|
veganboyjosh
Nov 21, 2006, 4:58 AM
Post #126 of 357
(2506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
In reply to: Jesus, man--that's like breaking a long vow of celibacy to fuck a sheep.
they can take our trophies.
they can take our in line photos.
they can even take our mods, apparently.
but they'll never take our awesome user base.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Nov 21, 2006, 8:54 AM
Post #127 of 357
(2473 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In reply to: Jesus, man--that's like breaking a long vow of celibacy to fuck a sheep. they can take our trophies. they can take our in line photos. they can even take our mods, apparently. but they'll never take our awesome user base.
LOL, ditto that.
i really do hope this site doesnt implode, because ill really miss some of the ppl here.
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 21, 2006, 11:48 AM
Post #128 of 357
(2459 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
I have to agree with this unknown canter. rrrrrrrradam you're throwing a lot of negativity these days while some of us are working hard to make the site goes on. And under your "presidency" the life was not idyllic. I understand that you joined long ago and have some parental relationship with this site, but why don't just try to be POSITIVE?
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Nov 21, 2006, 3:17 PM
Post #129 of 357
(2435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
In reply to: What will happen, is that the forums with valuable info will start to fade, in favor of Community, just as on DZ.com it makes up for almost 59% of the total posts (2.5 million site total / almost 1.5 million in Community), where as here its about 20%... Point... The content is more valuable here than just talking BS, or at least it was. Community was even a hidden Forum here, but now its open to even guest... Hell, it was at the bottom, and reffered to as "Scummunity" before, now its prominantly featured at the very top. Why ??? Because what really counts in the end of the day is "page views", as that's what is shown to advertisers, and who cares what generates page views as the total is what counts. On the old site, we could "mouse hover" to get to almost anywhere we wanted to go with just one click, now, it takes several, but then each one adds to the total. Also, on the old site, I believe that page views were only counted once per page per login session, thus going to the same page over and over still counted as 'one page view'... I beleive now, each click adds one page view.
If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then it explains so much of why the new site is the way it is. I had no idea of how advertising was valued and sold on a web site. Thank you, Adam, for the lesson. Very telling. Very telling indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Nov 21, 2006, 3:56 PM
Post #131 of 357
(2416 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
In reply to: In reply to: What will happen, is that the forums with valuable info will start to fade, in favor of Community, just as on DZ.com it makes up for almost 59% of the total posts (2.5 million site total / almost 1.5 million in Community), where as here its about 20%... Point... The content is more valuable here than just talking BS, or at least it was. Community was even a hidden Forum here, but now its open to even guest... Hell, it was at the bottom, and reffered to as "Scummunity" before, now its prominantly featured at the very top. Why ??? Because what really counts in the end of the day is "page views", as that's what is shown to advertisers, and who cares what generates page views as the total is what counts. On the old site, we could "mouse hover" to get to almost anywhere we wanted to go with just one click, now, it takes several, but then each one adds to the total. Also, on the old site, I believe that page views were only counted once per page per login session, thus going to the same page over and over still counted as 'one page view'... I beleive now, each click adds one page view. If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then it explains so much of why the new site is the way it is. I had no idea of how advertising was valued and sold on a web site. Thank you, Adam, for the lesson. Very telling. Very telling indeed.
 No it isn't. It relies on only one shred of very circumstantial evidence: the loss of dropdown menus. The situation can also be explained -- and it has been over and over -- by the fact that you're seeing is only a framework. Everything, including dropdown menus, had to go to install a scalable system. It's the single most important point in all of this and it's the one that is forgotten most often in debate such as this one.
It also completely ignores the the fact that, while some applications take more clicks than before, others require fewer. The search function, email and watched threads are just a few of them. And hell, if you want shortcuts to various pages, you can also bookmark them in your browser. What many have perceived to be a distinct lack of shortcuts is actually those people not yet knowing how to take full advantage of their settings. Get good with those and I think you'll agree.
Now, how about some of the positives that have occurred SINCE the switchover? Daniel's wife emailed me and mentioned that she's barely even seen her husband since way before the changeover. Currently, between his day job and this, he's in front of a computer 17 hours a day. Here's a laundry list of cases in which he and sangiro have stepped up:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...gforum.cgi?forum=76;
I certainly admit, I disagree somewhat with Hillary and John being let go, because there were probably stages that were skipped in that process. But those situations are most definitely not my business. I downright cringed when I first read sangiro's now-infamous comment, even though I saw the smiley and knew what it meant. But as for the rest of the changes, I find them to be either positives or in the process of being reevaluated, which, for now, is just fine by me.
(This post was edited by j_ung on Nov 21, 2006, 4:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Nov 21, 2006, 3:57 PM
Post #132 of 357
(2415 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15848
|
In reply to: In reply to: What will happen, is that the forums with valuable info will start to fade, in favor of Community, just as on DZ.com it makes up for almost 59% of the total posts (2.5 million site total / almost 1.5 million in Community), where as here its about 20%... Point... The content is more valuable here than just talking BS, or at least it was. Community was even a hidden Forum here, but now its open to even guest... Hell, it was at the bottom, and reffered to as "Scummunity" before, now its prominantly featured at the very top. Why ??? Because what really counts in the end of the day is "page views", as that's what is shown to advertisers, and who cares what generates page views as the total is what counts. On the old site, we could "mouse hover" to get to almost anywhere we wanted to go with just one click, now, it takes several, but then each one adds to the total. Also, on the old site, I believe that page views were only counted once per page per login session, thus going to the same page over and over still counted as 'one page view'... I beleive now, each click adds one page view. If this is true, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then it explains so much of why the new site is the way it is. I had no idea of how advertising was valued and sold on a web site. Thank you, Adam, for the lesson. Very telling. Very telling indeed.
when i first joined rc.com in 2003, community was accessible to guests. It was later hidden from guests. One of the reasons the campfire/soapbox is at the top of the forums thread, is that these threads are visited most frequently.Perhaps the new owners, put it at the top of the page for the users benefit.....hmmm. Even on the "old"rc.com, community was the most frequently visited thread. Whatever you believe the motive is for moving certain forums around, advertising and it's dollars are a necessity, and if it helps this site keep running, great.
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Nov 21, 2006, 4:17 PM
Post #133 of 357
(2405 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
Thanks to Jay and Marge for ruining my conspiracy theory. Dammit!!
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Nov 24, 2006, 7:31 PM
Post #135 of 357
(2293 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
I guess the question regarding moderation is just not going to get answered. That's cool, there are other forums.
Mitt
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Nov 25, 2006, 1:33 AM
Post #136 of 357
(2266 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: I guess the question regarding moderation is just not going to get answered. That's cool, there are other forums. Mitt
Well, as far as I can tell, that's just the way things are going to be around here from now on. The old RC.com used to make an honest effort to serve the interests of its user base, whereas now it appears to solely serve the interests of its owners. This site has been de-contented and dumbed down--and that is plain enough for all to see. As rrradam has pointed out, the number of posts in the climbing forums have gone way down. Likewise, the signal to noise ratio here has gone even further South, with the recent mass influx of non-climbing posters.
What that means in terms of continuing participation on RC.com will ultimately be an individual decision for each user to make. If you can live with the site being basically transformed into chat room (devoid of substantive climbing information) continued posting on the site will not be difficult for you. If, on the other hand, your principal reason for visiting RC.com was to interact with (and share climbing information with) other knowledgeable climbers, you will probably need to find another site.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Nov 25, 2006, 1:49 AM
Post #137 of 357
(2262 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
Chee Curt, don't you know how much time and effort and money went into this new and improved masterpiece? One should not be spreading such negative insinuations. They worked weally weally hard to piss off so many regulars! Say something POSITIVE, man. Jeez.
Oh, and if you *actually* want a laugh: Jay's GF got him to spend part of his turkey weekend at JTree. Say a little prayer for him 
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Nov 25, 2006, 5:00 AM
Post #138 of 357
(2249 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
I guess the question is where do you go to speak about rockclimbing that has a good setup like this used to be. Super topo seams to have a great bunch of people but the layout is hard to follow.
Mitt
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Nov 26, 2006, 4:03 AM
Post #139 of 357
(2215 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
the_mitt wrote: I guess the question is where do you go to speak about rockclimbing that has a good setup like this used to be. Super topo seams to have a great bunch of people but the layout is hard to follow. Mitt
All we need is a couple good coders who are willing to put the time into building something to "compete". The pissed off userbase is here, and we have staff and members who know what features we want and need, so it's just a matter of finding someone who wants to build it, which is a fairly slim chance. There is mountainproject.com though, which is looking better and better every day, as we simply get shut out and ignored around here.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Nov 26, 2006, 4:30 AM
Post #140 of 357
(2211 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
yep.. mountain project's database is awesome and i love the way that is set up.. the forums are low on numbers at the moment but it just needs users to move over and post
|
|
|
|
|
ddt
Nov 26, 2006, 5:51 AM
Post #141 of 357
(2205 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 2304
|
the_mitt wrote: I guess the question regarding moderation is just not going to get answered. That's cool, there are other forums. Mitt
Hey Mitt, I sent you a PM last week in reply to your PM to me, asking about moderation. For the benefit of everyone I'm happy to repeat the just of it here:
Regarding the moderation and what to expect, the following:
* The general direction is described in the forum rules, and further under my first point (1) earlier in this thread, here: http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=1481038#1481038
* I've asked Phil as lead moderator to engage the moderator group in a discussion about how exactly whe are going to implement those forum rules. That conversation is still ongoing and we're carefully considering how we uphold the principles above without becoming net-nannies or forum-nazis. No-one, including the owners, want that. Seriously.
* Once we have more clarity and consensus about how the rules will be implemented we'll let everyone know.
I hope you can appreciate that we're not on a mission to turn this place into a sunday school picnic. This is and will always be the place where climbers hang out. We understand and know how climbers talk, the tone, the style and the intent. I'm a climber too. We're not going to lose that. What I trust we will lose is the uncalled-for personal attacks on individuals that sometimes went unchecked in the past.
Hope this helps.
DDT
(edited to fix URL)
(This post was edited by ddt on Nov 26, 2006, 5:54 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Nov 26, 2006, 6:26 AM
Post #142 of 357
(2200 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
In reply to: 1. We don't have patience with personal attacks, abuse and belittlement of people, whether it's directed at a noob, another user, a mod, ourselves, or children that cannot speak for themselves here. We'll treat you with respect and we expect you to do the same to others on the site. This one single thing is core to what we believe has been lacking on RC.com for a number of years now, and we would like to see it back (no reflection on your term here Wink). Now please don't confuse this with disagreement, or even heated debate. That we can take, and will encourage. Don't confuse it with Nazi-style moderation either. You should feel free to voice your opinion without any fear of retaliation. Just do it in a way that upholds the basic principle above.
This is what I am afraid of. You see years ago this group was way over moderated and it did not start developing a solid user base until the over moderation subsided (I was a lurker back then). These are the questions that I was asking; Are we going back to the old style of moderation? Similar to Sagrio's actions towards me when I made my comment to him. Very similar to what has happened to Coldclimb and Climbsomething. By asking these questions it was sort of giving you an out so that you could say that the current over reactions were an adjustment period and we can go back to the tried and true moderation of that we enjoyed. I guess the question is answered as above you are going to the old style of moderation where you have to watch who you speak to and the tone of which you are saying it. That's fine you and Sangrio have bought something and have made it very clear that it will be run your way. This is not our RC.com.
I only hope that others speak their opinion the only way that we can. As I have, deleting my contributions to the site and slowly moving on. Hopefully when enough people move you will finally admit that RC.com did not have a moderation problem and go back to the way it was. What many don't know is that there have been members of this site who have been severely moderated and threatened with the tar pit. I myself have been banned for a few hours. Look at the number of posts in the "true climbing forums" how many new posts are there don't you see how low the numbers are from before, this place has become a chat group. Your site is bleeding to death and you don't realize it. I hope you turn things around before its to late. WHO SPEAKS FOR THE CUSTOMER? I THINK YOU FIRED THE PEOPLE WHO SPEAK FOR ME!!!!
And my main question was not answered. You (the owners) have stated that there were things that went unchecked in the past that you will not put up with here/now. What were they? This will give everybody a chance to look at an example of the "style" of moderation that will be used.
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Nov 26, 2006, 6:46 AM
Post #143 of 357
(2196 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
ddt wrote: the_mitt wrote: I guess the question regarding moderation is just not going to get answered. That's cool, there are other forums. Mitt Hey Mitt, I sent you a PM last week in reply to your PM to me, asking about moderation. For the benefit of everyone I'm happy to repeat the just of it here: Regarding the moderation and what to expect, the following: * The general direction is described in the forum rules, and further under my first point (1) earlier in this thread, here: http://www.rockclimbing.com/...post=1481038#1481038 * I've asked Phil as lead moderator to engage the moderator group in a discussion about how exactly whe are going to implement those forum rules. That conversation is still ongoing and we're carefully considering how we uphold the principles above without becoming net-nannies or forum-nazis. No-one, including the owners, want that. Seriously. * Once we have more clarity and consensus about how the rules will be implemented we'll let everyone know. I hope you can appreciate that we're not on a mission to turn this place into a sunday school picnic. This is and will always be the place where climbers hang out. We understand and know how climbers talk, the tone, the style and the intent. I'm a climber too. We're not going to lose that. What I trust we will lose is the uncalled-for personal attacks on individuals that sometimes went unchecked in the past. Hope this helps. DDT (edited to fix URL)
I replied to this and asked the question above (previous post) and got this reply ( I will quote your pm even though I'm against doing that, just your reply above makes it look like I am questioning for the sake of questioning and by the way is bad form):
In reply to: Thanks for your openness and directness Sean. I respect that. I agree with you that we should communicate clearly what the standard of moderation is going to be. I'm sorting through this right now with Phil and the group of mods. Cheers, ddt
Even you agree that there is a need for a more transparent "standard" of moderation. Its been a 10 days. Where is it? I would suggest that this is the foundation of your site and is paramount to being released. Lets here from the head MOD, from the guys who have been thread NAZI's (Sangrio, Thomas, etc). Where does RC.com stand? Why did the other mods stand to let Coldclimb and climbsomething go? If you are all pulling in the same direction who is playing devils advocate and standing up for the customers?
Mitt
|
|
|
|
|
ddt
Nov 26, 2006, 7:29 AM
Post #144 of 357
(2188 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 2304
|
the_mitt wrote: This is what I am afraid of. You see years ago this group was way over moderated and it did not start developing a solid user base until the over moderation subsided (I was a lurker back then). These are the questions that I was asking; Are we going back to the old style of moderation?
mitt, I cannot speak for the "old style of moderation" years ago as I was not here.
In reply to: I guess the question is answered as above you are going to the old style of moderation where you have to watch who you speak to and the tone of which you are saying it.
Why would you not have to watch what you say on a public forum with rules and moderation, unless you are advocating that there should be absolutely no moderation? If you look at the forum rules however, it should be pretty clear that a lot goes. There's not a lot you have to "watch" for... basically it's personal attacks, and references to pedophelia.
I trust people understand that there is a difference between speaking your mind about an issue (which can be done using the language, tone and words of your choice to best bring your point across), and personally attacking someone. If you're looking for examples of the latter, try searching the forums with simple search terms like "you are a d*ck", "f*ck you asshole", "you are a retard", "you are stupid", etc etc etc. Of course there is always context to consider... which we will.
ddt
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 26, 2006, 10:04 AM
Post #145 of 357
(2181 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
the_mitt wrote: Lets here from the head MOD, from the guys who have been thread NAZI's (Sangrio, Thomas, etc). Where does RC.com stand? Why did the other mods stand to let Coldclimb and climbsomething go? If you are all pulling in the same direction who is playing devils advocate and standing up for the customers? Mitt
I am a thread Nazi??? There are TOS that I would have applied REGARDING INSULTS (INSULTS! can you read that) . Other Mods asked me not, and I said I will not apply them. Final point!
edited so I don't sound too harsh myself. I've contributed a lot in silence, and I don't want to get attacked by an anonymous user!
(This post was edited by thomasribiere on Nov 26, 2006, 12:11 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Nov 26, 2006, 1:09 PM
Post #146 of 357
(2178 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
... this site wouldn't be the same without an occasional (and seldomly undeserved) 'fucktard', 'moron' or any other wellplaced insult by honorary members. In community anyway, but also in the other forums.
It's not that I support insulting as a necessary ingredient of human communication. But it is obviously a necessary ingridient for some of the more illustrious characters on this site. And hell - sissies who can't stand a little name-calling maybe shouldn't leave home anyway, let alone try to climb rock.
- Daniel
(This post was edited by tisar on Nov 26, 2006, 2:46 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Nov 26, 2006, 2:54 PM
Post #147 of 357
(2168 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
Thread Nazi? Sissy?
Keep them coming, I appreciate.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Nov 26, 2006, 5:42 PM
Post #149 of 357
(2151 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
tisar wrote: ... this site wouldn't be the same without an occasional (and seldomly undeserved) 'fucktard', 'moron' or any other wellplaced insult by honorary members. In community anyway, but also in the other forums.
I think it might be better.
In reply to: It's not that I support insulting as a necessary ingredient of human communication. But it is obviously a necessary ingridient for some of the more illustrious characters on this site. And hell - sissies who can't stand a little name-calling maybe shouldn't leave home anyway, let alone try to climb rock. - Daniel
Who are those illustrious characters? I can't think of one single valuable person on this site who needs to insult people to prove his or her points effectively. I can think of several, however, who do so routinely and then use other's "thin skin," to excuse their own inability or unwillingness to communicate like adults.
Those people, IMO, are not imperative to the feel and usability of RC.com. They are simply noise and, IMO, distract the usership and keep the site from becoming as useful to climbers as it can be.
Remember when we started The Lab? It's intent was very much to be a serious climbing discussion forum. I posted in no uncertain terms in its intro thread that personal attacks and flame wars would be moderated out of existence unhesitantly. That's not because I was a forum Nazi. (In fact I argued consistently for transparency and a light touch to moderation during my time as an admin.) It's because I knew that the the "illustrious characters" of whom you speak had the power to wreck every ounce of potential the forum had. I think that's part of what happened to RC.com as a whole. It just happened over so long a period of time, we often mistake it for colorful characters and atmosphere. Well, I don't think it is.
I'd love a chance to see what this site can be without so many of those folks running 'round, although I certainly feel for sites like Mountainproject if all of them head that way.  I think I'll back this policy of moderation for personal attacks. But I'll certainly continue to advocate for transparency, too. I still believe that quality is nothing shy of crucial.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 26, 2006, 5:53 PM
Post #150 of 357
(2146 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
climbsomething wrote: Chee Curt, don't you know how much time and effort and money went into this new and improved masterpiece? One should not be spreading such negative insinuations. They worked weally weally hard to piss off so many regulars! Say something POSITIVE, man. Jeez. Oh, and if you *actually* want a laugh: Jay's GF got him to spend part of his turkey weekend at JTree. Say a little prayer for him
Actually, she woke up Saturday morning and the first words out of her mouth were, "I want to stay at New Jack today and redpoint Nightstick (which she did), instead of going to J Tree."
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
