|
|
|
|
tigerbythetail
Sep 23, 2003, 12:29 AM
Post #27 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 514
|
One thing I feel to be a waste of server space is the route log portion of the route database. It seems to serve no real purpose other than being masturbatory (thanks for the word Camhead). True enough, if you were planning a trip or had your sights set on a particular route you could PM one of those who had done the climb for information. Then again couldn't you just start a thread asking for the information you need? Threads have been started for worse purposes. Perhaps the route log could be a part of or a link to your personal description - that way it wouldn't clog up the route info area like the example below. Here's one example of a popular Joshua Tree area - http://www.rockclimbing.com/routes/listSection.php?SectionID=2066 You can see that the log portion of some popular climbs is taking up way more space than the actual route description - it will only get worse given time. Now if a fraction of those people added a few bits of useful information instead perhaps we would have something more useful to all of us. Ultimately this site is as good as we make it - so if you don't like it either don't visit or do your part to help out.
|
|
|
|
|
alpinerock
Sep 23, 2003, 12:34 AM
Post #28 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 600
|
I've added about 30 routes in AF canyon and little cottonwood, the thing that bugs me is that people will add an area but no routes in it. :?
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Sep 23, 2003, 12:35 AM
Post #29 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
That is usually so they can upload pics of the area and still have them linked. To me, its all about time! I try to go back and fill in areas which are like that.
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Sep 23, 2003, 4:36 AM
Post #30 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
One thing regarding the ascent logs: Could a system be coded where it simply says "Ascents (#)" as a link, so you know how many people have climbed the route, and if you want to see the names, you can click it? That would work well for getting those out of the way, but still keeping them.
|
|
|
|
|
tarzan420
Sep 23, 2003, 4:54 AM
Post #31 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 678
|
I think the ascent logs are useful, but it is true that they need to be condensed in some areas. The reason I like it is, looking at routes I'm interested in doing, i can open up all the listed ascents, and some people include their own thoughts, beta, etc on the route. I wish more people would be more verbose in their comments about the route; it can be very helpful for someone trying to pick out what routes to attempt
|
|
|
|
|
arrrghjp
Sep 23, 2003, 6:55 AM
Post #32 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2002
Posts: 68
|
Here's my problem with contribution: I have put up a little bit of info (specifically gps location of few crags), and the two or three local route builders I know in the area, range from being top secret about their crags, to just don't like all the masses. Most of the climbing for me, is locally, and I just don't really know if I would be somehow putting my neck out by telling the world about all the wonderful rock in Eastern Oregon. A moral dilema ensues; telling the world about the many different local areas and several hundred routes, or keeping my lip zipped so I can keep friendships with those that are giving me the beta on their most recently completed 10b.
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Sep 23, 2003, 10:04 PM
Post #33 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
In reply to: Here's my problem with contribution: I have put up a little bit of info (specifically gps location of few crags), and the two or three local route builders I know in the area, range from being top secret about their crags, to just don't like all the masses. Most of the climbing for me, is locally, and I just don't really know if I would be somehow putting my neck out by telling the world about all the wonderful rock in Eastern Oregon. A moral dilema ensues; telling the world about the many different local areas and several hundred routes, or keeping my lip zipped so I can keep friendships with those that are giving me the beta on their most recently completed 10b. Yes that is a problem: to spill the beans on a new area or not. However, I doubt that it is the "only" area you climb at. You can always look at other areas you have visited to see if you have anythng else to add. Another option is put the new area w/o directions. You will get PMs from other curious users, then you just decide if you want to tell them or not :)
|
|
|
|
|
mcgardogen
Sep 23, 2003, 10:25 PM
Post #34 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2003
Posts: 55
|
It's simple the database sucks right now, but it could work pretty well. When people add a new routes and sections, (since these are added the most I believe) they need to keep in mind that they are doing it to help people not talk themselves up or be the first to put it on. Then add at least the main aspects. For sections give a general description, range of difficulty and type, and the last but deffinitely no least how to get there. I can't believe how many people leave out the directions on how to get to a section or route. When you don't do that it screws the whole point of why you add info in the first place. Oh well, I don't use it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
biff
Sep 23, 2003, 11:13 PM
Post #35 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2001
Posts: 851
|
In reply to: In reply to: I can't be alone in these thoughts? DMT You're right on, Dingus. I struggled for awhile with the idea of giving away my route information, when I finally decided to give it to RC.com, and they told me my photos were too large...I thought "to hell with you!" I think what you are alluding to is that they want the best of both worlds...they want us to give up information for free, but then they want to be able to make money off of it in the end. They're not sure if they want to be amateurs or professionals. Photos are now resized automatically, so please try to sumbit them again, and see if things work better for you. rockclimbing.com exists soley to support the climbing community. we strive to make things better for users, and climbers. It costs alot of money to run this place, and I am grateful to the people who donate money to the cause. We are not amateurs or professionals .. we are experinced climbers/computer programmers who volunteer our time (and money) to make this site better for everyone. There is no way that rockclimbing.com would start charging for people to get access to the routes database .. that would be stupid, and we are not stupid people. If we were trying to make money off this site it would only cover the costs to make it better and more reliable for users, not to profit for ourselves. All potential ways of making money are discussed at lenght between administrators, then when we decide that an Idea has some merrit, we post it to the community, and see what they have to say about it. Trust is something people seem to lack these days. I trust that everything I contribute to this site will remain free to everyone, and over the last 2 years I have never felt that the trust has ever been threatened. The routes database is a fundamental part of this site, I fill in and edit information for my province in hopes that somone will be in arizona (or some other place insanely hot) and see that they can have a road trip to my home town and have over 2000 sport routes, unlimited trad climbing, more than 75 alpine peaks within a 1 hour drive, and reasonable temperatures at their disposal. So far I know of a few people who have seen the routes db / photos, and have come here, spent money in local businesses, and had a great time. I have been eying australia for a long time .. I love to look a the photos/routes in the area, I can read about the areas, and dream of the day that I will be able to head down there for a few monts, and climb. Without the routes database, I would only be able to see glimpses of climbing in australia through magazines and such.
|
|
|
|
|
pixelguru
Sep 24, 2003, 12:07 AM
Post #37 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2003
Posts: 182
|
In reply to: I'd add some routes for Nebraska but there are none, unless you count the 3 boulders in Toadstool State Park. Unfortunately I've seen sturdier sandcastles than these choss piles. So it's Nebraska and Delaware as the two worst states to climb in... I once saw a road bike team in Delaware working out on a closed highway ramp... the only hill to be found. You have my sympathy.
|
|
|
|
|
ronamick
Sep 24, 2003, 12:23 AM
Post #38 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2002
Posts: 476
|
mastabatory (thanks for the word Camhead) He used it! Good job lad! There's a fella who's on top of the game. wait... wouldn't it be mastURbatory? Nonetheless, well done.
|
|
|
|
|
timpanogos
Sep 24, 2003, 12:25 AM
Post #39 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 935
|
I tried to add a route to and existing section - I hit save - nothing happened - no response at all?
|
|
|
|
|
mungeclimber
Sep 24, 2003, 12:39 AM
Post #40 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2002
Posts: 648
|
In reply to: In reply to: I can't be alone in these thoughts? DMT You're right on, Dingus. I struggled for awhile with the idea of giving away my route information, when I finally decided to give it to RC.com, and they told me my photos were too large...I thought "to hell with you!" I think what you are alluding to is that they want the best of both worlds...they want us to give up information for free, but then they want to be able to make money off of it in the end. They're not sure if they want to be amateurs or professionals. There's the trick, right. Try to make enough money to keep it going, but try not to alienate the people that contribute. It's the bain of all guidebook writers since you can't get it right 100% of the time for everyone. But the format is kinda screwy, but I've contributed anyways. Detailed info is pretty much not worth it, but general areas seems helpful if we take a communal approach rather than a market based approach. I've learned about Cali areas that aren't in e.g. Rock and Road. But I'm an obscure area officianado. But really, could "they" ever make a copyright claim to start charging for it? Doubt it, unless there was the usual offer, acceptance and consideration for giving up any claim to copyright. hmmmm, maybe I should read the terms of use. I think rc.com should be a central repository for links to other websites that sell stuff on their site to support giving out the free info on the other sites... like www.sonorapassclimbing.com and www.californiabouldering.com hahahaha
|
|
|
|
|
tigerbythetail
Sep 24, 2003, 1:05 AM
Post #41 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 514
|
Ronamick - yes indeed the word is masturbatory. Thanks for the heads up on the typo and of course I didn't want to miss another opportunity to use the word. The ideas about linking the route logs to a symbol on the route itself is a good idea that would eliminate a fair bit of clutter. People that actually put some effort into the route logs with decriptions and impressions of the route are appreciated and give some depth to the route logs, whereas those that merely use it as a public checklist seem overly masturbatory in their efforts (ha! used it twice in one post).
|
|
|
|
|
biff
Sep 24, 2003, 1:06 AM
Post #42 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2001
Posts: 851
|
In reply to: In reply to: i think the climbingboulder/climbingmoab style sites do a much better job of organizing and presenting route information and discussion, and also the intentions of those websites is a lot more clear. i agree. i tend to look up route stuff on those sites or nag friends with guide books and play in community over here. *lurk lurk lurk* Wow .. I am suprized that people actually use those sites. There is one called climbalberta that uses the same code aswell. I browsed through it, and thought .... man this is hard to use, and left it alone. The layout isn't very good, the text is hard to read, but it does display spesific route info in a very detailed way. It doesn't have anything that rockclimbing.com doesn't have (except for pictures to describe trad/sport routes and stars), and it doesn't have an ascent registery. The comments are nice, but I usually add comments in the ascent information.
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Sep 24, 2003, 1:38 AM
Post #43 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
here it is in a nutshell (IMO): if you don't see value in it - don't use it if you see value in it - use and add to it if you can ______________________________________________ for the naysayers : try not to be so negative in the "what ifs" as not everybody is out to steal your info and profit from it - some people are actually interested in offering info to others in the hope that they will benefit; all without personal gain for their efforts. _______________________________________________ finally, thank you for all the efforts by tigerbythetail, roughster, etc. for updating and adding to the local areas; and for all those others who update the areas i occasionally check out to see what's new. i think that there are probably some things that could be done better with the database, but i also trust those that use it regularly and spend the time updating it to do the job right. i'm sure that even they see it as a work in progress. MASTURBATORY - phew, that felt good!
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Sep 24, 2003, 2:02 AM
Post #44 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
biff, check out climbingboulder. it is unreal how much information is on that site. i agree that there are a couple of usability issues, and the overnight processing is annoying, but overall the quality on climbingboulder and climbingmoab is *way* higher than what is in this database. the comments there are also good for ridiculing people who put in crap, plagiarized, or inaccurate beta - which is sorely needed on this site. climbingalberta is a cobweb i believe - that one and climbingsaltlake were done very half-assed.
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Sep 24, 2003, 6:03 AM
Post #45 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
In reply to: biff, check out climbingboulder. it is unreal how much information is on that site. i agree that there are a couple of usability issues, and the overnight processing is annoying, but overall the quality on climbingboulder and climbingmoab is *way* higher than what is in this database. the comments there are also good for ridiculing people who put in crap, plagiarized, or inaccurate beta - which is sorely needed on this site. climbingalberta is a cobweb i believe - that one and climbingsaltlake were done very half-assed. Climbingboulder & Climbingmoab DO ROCK! However, it doesn't help you much if you live east of the Mississippi or want to climb Mt. Rainer, Denali, Foraker etc. They indeed do have LESS information than is on this site.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Sep 24, 2003, 1:45 PM
Post #46 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
it is easy enough to start your own climbingwhatever.com sites if you like and there isn't one in your area. climbingdevilslake is quite active for those poor bastards stuck in wisconsin. no website really gives you enough info to climb denali or foraker either - unless perhaps someone submitted the sultana ridge since the last time i checked.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Sep 24, 2003, 1:59 PM
Post #47 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Well that was what the site rating system is supposed to account for, but it has been stuck for months and months. It's not a high enough priority to fix, mainly because people are scared to complain about it for fear of being flamed, I think. I posted a message about it at http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=34438&highlight=site+ratings+stuck back in June but it hasn't been fixed yet. it's fixed now, but don't take that to mean that the metric isn't broken. I'm attempting to replace it with something that actually measures what users think of each other in aggregate, but of course there is strong resistance to tthat, too. re: Fiend: yeah, there's been some minor progress, but nothing that made it into release. I'm working with a tree-structured index this time around to see if I can make it so that users can arbitrarily assign their new route/problem/whatever on Foo Boulder in Bar Canyon of Baz Park, but it's not the most trivial implementation in the world, given the pseudo-tree of Country/State/Region/Area that is 'good enough' for some things. (and the enormous stack of other things to fix)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 24, 2003, 3:26 PM
Post #48 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
So... will RC.COM ever start charging to access the routes database? That would include making it a permium service or opting to charge all members for all access. How about an OFFICIAL RC.COM ANSWER? DMT
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Sep 24, 2003, 3:37 PM
Post #49 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
In reply to: So... will RC.COM ever start charging to access the routes database? That would include making it a permium service or opting to charge all members for all access. How about an OFFICIAL RC.COM ANSWER? DMT No !!! Not on my watch... I have said for a long time, that we cannot charge users to access the content that they add to the site. Everything on this site has been done by the users, as I am still a user, and so are the Coders, Mods, Editors, and Admins. We, the staff, volunteer our time also, just as do those who contribute to the RDB, Photo Gallery, Artickles, etc... We are all users of the site, some just add more content, and some add none and only take, then bitch that they don't get enough for free. Problem is, most "conspiracy theorists" see conspiracy in everything, so the above just sounds like propoganda to them. There are ideas being kicked around, like setting up PDA downloadable files for a small fee, but this would more be to cover the costs of writing substantial code to support this. But at this time, there is not enough info in the RDB to really warrant even trying this.
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Sep 24, 2003, 3:48 PM
Post #50 of 72
(4139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
In reply to: In reply to: Well that was what the site rating system is supposed to account for, but it has been stuck for months and months. It's not a high enough priority to fix, mainly because people are scared to complain about it for fear of being flamed, I think. I posted a message about it at http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=34438&highlight=site+ratings+stuck back in June but it hasn't been fixed yet. it's fixed now, but don't take that to mean that the metric isn't broken. I'm attempting to replace it with something that actually measures what users think of each other in aggregate, but of course there is strong resistance to tthat, too. Awesome Tim! :D Thanks a bunch, cause that's just been bugging me. I really do appreciate it. As for the topic at hand, I've said it before, but I would definately be willing to pay for this kind of resource, so I'm more than glad that it's given to me for free. This site is awesome!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|