictures.
How about we add two forums: Ask JT512 and Ask Beesty511, and see who people really trust when it comes down to getting accurate information.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 12:14 AM
Post #42 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
i much appreciate the knowledge and energy that has gone into this whole project to date. just because noobs aren't getting killed from bad advice from rc.com doesn't mean we (users and mods and coders all) shouldn't work towards making it a great site.
as was pointed out, the accessibility of the internet, not to mention the cost, is making it more and more of a initial/primary source of information for most young people.
not knowing much about coding or whatever, i throw this suggestion into the mix.
would it be possible to have users rate individual threads/posts, or perhaps just threads/posts in a single forum, such as beginners, so that when new viewers of the thread/post read them, they can take them with a grain of salt or not. i'm thinking of something similar to the way people can "rate" the book reviews on amazon. "was this review helpful". users would/should not be able to vote/rate on their own posts, and would only be able to vote/rate on a post or thread once, to cut down on false self-ratings.
i think it would help keep the moderating to a minimum, as the threads would be self regulating this way, useful for the mods cos it's less work, and usefull for the users cos it's easy to tell which users/threads/posts have little/no/bad advice.
someone suggested deleting old posts, this system could also be incorporated into that, as low rated posts or threads could be deleted (it would make more sense to delete entire threads in this case, as the threads with posts with poor ratings would cease to make sense if the posts got deleted) after a certain time period, so noobs/experienced users don't have to tread thru mountains of posts to get good info.
just some ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 31, 2004, 12:28 AM
Post #43 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
Quote:
would it be possible to have users rate individual threads/posts, or perhaps just threads/posts in a single forum, such as beginners, so that when new viewers of the thread/post read them, they can take them with a grain of salt or not. i'm thinking of something similar to the way people can "rate" the book reviews on amazon. "was this review helpful". users would/should not be able to vote/rate on their own posts, and would only be able to vote/rate on a post or thread once, to cut down on false self-ratings.
Response:
So, how do you think a new person is gonna react when their question is trashed by the flamers of this site and the post gets a low enough rating to get it deleted? Think they are going to want to post again?
There are some great ideas here but two points have to be considered. Everyone wants better information to be given to the new folks. but you also have to consider the desire for the new user to stick around an continue to use this site. From what I have seen a new user often gets trashed for what the "experts" deem a stupid question ( I am not saying everyone is doing this. But is happens too often.. )
So, as a relatively new user myself that has considered dropping this site from my favorites page... I recommend you be careful on who you select to represent this site as your "experts" and voters.. Because your "experts" are not always the folks you want in your "public interface" positions if you know what I mean.
I am sure I will be called a whiner but there are lots of people out on this site that have valuable things to say and as many have already noted, there often times is not one "right" answer. To leave the site representation to a "selected" few doesn't seem like the right way to go about educating the masses.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 12:52 AM
Post #44 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
crimpandgo said "Everyone wants better information to be given to the new folks. but you also have to consider the desire for the new user to stick around an continue to use this site. From what I have seen a new user often gets trashed for what the "experts" deem a stupid question ( I am not saying everyone is doing this. But is happens too often.. ) "
and "To leave the site representation to a "selected" few doesn't seem like the right way to go about educating the masses."
in response to the first quote, this is a wonderful point. i am constantly surprised by the harsh responses noobs often get, simply cos they didn't know enough about what they were asking about to phrase the question correctly, or specific enough. ie "what kind of rope do i need" type questions. to this i say that we shouldn't rate the questions. any question is a good one, as long as it's legit, and not a troll. which is another topic all together.
to the second, i say that limiting the number of "experts" is never a wise idea. which is why i think everyone/rc.com users should/would rate the posts. not just the mods.
the post ratings could show up in user's profiles, so if someone was questioning the validity of someone's post, they could check their profile, a la ebay's feedback system. perhaps another way to limit the "noise" in this situation would be to mandate that in order to rate a post/thread, users would need to post in the thread. on ebay, you can't just give anyone feedback, you have to have had a transaction with them. not to keep using other systems as examples, but the feedback system seems to be working, and the longer it's in place, the better it gets. ie if someone has 100% positive feedback, but 5 transactions, that's not quite as strong as someone with %97.45 positive feedback and 1500 transactions.
flamers would get negative feedback for flaming instead of just getting flamed back, so they would either stop posting out of fear of negative ratings, or cos no one pays them any attention cos their rating is so low.
|
|
|
|
|
beesty511
Aug 31, 2004, 1:07 AM
Post #45 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 336
|
In reply to: How about we add two forums: Ask JT512 and Ask Beesty511, and see who people really trust when it comes down to getting accurate information.
Is your sphere of influence dwindling so rapidly that you need to invent new ways to corner people and harass them? Only people with egos that are out of control actually believe they have all the answers and should have a forum named after themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 1:14 AM
Post #46 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: any question is a good one, as long as it's legit,
Not true at all. Many questions are a waste of bandwidth themselves, and only clutter up the site, lowering the signal-to-noise ratio, and making it even harder for sincere users to find solid information. Other questions could be good, but are so ambiguously worded that they can't be clearly answered, and the resulting threads become mired down with miscommunication, which can border on dangerous. The recent question" "Does anybody else use a Yosemite Finish to back up their harness tie-in?" posted to Beginners was both lame per se and so poorly worded that it couldn't be intelligently answered.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Aug 31, 2004, 1:45 AM
Post #47 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
crimpandgo I hope that you do not get called a whiner. A response to your response is that we do in fact already have post ratings. Around ten percent of users each day get handed 5 votes that they can vote on their fav posts. They can either vote it as a steaming pile of poo or give it a trophy vote.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 2:15 AM
Post #48 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
jay,
i think all the questions are good, but not all posts. the key is to find a way to limit the extraneous, repeated questions so that the regular rusers of the forums don't have to answer the same "what kind of rope do i need" questions week after week.
i suppose my "rate the threads" system doesn't address that, but maybe it could be worked so that it would somehow.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 2:18 AM
Post #49 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: jay, i think all the questions are good...
If you think that, then try composing an intelligent response to the example bad question I quoted above. Such questions can only lead to nonsensical responses because the questions themselves are nonsensical. Don't believe me? Break out pencil and paper and try answering that question.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 3:18 AM
Post #50 of 105
(5506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
well, the question is valid, whatever the question is. i don't know how questioons/posts like this should be treated. climbing and all that goes along with it, equipment, tehcnique, knots, is inherently technical, and does not lend itself well to being explained/asked on an internet forums such as this.
and since wrong answers/information is entirely probable to be passd along with valid information, how _do_ we seperate the good questions from the bad.
the example you list is a valid one, and i understand why you locked it. i could go either way as far as should it be locked or should it not. that's a related issue that's gonna come up in a climbing related forum, as opposed to a cooking forum, where the wrong recipe or cooking time will not necessarily get someone maimed or killed.
i just don't know how to handle problems like this very ambiguously phrased question, other than heavy supervision by the mods. which in itself is aproblem cos who wants to be that mod, or post in his or her forum(s)?
i take back what i said about all questions being valid. the person who posted that question was seeking knowledge that someone on this board prolly has, but he opr she didn;'t know enough about what he was asking to know how to ask it.
i just don't know.
my original post relating to the beginner's forum and rating individual posts was an attempt to solve the necessary supervision by mods of the noob forum.
|
|
|
|
|
nagatana
Aug 31, 2004, 3:43 AM
Post #51 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2003
Posts: 425
|
(edited as I read the thread, and it was pretty brainless)
My opinion is that the mods in the Beginners forum simply need to be more aggressive, and simple post a link to the search, or to an existing thread, then lock the redundant thread. It'd cut back on all the people yelling at the beginner for posting such a question, while also teaching him that there's a search function on the site.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 3:53 AM
Post #52 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: the example you list is a valid one, and i understand why you locked it. i could go either way as far as should it be locked or should it not. that's a related issue that's gonna come up in a climbing related forum, as opposed to a cooking forum, where the wrong recipe or cooking time will not necessarily get someone maimed or killed.
As I see it, we are trying to take care of three related problems: low signal-to-noise ratio in the forums, beginners answering questions they aren't qualified to answer, and redundancy among forum topics. It's easy to see how these three problems are correlated. As an example, a beginner asks an ambiguous question that was just asked (ambiguously) last week, and which received, among possibly a few good answers, many incorrect and ambiguous answers. Result: a few good tidbits of information buried amongst a mountain of low-quality information.
Now, what's wrong with that? Isn't this all just for fun, anyway? No, it's not. The purpose of the forums is to provide for discussion of new ideas, not ones that have been hashed around for years. Rehashing the same old topics, without adding any new ideas, simply clutters up the forums, further burying the relatively few fresh ideas and stimulating topics that come up. Questions with either pat answers or whose arguments are well known (eg, EDK vs double fisherman's knot for rappelling) can be summarized in a FAQ. If new data on the question comes up, that's what should be discussed in the forums.
Ever wonder why the ratio of young beginners to older, more accomplished climbers is so high here? One reason is that more experienced climbers aren't looking for a chat-room experience. They want solid information, and they want to be able to find it readily, rather than to have to wade through a myriad of posts from adolescents who've been climbing for 2 years or 2 months and think they're experts. So, if this website ever hopes to be anything better than a giant free-for-all chat room, we have to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. We can't force the signal to go up, but we can take steps, like revamping the Beginners forum and putting together a FAQ, that will reduce the noise. The reality is that we do have a good deal of high-level discussion in the forum. It's just hard to find. Once we reduce the clutter and the higher-quality discussions begin to stand out, we will hopefully begin to attract more experienced members of the climbing community, which will further enhance the quality of the forums.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
nagatana
Aug 31, 2004, 3:58 AM
Post #53 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2003
Posts: 425
|
Jay, do newcomers ever read the FAQ. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
squish
Aug 31, 2004, 4:00 AM
Post #54 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2003
Posts: 470
|
In reply to: In reply to: The "death advice" stuff is way over-dramatic. Dingus is right---noobs aren't killing themselves. Nor is rc.com such a primary source of information that this should be taken so seriously. Rc.com, and the internet generally, is becoming a primary source for information on many subjects, including rockclimbing. [..snip...] The objective is to raise the bar around here. -Jay
You can raise the bar all you want, but the following still holds true:
In reply to: Either the noobs are smart enough to find and use those things, or not---either way it's not rc.com's problem. And if they get hurt, too bad---climbing can hurt you.
For my two cents' worth, I think keeping the Beginners forum is fine. That's where all the known dumb questions belong.
When I say "dumb questions," I mean those that the author himself recognises as such. People do this in real life all the time when they begin with "I don't mean to interrupt" and "I know I should already know this," and sometimes even stating "this is probably a dumb question..."
Answering these doesn't belong in the, ahem, "flow" of regular discussions.
I think that so far the mods have done a good job of promoting actual smart questions to the appropriate forums; so why not keep a beginners area aside and leave it wide open as a rich source of possible FAQ entries (questions AND answers, please). At least this should be a place where the clueless newbies don't have to preface everything with "don't flame me..."
I think it would be most appropriate to answer frequent questions with a link to the FAQ, a FAQ search page, or better yet, a specific FAQ entry--teach people that the FAQ exists. If it's not in the FAQ yet, consider whether it should be.
Someone else brought up the idea of merit badges like "expert" and "non-expert." How could this be determined? Here's my suggestion: use the post rating as a guide. Those who have a high ratio of trophy posts to unrated/turd posts could get a "trusted peer" designation. (Vice versa, those with a high turd ratio could be branded as trolls.) This is probably the most direct way to indicate that a person has given valuable information in the past. Your thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:15 AM
Post #55 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
jay...
well put. the three issues you put forth are all well stated. can they be tackled independantly? don't know. my vote goes for a faq that is concise, clear, comprehensive, and fluid. how that can be done is beyond me, but i'll keep throwing out ideas if it helps.
of course, i don't wanna contribute more noise than signal...
as users/mods who are aware of these three issues in particular, i think it's useful to be vigilant about upholding these rules (responding quickly, accurately, safely, etc) and locking the threads appropriately.
perhaps being mindful of posting why the reaosn for the locked thread would help, which you did, but i think posting a link to appropriate threads/faq's would be in order also. i know the question(s) was(are) poorly worded, but if you are aware of it's redundancy, you should be able to provide links to the related threads, which would decrease the anoyance factor for other users reading/participating in the thread prior to it's being locked.
having used/currently using several similar forums which are non climbing related, the issue of noobs posting the same old questions is a common problem. (content related, as opposd to strictly site related) faq's seem to be the way to go to avoid that as much as possible as well as users shutting down redundant/badly worded questions asap. i think ignoring the posts that are redundant can be even more useful, as then the threads don't just get bumped t the fornt page over and over. but then there's the issue of the inexperienced answering incorrectly.
your point about experienced climbers not looking for a chat room experience is an interesting one. it's an issue that seems inevitible the way the forums are set up now. and one that will become more common, in my opinion. at least until darpa releases the internet 2.0, anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
squish
Aug 31, 2004, 4:26 AM
Post #56 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2003
Posts: 470
|
In reply to: Jay, do newcomers ever read the FAQ. :wink:
This is probably a dumb question and I know I should already know this, but where is the FAQ?
I'm only half kidding. It's not easy to get to. It should be right at the top beside the Forums link in the menu bar, as well as being listed as FAQ Search under the search section at left.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:30 AM
Post #57 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
squish wrote:
In reply to: This is probably the most direct way to indicate that a person has given valuable information in the past. Your thoughts?
exactly my point. the more feedack users get, the more likely they are to earn troll status or expert status, based on the usability of the information they provide.
i think the beginner's forum is a great place for the "dumb" questions. it's also a good place for beginners to post, a place for which there should be. noobs (especially self aware noobs) should have a place to post their questions, however ambiguous they may be due to lack of appropriate climbingspeak, without fear of getting flamed for asking dumb questions. noob users should also be able to/responsible for find a list of faq's, which they can search or read thru prior to posting their question.
jay had a good point about the forums being a place for new ideas or discussions that have not taken place before. this, in my mind, brings up the more base question of what is rc.com's mission? to provide information, discussion, both? i think we'd all agree that it would be both, and much more than just discussion and information.
perhaps the faq needs to be a place seperate from the forums. for straight information, rc.com could post all the information in all the climbing books in the world, (nevermind the copyright issues associated with this, just stay with me) and noobs would still ask "what kind of rope do i need?"
i don't know. as simply a user, not a member or mod or coder, i don't think it's my place to say how the site should be set up.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Aug 31, 2004, 5:11 AM
Post #58 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
In reply to: I think it would be most appropriate to answer frequent questions with a link to the FAQ, a FAQ search page, or better yet, a specific FAQ entry--teach people that the FAQ exists. If it's not in the FAQ yet, consider whether it should be. (and) This is probably a dumb question and I know I should already know this, but where is the FAQ? I'm only half kidding. It's not easy to get to. It should be right at the top beside the Forums link in the menu bar, as well as being listed as FAQ Search under the search section at left.
Amen to these!
I seriously had never noticed the FAQ up there, and I thought I had scoured the site before I ever posted up. Read the site dictionary A to Z and such.
Now that I know it's there, I'm off to go peruse it, and perhaps save some "experts" some grief in the future.
I've been referring to FOTH first and foremost ever since my eyebrows were singed off somewhere around my third post . . . effective, that fire can be, sometimes. I don't expect FAQ to replace FOTH or other such books but still good for an instant response. Less-than-subtle hints about reading up would be well-placed among the FAQ's, I think.
Glad to see efforts to reduce reduntant q's resulting in redundant flames, rather than the usual grousing!
tnx
leinosaur
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 31, 2004, 5:13 AM
Post #59 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: How about banning curt and jt512 completely from the forums? I think that would elevate the quality of all the forums. They seem to hate everyone that has a question anyway. Or, only allow people to post to forums in which they have politely given "correct advice". Every question could be assigned a category, and for instance, curt would only be allowed to respond to Community type posts or shoe threads. Because of his history, curt would not be able to respond to any question that involved climbing techniques or quantitative answers.
Better yet, how about we ban all anonymous poseurs like beesty511, who attempt to impersonate actual real life experienced climbers by spewing back some drivel that they read in a book somewhere? I think that would represent a substantial improvement.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbfrog
Aug 31, 2004, 6:05 AM
Post #60 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 101
|
Isn't the idea of the website to have everyone put in thier opinions? I have seen posts and heard things done by supposed "experts", and would have nothing to do with them. And often I would think to myself, "These people are supposed to be experts?" I always thaught that accidents happen with two types of climbers. The beginners who don't know enough, and the experts who think they know everything and therefore think they can make short cuts and act lax and get injured as well. I definetly don't call myself an expert and never will, and wish people never proclaimed to be "experts". I think in the sport of climbing, the learning is never ending. Therefore I believe the forums should be left open to everybody to put their own opinions into. Isn't it possible for someone with little experience to run into a certain situation that a person with years of experience never has run into? Does it make that person with little experience more of an "expert" for that particular situation?
Don't get me wrong, I do like the idea of this type of forum. It will definetly help a beginner make up his/her mind with all the opinions. But it is also important to have all the opinions. It should be up to the person looking for the advice to form his/her own clear, concise, safest, and most logical opinion.
So please, if you can, define the tem "expert".
As a matter of fact, I think there should be a whole other post of this.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 31, 2004, 3:08 PM
Post #61 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
JTs responses are exactly why I am concerned about "experts" answering beginners questions. What gives you the right to call someones question meaningless or dumb? The person asking it doesn't think it is dumb. Maybe they do not know how to use the search function? Frankly I have tried using the RC search engine a few times and got 0 hits on obvious topics. by calling them dumb and telling them they shouldn't consider posting because it is useless babble and wasting your time is insulting to the beginners and frankly is just plain arrogant on your part.
If your think their questions are redundant or nonesensical, do what everyone else does, either ignore the post or simply give them a nice, friendly reminder of where they can get the information.
|
|
|
|
|
roboclimber
Aug 31, 2004, 3:21 PM
Post #62 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2004
Posts: 138
|
I have found jt512's responses both informative and educational; however, his interpersonal skills leave something to be desired. I think if he dumps the condescending attitude (or at least tones it down a little bit; I mean, if he dumps it altogether, he would not be jt512) he probably would be one of the big assets to the beginners forum.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 3:21 PM
Post #63 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
crimpandgo,
i don't think jay thinks the posts/posters are actually dumb, just that their having been posted poses a sticky problem that is difficult to address. where do questions that are a)frequently asked and/or answered, b)misleading or ambiguously worded so as to be confusing to the rest of us, c)obvious trolls belong?
there is the potential for the website to be chock full of usefull information. but rc.com has the potential to be overloaded with useless and/or dangerous information. up to a point, this information is just written off by the operaters/servers of rc.com. but at a but at that point, the useless and/or dangerous stuff is a waste of bandwidth which costs them money, and hinders what they can/will do with the site.
it's the same problem with the internet in general. yes, it's a wonderful research tool. but what makes it wonderful also makes it a pain in the arse. there's often too much information to process what you need. learning google skills helps, but there's still a ton out there. finding it is the issue.
which brings us back to here. the search on rc.com could be better. but a simple solution would be a faq so that when people post the weekly "how do i tie a water knot?" questions, the more expereinced users can point them in the right direction.
there are many solutions to this problem. but for a website that is volunteer run, the optin quickly fade out. a large, comprehensive easy to use faq would cut way down on traffic of this nature, as well as mods who are patient and refer noobs to the faq in a way that is not hostile and bitter, as many of the "this has been asked and answered" responses can be.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 31, 2004, 3:32 PM
Post #64 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
veganboyjosh,
I agree with what you are saying. I realize the problem can get out of hand. As a user of this site, I just ignore the redundant threads. For a moderator I understand it is a much larger problem. I agree that improving the search engine would be a large help.
Peace :D
|
|
|
|
|
roboclimber
Aug 31, 2004, 3:33 PM
Post #65 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2004
Posts: 138
|
This website is full of dangerous and useless information; it is a public forum, so this is unavoidable. The only potential problem I see with having pre-appointed "experts" give advice is one of legal liability. If the site appoints an "expert" in the field to give advice, there may be an assumption of legal responsibility for any damages that may come from said advice.
It is the same problem in the medical world. I am a third year medical student, and can freely answer questions on this site; however, once I am a liscensed physician, I will no longer be able to answer questions over the web because any advice I give is an expert opinion, and I incure all of the liability if someone follows that advice and gets injured. I hope that rc.com considers this before launching this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 3:44 PM
Post #66 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Rc.com, and the internet generally, is becoming a primary source for information on many subjects, including rockclimbing.
The endless vareity of 'how to' books at REI, the success of How to Authors like John Long, and the numbers of books sold, certainly make your point for you, hehe. Oh! wait a minute! I guess they don't!
There is more how-to information available about rock climbing than ever before and to state that the internet is a PRIMARY source of information is far overstating your hand.
Gyms are the primary source of climbing information at this point. That isn't likely to change any time soon.
In reply to: Just look at how often we get questions from beginners who don't anything about climbing.
That's funny. Those damned beginners and their ignorant questions. Hey jt, why do you think they are called beginners???
This bad attitude of yours is exactly why you should not be lording it over beginners.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Aug 31, 2004, 3:45 PM
Post #67 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: Ever wonder why the ratio of young beginners to older, more accomplished climbers is so high here?
I figured it was because the ratio of young climbers to older, experienced climbers is pretty high. Rockclimbing has grown a lot in popularity, which means lots of newbies. Young people probably kill more time on the internet than older climbers trying to balance, family, careers and, ah um, climbing.
cheers
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 31, 2004, 3:46 PM
Post #68 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
In reply to: I have found jt512's responses both informative and educational; however, his interpersonal skills leave something to be desired.
This is the internet. There are no "interpersonal skills". If someone posts something stupid, they should be sufficiently flamed.
I, for one, think rc.com could use more posters who can be as abrasive as jt512.
P.S. stfu n00b.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 3:46 PM
Post #69 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: How about we add two forums: Ask JT512 and Ask Beesty511, and see who people really trust when it comes down to getting accurate information. -Jay
I thought that is exactly what you proposed. In fact, I'm sure of it.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
roboclimber
Aug 31, 2004, 3:54 PM
Post #70 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2004
Posts: 138
|
In reply to: fracture wrote: P.S. stfu n00b.
Temper, temper. Didn't the doctor warn you about high blood pressure overloading your small, insignificant brain.
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 31, 2004, 3:56 PM
Post #71 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
In reply to: In reply to: Rc.com, and the internet generally, is becoming a primary source for information on many subjects, including rockclimbing. The endless vareity of 'how to' books at REI, the success of How to Authors like John Long, and the numbers of books sold, certainly make your point for you, hehe. Oh! wait a minute! I guess they don't!
The sad thing, btw, is that beyond the very basic information, the rec.climbing archives and Dawn's FAQ were (for me) much more valuable sources than the basic how-to books that I read.
The rc.com beginners forum wasn't much use at all. I think I posted there once about an exaustive list of bowline tie-in variants....yeah right---guess how many responses that thread got. :lol:
In reply to: Gyms are the primary source of climbing information at this point. That isn't likely to change any time soon.
Right.
Rc.com doesn't teach people to climb. People don't die because someone says to use keychain carabiners as your draws, or whatever. Believe it or not, even newbies have a responsibility to be smart enough to not kill themselves---otherwise they are in the wrong sport.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 3:59 PM
Post #72 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: would it be possible to have users rate individual threads/posts, or perhaps just threads/posts in a single forum, such as beginners, so that when new viewers of the thread/post read them, they can take them with a grain of salt or not.
Ever sit in class and wait for the dumb kid to ask the question you were too embarrassed to ask? And then gone Ohhhhhhh! And pretended you knew the answer all along? Did you ever thank that kid?
Now, how about instead of silently waiting for the dumb kid to ask that qustion you're to proud to ask, how about we rate that question a zero and slap a dunce cap on the kid's head and make him sit in the corner until he can phrase the question in a format suitable to the dick headed teachers liking?
Yeah, that sounds exactly like the school I want my kids to learn in!
Rating beginners questions will only serve to illustrate what the voters think of noobs in the first place.
ie. not much around here.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 3:59 PM
Post #73 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
dingus said: "The endless vareity of 'how to' books at REI, the success of How to Authors like John Long, and the numbers of books sold, certainly make your point for you, hehe. Oh! wait a minute! I guess they don't! "
and how successful do you think joh long would be if his books repeated the same information (tie in knots, for example) over and over and over again? which is what happens when new (typically more inexperienced climbers) users post the same questions week after week.
which is why we need a faq.
dingus again:
"There is more how-to information available about rock climbing than ever before and to state that the internet is a PRIMARY source of information is far overstating your hand. "
note that i said that "it's becoming a primary source". not that it is a primary source. for many people it already is. and for many kids getting into climbing now, the internet has been in/a part of their classroooms since elementary school. sure there are a ton of books covering all aspects of climbing etc ont he market. but the internet is free.
robo said:
"The only potential problem I see with having pre-appointed "experts" give advice is one of legal liability. If the site appoints an "expert" in the field to give advice, there may be an assumption of legal responsibility for any damages that may come from said advice. "
the "experts" shouldn't be appointed by rc.com, they should earn their status by receiving ratings from other users. that way the liabiity lies with the users themselves. should rc.com choose to anoint someone with expert status, then that opens a whole other bag of worms. i think everyone agrees that that would be stupid at best for them to do.
i don't see how the user's rating system (similar to ebay's feedback system) could backfire and cause rc.com liability. something for a lawyer to answer, and i am certainly not one.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:02 PM
Post #74 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
dingus wrote : Now, how about instead of silently waiting for the dumb kid to ask that qustion you're to proud to ask, how about we rate that question a zero and slap a dunce cap on the kid's head and make him sit in the corner
i later refined that idea to say that we should make it so questions couldn't be rated. users couldn't rate questions, they would be rating the answers. and based on how many "good" users or "bad" users (baed on their individual feedback ratings) the thread has, users would be able to tell at a glance the value of the thread.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:04 PM
Post #75 of 105
(5644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: The purpose of the forums is to provide for discussion of new ideas, not ones that have been hashed around for years.
One user telling ALL THE OTHER USERS the purpose of the forum.
This is jt's management style incarnate. The Imperial Decree.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:06 PM
Post #76 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: JTs responses are exactly why I am concerned about "experts" answering beginners questions. What gives you the right to call someones question meaningless or dumb?
Easy! The 'edit' button. And NOTHING MORE.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:07 PM
Post #77 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I think if he dumps the condescending attitude (or at least tones it down a little bit; I mean, if he dumps it altogether, he would not be jt512) he probably would be one of the big assets to the beginners forum.
Impossible. He learned at the feet of the Master.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:14 PM
Post #78 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: The sad thing, btw, is that beyond the very basic information, the rec.climbing archives and Dawn's FAQ were (for me) much more valuable sources than the basic how-to books that I read.
Really??? Please, tell me, how to construct an anchor, put on a harness, rig a decending device and rappel down a cliff using ONLY tradgirl's FAQ as a source of all information. Tell me how to top rope. Tell me how to tie a bowline on a coil. Do you think the bits of excellent advice in that FAQ supercede the basics of 'how to?' Not even by a mile does that FAQ approach the utility of a single how to book, even as far back as the Rockcraft books.
In reply to: Rc.com doesn't teach people to climb.
Kindly point that out to those who feel otherwise would you? I grow tired of it.
In reply to: People don't die because someone says to use keychain carabiners as your draws, or whatever. Believe it or not, even newbies have a responsibility to be smart enough to not kill themselves---otherwise they are in the wrong sport.
This last statement is inconsistent with the stated desire to save the noobs from themselves (even though they are not learning how to rock climb here).
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:20 PM
Post #79 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: and how successful do you think joh long would be if his books repeated the same information (tie in knots, for example) over and over and over again? which is what happens when new (typically more inexperienced climbers) users post the same questions week after week. which is why we need a faq.
I can't touch John Long's books. For me to presume I understand the keys to their success would be the height of unsupported arrogance. And whether you post a FAQ or not, those same questions will be asked over and over and over. Like, in the 2nd grade? After a season or two, rarely does a teacher hear a NEW question. And yet, those questions are to be treated as if they were being asked anew... because for the asker, they ARE. Noobs ask the same questions over and over and over. GASP! If a teacher can't deal with the repetitive nature of the questions, they are in the WRONG BUSINESS.
This isn't about the noobs anyway. It is about making a select group of people feel better about the forum.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:23 PM
Post #80 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: users couldn't rate questions, they would be rating the answers. and based on how many "good" users or "bad" users (baed on their individual feedback ratings) the thread has, users would be able to tell at a glance the value of the thread.
So the very people you assure us cannot tell good answers from bad are going to be voting on them???
Makes perfect sense to me!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:30 PM
Post #81 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
dingus,
you're right about john long's books. i don't presume to know why they are successful either. prolly cos their written in a style that is casual but at the same time informative and clear. i apologize for assuming i know why his books work.
and if you can't see why the feedback system would work, (a similar system to that which ebay, amazon, and others have been using for years) then i can't explain it to you.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 4:41 PM
Post #82 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: and if you can't see why the feedback system would work, (a similar system to that which ebay, amazon, and others have been using for years) then i can't explain it to you.
You can't seem to see the fact that expecting beginners to ask questions expertly is beyond the realm of realistic expectations. So you want to code around it.
You will fail and beginners will continue to ask their repetitive questions.
Because that is what beginners DO. I have never understood this intolerance for beginner questions, not here, not on rec.climbing, not anywhere.
I do find it amusing that the noobie intolerance originally bred by academics in usenet has come home to roost here.
Noobs should be encouraged to asked questions. Period.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:46 PM
Post #83 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
dingus said:
"Noobs should be encouraged to asked questions. Period."
point taken. i don't want to discourage anyone from asking a question. but at the same time, i (and i think other users) want to be able to visit a forum and read posts from users who aren't asking the same questions i've read a bunch of times before. or asked myself and been answered. how to accomplish that? just deal with repeated posts?
at some point the "annoying" noobs who post the repetitive questions have the potential to answer the same questions they asked at one point, as they aren's noobs forever. hopefully.
how can this repetitive nature be handled and accomodated at the same time? can it even?
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 31, 2004, 4:49 PM
Post #84 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
Quote:
Noobs should be encouraged to asked questions. Period.
Response:
I second this statement ! An uninformed nOOb is far more dangerous then a noob that asks too many questions. Encourage the questions and answer them intelligently and get them on the correct climbing track so they can be safe and have fun. Heck you might even make a new friend out the experience.
And if you dont want to answer them, then simply ignore them instead of feeding them meaningless flames which, in my opinion does more to clog up RC.com than the redundant questions ever do.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 4:51 PM
Post #85 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
crimandgo said:
"And if you dont want to answer them, then simply ignore them instead of feeding them meaningless flames which, in my opinion does more to clog up RC.com than the redundant questions ever do."
absolutely.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 5:16 PM
Post #86 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: dingus said: "Noobs should be encouraged to asked questions. Period." point taken. i don't want to discourage anyone from asking a question. but at the same time, i (and i think other users) want to be able to visit a forum and read posts from users who aren't asking the same questions i've read a bunch of times before.
BING!
You illustrate my point. This is not about beginners at all, but about making a small, select group of 'experts' feel better about a forum.
Now I ask you... who is the Beginner's Forum for?
When you lock a thread because the user failed to phrase a question properly, you put all beginners in Jeapordy (like that? Pretty neat, huh?). That discourages beginners from asking questions which is EXACTLY THE DESIRED EFFECT.
The effect of suppressing unliked questions and threads is to discourage beginners from asking questions in the first place. It is *on purpose* and stated as a desired goal. And the reason for that discouragement is because these *experts* don't want to answer. Now those are the people I want running my kid's school! The ones who don't want to answer questions and treat their students like shit.
All and all, just another, brick in the wall.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Aug 31, 2004, 5:19 PM
Post #87 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
dingus,
i concede, you are right about who the noob forum would be for. all this talk has made me wanna get outside.
stupid rain in portland.
|
|
|
|
|
the_pirate
Aug 31, 2004, 5:19 PM
Post #88 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3984
|
Somebody check the status of the fire suppression standpipe. Dingus is on fire here.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Aug 31, 2004, 5:26 PM
Post #89 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
Another suggestion:
Maybe the beginner forum should be restricted to beginners? reverse physcology. Let beginners talk to and meet other beginners without intervention and flaming from "experts". Questions (beginners or otherwise) should be posted under the appropriate topic areas other than the beginners forum).
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 5:32 PM
Post #90 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: at some point the "annoying" noobs who post the repetitive questions have the potential to answer the same questions they asked at one point, as they aren's noobs forever. hopefully. how can this repetitive nature be handled and accomodated at the same time? can it even?
I bet you don't have kids in grade school. If you do, go sit in a 2nd or 3rd grade class for a day. It may open your eyes to what it truly means to be a beginner again.
To your point: I watched the evolution of David Kastrup on rec.climbing and evolution is the correct word. He went from bright (brilliant is more like it) and over enthusiastic noob pipeing in on most every thread, expounding upon book learning and challenging information where ever it came from.
He stepped on a lot of toes with his sledge hammer approach to knowledge, old David did. Me included. I took the occasional opportunity to flame him, once for presenting book knowledge as if it were his own.
But over the course of, jeez, it must be 5 years now probably more, David has blossomed into a strong climber (I think he was strong from the start) and his posts can be counted upon for accurate information. I went from cringing to enjoying to missing his posts and my respect for the german I have never met continues to grow over time.
Such is the evolution of at least one internet dweeb. I think he is a good model to follow.
How do you handle noob repetitiveness? With patience, humor and understanding. And if on a particular day you lack one of those requisites, then you should recuse yourself from fielding noob questions.
jt512 challenged me to answer the Yosemite finish knot question. I did not even read the subsequent thread as far as I recall. I had no desire to do so. I do not presuppose to have all the answers and I don't even attempt to answer most technical questions. Why? It isn't my forte for one. I recognize the superior technical wizardry of folks like jt512, curt, rgold and others.
Too bad for the noobs some of them are too curmudgeonly and stingy to answer most of the time. They would rather suppress questions than answer them.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 31, 2004, 6:38 PM
Post #91 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: Too bad for the noobs some of them are too curmudgeonly and stingy to answer most of the time. They would rather suppress questions than answer them.
DMT
italics added for emphasis.
Thanks for the some, dingus. Your brush was getting a bit broad there.
While I agree with much of what you're saying, I think your ire is misplaced. I like answering questions, noob or otherwise. I've only been climbing five or six years, and in many aspects, I am very much still a noob. Ask me questions about big-wall climbing, alpine adventures, or bouldering pads, and I'll forward you on to better sources than me. But ask me about trad climbing, double ropes, New England climbing, or some technical issues, and I'll happily give you the best info I can, while readily admitting the limits on my own knowledge. You see, I know what it feels like to not know stuff - because there's so much I *don't* know! All it takes is a little compassion to take you from this state to the desire to help others. I think this is actually the rule rather than the exception you make it out to be.
Here's the heart of the problem: while I think my compassion and desire to be helpful is very common, what's less common is the ability to realize the limitations of one's own knowledge. This is the true cause of all the heartache about the beginner's forum. This is why beginners give incorrect answers to other beginners. Hey, they figure they know something about the topic - their compassion leads them to try to help. This is also the cause of the beginner who asks a question in a misleading or confusing way. They don't realize they need to put very clear parameters around their question because they don't see the bleed of their question into other possible meanings. How can they? They have no knowledge that those other meanings could be read into their question.
I can't speak for JT, Curt, or anyone else. But speaking for myself, I too want to encourage beginners to ask questions. I also want to encourage them to be as clear as possible with their questions, because as beginners they don't realize that without adding in those clarifying points their questions will be misinterpreted. To encourage that point, a little healthy flaming by JT and others may not be such a bad thing, especially if it's done with a little more grace than you typically see. Secondly, I want to encourage those who don't have a full comprehension of the subject matter to hold their tounges on technical matters when they have some doubt. I don't think I have to convince you of that, I think.
My suggestion (and UASunflower's refinement of it) was simply a way of encouraging those posters who really have a commitment to adding more than a throwaway comment, and who at least think they have some real knowledge to pull from, to get involved. I was also thinking it would broaden the pool of "experts" to include regular folks who just happen to have a penchant to be helpful, enough of a grasp of the english language and human psychology, and the climbing experience under their belts. Who know, might broaden the pool out as far as to include folks like you and me. I also hoped it would help gather text for the FAQ, which seems valuable (to me at least).
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 6:58 PM
Post #92 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I think your ire is misplaced.
OK, let me set this straight then. I have no ire about this subject, toward any of the participants or rc.com in general. I was not being angry this morning in my various replies.
In fact, I respect the very same people I criticize to a great extent. While I strongly disagree with, for example, jt512's Lord Slimeing ways, I totally respect his knowledge and abilities as a climber and even his role as a leader here on rc.com. You don't see me often arguing a technical issue with Jay (or Curt, et al). These guys know their shit. I not only accept it, I respect it.
But I have strong and consistent opinions about free speech and I will make and defend those notions till the cows come home. I came to this group, a group of climbers I happen to like and enjoy reading by the way, with those strongly held opinions and my time here has only reenforced them. Call me a broken record all you wish. Attribute my rantings to 'ire' if it helps, but I will never agree that suppression of questions is the correct path to enlightenment.
It is my hope, that one person at a time, the admins and mods of this very nice web site will come to agree more with me and less with the controllers. They will come to understand the value, the brilliant value of letting people speak their own words. A country was built on it, so I think we could manage a website with similar freedoms without self-immolation.
The participants of this discussion should be required to reread Animal Farm.
Meet the new boss, he's the same as the old boss.
I say, screw the BOSS, who ever she may be! I don't need no stinking boss to regulate my conversations and this ENTIRE THREAD is about regulating people's words.
Shame on those who suppress genuine questions because they irritate.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 7:55 PM
Post #93 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: Jay, do newcomers ever read the FAQ. :wink: This is probably a dumb question and I know I should already know this, but where is the FAQ? I'm only half kidding. It's not easy to get to. It should be right at the top beside the Forums link in the menu bar, as well as being listed as FAQ Search under the search section at left.
The FAQ really hasn't been rolled out yet. Alpnclimbr1 just started putting it together a couple weeks ago. I agree that it should be prominently displayed.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 8:02 PM
Post #94 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Noobs ask the same questions over and over and over. GASP! If a teacher can't deal with the repetitive nature of the questions, they are in the WRONG BUSINESS.
That statement contradicts your assertion that n00bs aren't learning to climb here.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 31, 2004, 8:05 PM
Post #95 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Noobs should be encouraged to asked questions. Period. DMT
Not quite. N00bs should be encouraged to look up their questions in a FAQ; then, if they still have questions, to post them.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 31, 2004, 8:37 PM
Post #96 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Dingus, you ignored the entire substance of my post to harp on an issue that is, if I may be so bold, irrelevant to the subject I'm trying to address. That's your prerogative of course, but I don't think it forwards the discussion at all.
Let me be 100% clear. I'm not recommending any changes to the beginner's forum. However the powers-that-be have made it known that changes are in the works. I'm suggesting a way to implement those changes. A way that I hope might be better easier, and involve less censorship and less work for all involved. Take a look at the actual substance of the idea before you condemn it.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 31, 2004, 8:48 PM
Post #97 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dingus, you ignored the entire substance of my post to harp on an issue that is, if I may be so bold, irrelevant to the subject I'm trying to address. That's your prerogative of course, but I don't think it forwards the discussion at all.
I read your whole post. You said I was mad. I wanted to reassure you I was not mad, nor am I irrelevant now that I think about it. A lot of times it is easier to dismiss what someone is saying if they are perceived as angry. So maybe it was a throw away line or you but it was not irrelevant to me at all.
In reply to: Let me be 100% clear. I'm not recommending any changes to the beginner's forum. However the powers-that-be have made it known that changes are in the works. I'm suggesting a way to implement those changes.
Yes you are. So am I by the way, by recommending what not to do and more importantly who shouldn't do it. In the grand scheme of things, the least intrusive improvement would be a completely new 'ask the experts' forum controlled by that core group. You know the ones.
And leave the beginners forum as-is but with the addition of the FAQ work alpnclmr1 is constructing. And any recognixed expert from the Experts Forum should stay out of the beginners forum entirely. Otherwise they will continue to complain about the same old stupid noob questions until long after the cows go home.
In reply to: A way that I hope might be better easier, and involve less censorship and less work for all involved. Take a look at the actual substance of the idea before you condemn it. GO
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 31, 2004, 9:49 PM
Post #98 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Okay, perhaps ire was the wrong word. You clearly have strong feelings on the subject, whatever you wish to call them. Fair enough. While you're not a one-trick pony on this site, it does bum me out that you focused on that one word - Ire, to the exlusion of all the actual content here. For you, it would appear that this thread is like all the other threads about RC.com, a platform for your standard stump speech. I mean, thread drift is all well and good, but I would certainly value your opinion on my actual idea. That is, after all, why I started this thread.
But the truth is that I think you and I have little common ground on this issue. What it boils down to is that it's clear that my ideas start from the basic premise that a small amount of censorship and structural power discrepancy is inherent in the world of rc.com. So while I do care about censorship and powerplay, I can't help but see some of the points you make in this thread a little trite. And similarly, while it's disappointing to me that you cannot speak to any of my suggestions about the Beginners/Ask-The-Experts forum, I understand it's not because you don't care, it's simply because you can never accept the basic premise from which I start, and so every suggestion built on top of that is irrelevant to you. So be it. No hard feelings.
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
csoles
Aug 31, 2004, 10:32 PM
Post #99 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 329
|
FWIW I strongly suspect that locking posts, FAQ, "Experts" forum are all setting up the web site for a massive lawsuit that may spell the end of it. If you haven't consulted with a lawyer specializing in outdoor liability, you may be creating a quagmire that you can't imagine.
Without all this formality and just allowing questions and discussion, RC.com was probably fairly safe. But the FAQ, in particular, and moves to limit who can respond may well be creating a legal standard of care that none of you anticipated.
Until you have this straightened out with a competent lawyer, I'd suggest not having your name attached to the FAQ in any way. Or even participating as a moderator or "expert." What you don't know may come back to haunt you.
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Sep 1, 2004, 3:39 AM
Post #100 of 105
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: If you haven't consulted with a lawyer specializing in outdoor liability, you may be creating a quagmire that you can't imagine.
I had so many smartass responses, but then realized that you may be legitimately concerned. Let's address it this way then, there are several outdoor publications and manufacturers of gear. They have managed without major legal counsel for the simple reason that there is personal accountability in many of these "extreme" sports. Period.
It's rockclimbing, not sidewalking. Take any advice with risk, injury is likely without proper instruction, this site is not the place for that. If you can't handle it, then I suggest toproping with a 7 point anchor while clipping bolts as you go with 46 crashpads underneath. Of course you still might break a nail. :D
So much legal advice, so little lawyers....
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 1, 2004, 3:31 PM
Post #101 of 105
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Some things I hope you all consider as you move your debate about the beginners forum more into the action stage.
1. I think people best learn in an open environment that encourages dialogue. As I think back over my own career as a student, I have flourished under teachers and instructors who were secure enough to engage their students in DISCUSSIONS. These teachers, and they are the ones most of us remember years after they have crossed our paths, they know the answers just like the petty dictators do. They just have the courage and the teaching convictions to understand that not all students arrive at wisdom via the same path. Some of us have to talk our way to undertanding and if you folks are honest about it, most of us learn best that way. Open dialogue, not stepped upon by irritable experts who tire of noobs asking the same questions as the crop from last year. Said experts are WAY OUT OF LINE feeling this way toward beginners. Shame on them!
2. We are a group of peers. This isn't boot camp and none of us are beholden to any of you, for anything really. So don't go all Drill Instructor on us! We are your peers, albeit with less experience. You have no right to lord it over us and you are showing some character faults to even attempt it. Stop trying to control the discussions of free thinking adults voluntarily pursuing a free spirit sport. We climbers don't like being told what to do, what to think OR WHAT TO SAY!!!!1111 Even Beginners! When will you ever get it through your heads, you have no right to control the conversation of others!
3. Beesty points out repeatedly, and honesty demands attention, that it is not an unreasonable expectation to answer beginner questions in a nice tone with accurate information. Nasty, sarcastic remarks, inaccurate information and bullying behavior rightly should get flamed. That beesty relies upon the same tactics as those it criticizes to do that flaming merely confirms that beesty is human, and fallen, like the rest of us. Doesn't mean its central theme is wrong. I too have felt the wrath of beesty and while I would never admit to enjoy getting flammed, and I certainy defended myself, I also freely admit that beesty's comments toward me had their desired effect (or one of them anyway), I became more aware of the beginners forum in general and had to admit it was generally OK to be nice to boobs, I mean noobs (it's OK to be nice to boobs too, I assure you!). What a concept, eh? Don't throw out that notion just cause you don't like beesty. Personal contribution, that's the ticket!
4. Go ahead and form your expert's panel. There are inherent problems though... where do you put them? Who are the experts and what is their expertise? Will these experts tender questions from all the forums? Are you gonna subdivide the experts into the various genre's to reflect the forum structure?
Here's my take: accept any expert who wants to volunteer. Don't write a bunch of code or create control systems that simulate equality and or fairness in terms of that selection process. No ridiculous voting or weighing. We all know those devices are meant to shield the experts from their own bad behavior anyway. They are the programmers way of getting around human personalities and they stip the humanity right out of the exchange. The expert should willingly post their credentials somewhere, so average folks can have a sense from whence that expertise comes. Said experts shold really resist the temptation to be expert in all things. Too many times we see an 'ask the expert' comment on drape colors or the best stick shift, because someone asked and they feel compelled to be a know it all. YOU'RE NOT... a KNOW IT ALL! Have the grace to recruit 'experts for a day' to answer questions out of your depth, or you have no intellectual courage at all. In fact, if a bouldering expert even attempts to answer say an aid question, that expert should be laughed at and flamed! She would be doing the very same thing the experts panel is supposed to cure (which it won't anyway, noobs ask noob questions, period). Just let people ask the 'expert of their choice.' So even though JT was being facteous, an ASK JT512 forum, or an ASK CURT forum, or an ASK X panel, may actually make some sense. Let the self appointed experts stand on their own. The value of their contributions will quickly out through the post count.
5. I asked before, what is the purpose of the Beginners Forum. I would hazard a guess that it is not to entertain the experts with ever new and interesting questions. I rejected that notion from jt512, the 'purpose of the forums' and I urge everyone else to avoid the tyranny of entertaining jt512 and his fellow dissatisified experts. I don't think the forum should be about them, AT ALL. I frankly don't care that Curt or jt512 or anyone else dislikes repetitive questions. Too freaking bad!!!111
To me, a Beginner's Forum should be a place where open questions are encouraged, where no noob question is deemed too stupid for the light of day, where discussions are used to GUIDE our new brethren toward underdstanding, not goose stepping toward University. WE ARE PEERS! We are not your disciples! Get it????? When you go into the Beginners Forum, you should do so as a teacher, not a dictator. Shutting down a thread because it was worded wrongly, the thing that set me off initially, is an especially egregious foul. It says in no uncertain terms, 'your question is stupid!" While that may be OK in the aid forum, or at rec.climbing, I would submit that it is a rotten thing to do in the beginners forum here, where climber by climber, one by one, you should be GUIDING them toward wisdom, not herding them.
So leave the Beginners Forum alone and resist the temptation to control the conversations. PARTICIPATE but understand your role as teacher and guide. If you find yourself feeling dirtied by rubbing shoulders with the unwashed masses, instead of truncating the threads and locking out dissent, perhaps you should instead take a time out and go somewhere else till you are more accomodating of the needs of beginners.
PEERS. These people are your peers. They are not your disciples and you have no cause to whack them with internet sticks.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
squish
Sep 1, 2004, 7:10 PM
Post #102 of 105
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2003
Posts: 470
|
In reply to: Just let people ask the 'expert of their choice.' So even though JT was being facteous, an ASK JT512 forum, or an ASK CURT forum, or an ASK X panel, may actually make some sense. Let the self appointed experts stand on their own.
I miss Dr. Piton.
|
|
|
|
|
the_fury
Sep 1, 2004, 7:44 PM
Post #103 of 105
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Posts: 36
|
In reply to: you have no cause to whack them with internet sticks.
Stick?
*ears perk up*
did someone say stick?
C'mon throw the stick.
throw it
throw it throw it throw it throw it
*wags tail hopefully*
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 1, 2004, 7:59 PM
Post #104 of 105
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
And I'm gonna get that little dog too!
WWW
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Sep 1, 2004, 9:15 PM
Post #105 of 105
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Phil feigns throwing stick and watches Fury run off and stop with a bewidered look on its face, Where`s the stick, I`m sure it got thrown out here somewhere, says the Fury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
