For those of you who are wondering about the guy that Bob mentions at the beginning of this well-written article, I'm that guy. With his previous article "Volume 4," I asked that he notify me when Volume 5 was done and he politely did so. My thanks, Bob. Bob's recent writings have been cathartic in compelling me to reminisce about a special and unique time.
• Do newcomers really care about SP’s history in this age of temporary? It's been made clear for those that really are interested, the history of SP can be found on internet. I could resubmit the articles-it would take considerable work to make them appealing, but if I did, would it make a difference, would it be worth the time invested? How would the SP community truly benefit?
• Bob chronicles the voting system’s changes very well, and it was just as he says. It was always a problem that plagues staff members to this day, but back then, it was a fierce and daily battle. I recall as a staff member removing many votes for a myriad of reasons, from rivalries to downright hatred.
• Voting played an important role in establishing SP’s reputation for excellent info. SP’s most important years were those formative ones in which it had to establish itself and its reputation. In later years, that reputation has slid somewhat into mediocrity, but SP is still the best information source of its type thanks to the early submissions from passionate members in those formative years. It is through their efforts SP’s reputation was established, and internet and media attention contributed to cementing SP into its current status.
• Bob is right about the voting system overall though. The damage has been done. Fortunately though, this does not have that much bearing on current society’s “must have it now “ attitude. SP is still relied upon by all sorts of folks, including me. I’m always interested in what SP might have to say on a possible destination.
• In today’s SP, name recognition may have an equal influence as quality when people vote on a submission. Back in SP’s formative years though, members knew who submitted good pages. They looked forward to it and were excited when a page from a favorite contributor would appear on the WHAT’S NEW page. I’d venture to say that while it is the same today to a certain degree, this is not the case as often anymore. Sure, the “choice real estate” has all been claimed, but a truly good member concerned with the quality of their submission could establish a reputation easily as a first rate contributor.
• But Bob’s right. In this day and age, who has the time to do that, especially in this rushed society where everything is so temporary and our attention span is focused on one thing for a maximum of a minute? It’s a lot to ask for a fleeting moment of visibility on a monitor. I certainly understand and saw it coming toward the end of my service on the SP staff. Yep, our society and the internet has changed that much since 2001.
• Bob relays the photo voting problems accurately. This will always be a problem and an admitted flaw at SP, but IMO, it is not important, and overlooking it won’t adversely affect SP’s reputation as a good source of information.
• While good members departed over the photo issues and other problems, IMO the chief problem that caused people to leave SP was life changes. Changes in their own life, followed by changes in the internet’s role in their lives.
• A significant number of those departed, including me, left SP because of their unhappiness with what was happening at the web site and/or having the realization that the “old guard” no longer mattered in today’s SP. This is nothing against SP. It just how things are in the rapidly changing world of the internet. The values and motivations of SP’s founders were no longer relevant, and SP’s current members couldn’t begin to relate to these attributes, regardless whether they knew us personally or if The History of SummitPost articles were still posted, or if all those old members were still active. For me personally, it was best and certainly my queue to move on to life’s next journey and challenge. I hold that period of time dear to my heart. I’m proud to have played a major role in the formation of this grand website, and when appropriate, I’ll mention it in conversations with folks. Despite that “wonderfulness” though, it’s the past and is as insignificant to a current member as a piece of chewed bubble gum in the gutter. Everything is temporary and fleeting. Live for the moment, and more importantly, for your future. Reveling in past glories is whistling in the wind.
• Bob is right about the WHAT’S NEW page. I remember submitting a page and by the end of the day, it was almost pushed off the What’s New page. Things happened very fast back then. SP was blessed with lots of excellent contributors that cared about and supported the vision Josh and Ryle had in mind, and I was pleased to see Colorado leading the way in the effort. But again, now that the work is done, what does it matter? Sure, people benefit from it. That’s the intent. Had it not been done here, though, it would have been done somewhere. That’s the nature of the internet. SP had the blessing of timing and being in the right place at the right time. It was a magical moment to be sure, and clearly I was destined to be part of it. And many others have benefited-which was the intent. But of those that benefit, very few actually care. So it’s only natural that SP has quietly slid into “routine mediocrity” for lack of a better term. As Bob suggests, SP’s reputation is only slightly affected.
• Squatters were a problem back in SP’s young days and I see this is still the case, although there’s probably much less choice real estate to squat on, and people as Bob says, don’t waste their time on such endeavors any more. The life that drove the site has since departed, but SP is now living the life it was designed to live-be an information site, which was always the emphasis I stressed as a staff member. Being an information provider is not unlike being a library. It is a quiet, mundane and routine, if not happy existence, but it’s an honorable one. In turn, it’s only natural that the forums would quiet down as well. But that’s fine, because that is no longer SP’s focus. You want soap-opera style forum action, go to 14ers.com.
• Wikify SP? No. This would destroy the original mission statement of the web site, which is the very heart of the matter.
• I like Bob’s analogy on why people don’t vote or comment. Makes perfect sense.
• Will moving to a like/thumbs-up voting system, as much as it might displease heavy contributors, increase user participation? No.
• Does increased participation matter as long as site traffic continues to grow and content does not disappear? No.
• Does SP want to regain lost ground? If so, how? I’ll answer with another question. Has SP fulfilled its original mission statement, and if so, would it not be a good idea to stay focused on that mission rather than be something else that it isn’t?
• Can SP evolve as the Internet does, or is it going to bank upon its database for survival? Perhaps SP has already evolved in its maturity. I’d be interested to see what others think SP should evolve into? The internet may be evolving, but is it for the best? Does SP need to evolve and perhaps change into something else to achieve its intent, or would it be better for SP to focus on its mission and continually improve so that it can be the best source of information of its kind?
• Things may be quiet and mellow at SP in this day and age, but is that a bad thing? Compared to what I dealt with back then, I’d be grateful today for SP’s current atmosphere, which is quiet and much less contentious. Yeah, it’s not as interesting or exciting, but back then, SP was still evolving, and it wasn’t as close to being where it needed to be as it is now. So seeing SP “grow” will mean many things to many different people. Keeping SP’s focus will be important though if SP is to actually thrive in today’s very temporary climate.
• Bob’s closing comment: SP is not the best climbing site out there and probably never will be, but it is the best mountaineering site. Let's keep it that way. This is my point exactly, and it has always been my view since day one. I would recommend to SP’s current community that this is the vision the membership should stay focused on, should they decide to become involved with something that can easily vanish in the blink of an eye. If it is a worthwhile endeavor, and a wise use of your time in which you will feel rewarded (which is was for me), I highly recommend you take up the torch, and may you be blessed in the process!
Best regards,
Aaron Johnson
Former SP Staff Member
PS-Bob-Great job on the article. Thanks for posting and alerting me to it as I requested. I enjoyed it, especially seeing that my perspective wasn’t as narrow as I thought It was.
Bob, I think you've hit this one out of the park. If someone doesn't know much about Summitpost and how it has developed over the years, by reading your articles they will get a great background and a feel for what has transpired. Thank you.
Most of my mountain pages border on obscure peaks in Nevada, Utah and other western states but when I started looking for information on the ones I was interested in, I found little out there. It became one of my goals to "share" the information that I acquired with others that might become interested in visiting some of these peaks and in return hope that they too would add some helpful information to the created page. Many of the peaks I've been to are rarely visited but are gems in their own right, deserving of more appreciation. To do a page right, it takes time and effort and I can only hope that others will find it helpful. I don't want to make this sound self serving since I'm the one who gets the most out of a peak I share on Summitpost.
Summitpost is a valuable resource to me, I hope others will also take the time (as you do) to keep building it and making it the tremendous resource it has become. It is unique in the fact that it has developed through a communal effort and overall, the pluses have outweighed the minuses. Thanks to the elves and contributors who have made this site happen, I salute you.
I much appreciate the effort you and Aaron have put into various articles, and comments, describing the history of this site. I joined a little before things started going south, then left because of some of what I saw, and later came back under a different name.
I think whenever you set up something involving an assessment of better/worse on this that or the other, with accompanying votes on quality and etc., you invite the kind of result you've experienced. Human beings are often very weird (read: immature) when it comes to things like that, no matter the specific topic involved. Better to just let people post things and comment thereupon, and leave it at that, IMO.
Very good article, Bob, thanks for explaining to a relative newcomer like me what was to be the site in its moments of glory, but also what were the difficulties and rivalries, certainly due to human nature, unfortunately so often inclined to misconduct not only in real life but also in the virtual one.
I have joined SP in 2011, after the fall you’re writing about, but I could still attend to misconduct and manipulation, such as those perpetrated by that escaped member , whose rigged photos had deceived me and other people in good faith as me for a long time. From this point of view, things have improved now, but not at all in other ways, such as the dramatic decrease of voters and the number of submitted pages.
However, we must keep in mind that most of the mountains have already been posted and it is increasingly difficult to find non-existing ones, especially for USA users.
As you yourself have written, a perfect voting system doesn’t exist and will never exist , it’s rather the bad use that people make of the vote to make the system flawed and a source of frustration and dissatisfaction. Things change, even mountains change, so also Internet has changed : now the users seem to prefer the information “hit and run” rather than full, rich and competent information. I think not for this reason SP should become a site for throwaway information about mountain, in fact much can and must be done to improve SP info.
I fully share your acute analysis, but I think what's done is done and now the most important thing is to focus on the present.
I wish to give my contribution, albeit small, so I would like to focus on some points that I consider essential for the future of SP:
- Definitely the most important mission to make SP living very well is to update and improve the countless mountains and routes pages that have become obsolete, containing old information and not current or incomplete, or even unattractive.
This is not at all a novelty, this point had been well understood and encouraged, so that a great work had been started, but now greatly slowed with starting enthusiasm collapsed. It’s not always possible to update an old page attaching a route with fresh news, and when possible sometimes the operation can be a bit ridiculous: at the end you have a route page with much more information than the main mountain page! The road is hard, especially due to the fact that the owners of the pages are completely unwilling to share their pages, fearing confrontation and eventually losing those
- This is a huge obstacle. How to get around it? Wikify SP? I think that only if the working team is very close-knit we could obtain positive results, otherwise we would witness to endless discussions and disagreements and eventually the remedy would be worse than the disease.
- In my opinion the trump card to overcome the obstacle of the owners refractory to share their pages with the potential updater is to find the way to stimulate this latter, but without humiliating and above all affecting the original owner. I don’t know what could be the system, but it shouldn’t be too complicated for an expert of mathematical algorithms and power points.
- SP is primarily a mountain and alpinism site, so we should not tolerate that it becomes a photography site or a place to post breathtaking photos but having nothing to do with mountaineering. However beautiful photos are blessed, because we must admit that these latters convey information more effectively than not the bad photos.
- Commit ourselves in the first person to participate in the vote
My son, John, Pookster1127, joined SP in 2012 to record our trip to the Blue Glacier and Mount Olympus. He was 15 years old at the time and just looking for a way (beside Facebook) to easily document the trip. In our research for the trip we relied heavily on the Mount Olympus SP page by Redwic and the SP trip reports which had the best video of the route. From my perspective the info was far superior than we obtained anywhere else. It was also more entertaining with a great "personality".
We did not know or understand anything about the mission of the website or the voting system but when the votes for his pics and the report came in it let him know others reviewed his work.
I encouraged him to write an article on why he started climbing which got good reviews and made the front page of SP several months after he posted. John is off to college now and he never goes on the site anymore. I hope he will be back.
I joined in 2013 and am still a regular in reviewing the site for ideas for next trips. We climb at Seneca occasionally and I wanted to climb on the west face up to the notch because of one of your posts. We went to the Grand Teton in part because of the work by PanamaRed.
I am saddened Bob, you feel the site is no longer as vibrant as it once was.
By the way I could care less for the voting system for evaluating the quality of the contribution. I can not see the point. I look at all the contributions to a potential climb. I do not need someone else to evaluate its quality for me. Up and down votes seems like they measure popularity not quality and isn't that what the SP voting system has evolved to anyway? Sorry, just the way I feel.
I, for one, would challenge the leadership of the site to open all the pages up to contribution by all members. I think unless you do so the pages that are up will become static and stale. The people most motivated to contribute to a climb are the ones who were on the mountain last. If your concerned about quality and accuracy give the page owner rights to accept or deny the changes and a certain time to review the material. Or perhaps put the changes up in a beta format and give the membership a chance to review them and let the page owner decide. If the page owner is too busy then give the page to someone else with more time. Keep a history of page ownership so that others know of the "old timer's" work
I recently wrote an article on the history of The Grand. Chugach Mtn Boy liked the article but was unhappy that I had referred to the Grand as volcanically formed. He objected politely to my error and I changed the article. Simple peer review. BTW had I been able to contribute to PanamaRed's Teton page I might would have written the article differently but it might have been good content for that page. My article now rarely gets any hits so it might have been more useful to SP as content for the main page. (or maybe the content is boring - what author really knows?)
My contributions are far less than most active members on the site. I much appreciate those, like yourself, who have dedicated themselves to clear, accurate, useful, and interesting content. Still, if SP made it easier to contribute to the main pages perhaps SP would attract more folks who have a few hours - rather than the few dedicated people who have a "second career" as a SP contributor.
Thanks for the honorable mention, JRB! Much appreciated!
If I can ever be of help regarding another peak, or if you are having difficulty finding information regarding a peak in the Northwest (primarily), just let me know.
I was never much of a voter on SummitPost, but the new system made me vote even less. In my day job as an engineer I periodically have to rate each of our suppliers on a variety of measures -- I think of 7/10 as a good score; suppliers are sometimes hurt and want to know what they did wrong; that leads to useful discussions about our relative expectations. All of which takes a lot of time and thought.
Much as I love SummitPost, I just don't have the mental bandwidth to think carefully about each vote, or worry about what the submitter might think of a 7/10. So once in a while I'll give a 10/10 to something spectacular; otherwise I don't vote at all.
Maybe this would be too complicated -- but what about a dual system, where we could "like" something that looks cool, and have a numerical scale for those who want to go deeper?
Occasionally I will read a page, realize it has ambiguous or outdated instructions, and I will submit a map with an extended caption. Such maps and captions are a quick way to give the information missing from the page; for simple routes, that is about all one needs. And here's what usually happens: No one votes for the map, so it sinks to the bottom of the summitpost ratings. People continue to read the main page, ignore the low-ranking images, and take a bad or illegal route.
StartingOver - Mar 17, 2015 12:27 pm - Hasn't voted
Why do I Visit SummitPost?
I visit SummitPost to get information about mountains that are within my reach, to view spectacular photos of those mountains, and to read fun and inspiring stories.
I'm a hiker and aspiring trekker interesting in climbing as many mountains as I can. Sadly, I've concluded that I will not be the type of person to summit Everest, Denali, or anything that requires highly-technical rock climbing skills. Anything over class 2 is likely out of reach for me, though I did climb Borah as a youngster. When I climbed Borah, the guidebooks categorized it as Class 2. Now the consensuses seems to be that it is Class 3. So maybe Class 3's are doable for me as well. After attempting Rainier several years ago, however, I suffered spontaneous lung collapse--caused solely by bad luck and not bad conditioning or anything else that could have been prevented--that set me back for some time. I am now slowly, cautiously getting back into the swing of things, taking care I don't tackle anything without adequate preparation that could cause any further medical problems. Make sure I can handle 10,000 feet before trying 10,500 feet, and so forth. It is dramatic altitude change that can cause spontaneous lung collapses like the one that I had.
Forums? Really not that interesting to me. I suppose if I had a very specific question for which I needed an answer I might wander in there. Otherwise, I don't find them enticing, and that may be why participation is down (Note that I just joined several months ago, so I have no historical perspective on this).
I think this site will thrive if it focuses on providing up-to-date information about all kinds of mountains, from the Class 5.11 routes I would never even dream of attempting to walk-ups and class twos (my focus), along with providing photos and stories about those mountains.
It's fun to get votes on my pictures, but I don't expect to -- and honestly shouldn't -- ever become a member with great "power." I post photos both for my own enjoyment and as a reference for me and ones that I think others might enjoy too. I'm no professional photographer, and it is unlikely I will ever manage to take a photograph of a mountain worthy of a 99.99% rating. But there's absolutely noting wrong, in my opinion, in taking photos from roads, or along the trails, that provide information about the mountain or route at issue. Indeed, that is the primary reason why I started visiting the site in the first place.
I think this site does a pretty good job of this already. Hopefully participation will become more active during the summer. I suspect less people visit during the winter time. Many of the pages are too short and do not contain enough detailed information about the routes and conditions. Many of the pages are too old and have not been updated in quite some time.
In short, I have no interest in a site focused solely on highly-experienced mountaineers reminiscing about routes that are not accessible to the vast majority of people. SummitPost is not that, and it should not become that -- and I don't think you are advocating for that either. If the focus remains on quality postings about beautiful (or even not-so-lovely) mountains, the site will continue to thrive.
Twelve years ago, I was transferred to the Pine Ridge area of northwest Nebraska. I loved the many thousands of acres of forest, small peaks and buttes, canyons and numerous streams. But finding any useful information to access all that beauty was extremely difficult. It was surprising to find widespread indifference to the surrounding beauty of that area. So, I began exploring, mostly on my own, and eventually started a website (Panhandle Trails) to share what I was learning. And about that time, I also discovered SP. It provided another useful means to share info that had proven hard to come by. This has been mostly a solo venture for me. I have grown to appreciate the "big umbrella" of SP that also includes lesser peaks, canyons, buttes, and more. It's great to learn about and share hiking opportunities for those of us who are in our declining years.
After my 2012 retirement, my wife and I moved to the nearby Black Hills. Our goal has been to share though our site and SP what we have learned so that other hikers visiting the Black Hills-Pine Ridge region will not have to go through the same difficulties we have in finding useful hiking information.
Yes, SP is evolving. Change is inevitable, and there are good things we hate to see disappear. But I am glad to have people like Bob working for positive change at SP. Proactive changes are generally quite difficult wherever you are "charting new waters". But I believe the benefits to hikers and climbers worldwide are worth all the efforts (and headaches that sometimes go with the territory). My wife & I will continue to share what we learn from our region (that is not nearly so popular as the Rockies, Sierras, Alps, etc.). We are glad to be a small part of a much-larger group effort to continue to grow the SP database.
In my early days at SP, I did not vote or comment much. I actually understood little about SP. But I have come to see the importance of peer review and encouragement through comments and votes. Because I am not a technical climber, I try to stay away from voting on anything that I believe I know nothing or next to nothing about. Votes should be real. I agree that voting should be more than a popularity contest or a clique thing. But I also recognize that some members turn in consistently good work - well researched and thorough. There is a reason those people get a lot of votes. I appreciate how they "set the bar a little higher" for people like me to aspire to. I'm sorry I missed "the good old days" at SP, but I have no problem with the way it is right now and am glad to be here. My thanks to Bob and all the others who share at SP!
Some people get more votes because they produce good pages. But most people get more votes due to mutual back-patting, or by having objects (e.g. Mount Whitney) that get a lot of enthusiasts who want to vote on something emblematic of their accomplishment. Please don't kid yourself into thinking that a good page correlates with a good score.
"Peer review" here is pretty silly. Twice I have found highly-rated pages that were plagiarisms. I would be more in favor of voting for elves who simply decide if a contribution adds to the knowledge base. Most of the pages could replaced by a single map and gpx file, or rock-climbing topo with a detailed caption.
The site has simply changed into the creature that best fills the nearest niche, and that creature is a jazzed up version of Backpacker magazine. The online guidebook concept doesn't really work - for SP or any other site. It's nice for a weekend visit to an area, but not for anyone who seriously wants to explore an area's climbing potential.
Besides, let's face it, the vast majority of members/readers of the site are pedestrian tourists (and I do not mean to denigrate them with that label, I just mean that they like to walk around and see things). The site serves their needs and provides some motivation for their interest. That is not the same interest that most climbers have when they venture out to climb. Why pretend the situation is otherwise? Why lament the change?
The photography is very nice, anyway.
I think just about anyone else would have been reluctant to touch the voting issue with a ten foot pole, but you have accurately described the issues we have faced, including why voting and other feedback is an important issue, and how it affects the rest of the site. For anyone unfamiliar with SP, this article might seem like dry reading, but not for those of us who have sat back over the years and watched these issues unfurl.
As someone who has invested vast amounts of unpaid hours into SP, I want to see the site not only survive but thrive as well.
I've also wondered why there wasn't more participation in commenting. The instant gratification status of society sounds like it would explain everything except if you look on youtube or twitter, you'll find that people are more than willing to voice their opinion. It could be a digestion issue, and by that I mean reading. This site might evolve into a photo/diagram/video climbing blog but it could also still be informative. Newer members don't seem afraid to post video TR's or massive photo maps of their routes. Mudrat Mackenzie always puts together detailed lines. Wish we could spark more discussion there.
As far as the wiki thing goes, SP does allow members to share pages, something that we rarely see. I wonder how much of this is egos getting in the way as opposed to pride in work on a given page? Certainly members could share pages with other knowledgeable members and improve the information on their page without having to relinquish ownership. I have done this with some of my pages already. I really wish it caught on more.
ToOldForThis - Mar 23, 2015 1:41 am - Hasn't voted
Long Time Lurker
I have been coming to SP for the past two years looking for information on hikes that I want to attempt and getting ideas for hikes/climbs I didn't know existed. I appreciate the info available and I enjoy reading the trip reports as much as or in some cases more so than the pages themselves.
As far as new pages, there are few summits that I could not find already. I may decide to post something, but I question the value of posting my experiences from climbing some small peak in my proverbial backyard that I doubt anyone else would be interested in or will ever search for on these pages. The fact that you have so much information available should not be viewed as a negative.
Second, I have noted that some pages are very outdated and contain incorrect information. How should this be corrected? Certainly not by allowing anyone and everyone to edit pages. This would likely result not only in wars over what should be on the page, but also more inaccurate information, possibly intentionally inaccurate. However, there should be a way to open certain peaks, etc. to new posters if the current "owner" has moved on. I like the idea posted above where a page owner has a set amount of time to reply to a formal request for an update/change to his page. A lack of response should be viewed as an abandonment of the page and a loss of "ownership." This would allow outdated or incorrect content to be replaced by current and correct information, which is what I came for. As it is now, I rely as much or more so on the Trip reports for my information on a particular mountain or route.
Lastly, thanks for what you and the other moderators and contributors do in providing and maintaining this site. It has been an enjoyment and a useful tool in getting me back into hiking.
P.S. I couldn't care less about the scores at the top of a page. I can judge for myself if the information was useful, without seeing what other people thought of it.
Pages can be adopted by other members. While the normal process is to ask the owner about it, if the owner of an outdated page has been inactive for a long time it is automatically considered to be up for adoption by others who are willing and able to improve it. See this thread.
However, outdated or poor pages for which the owner is still active, but just not willing or able to either improve the page or let someone else adopt it, well, that's a problem for which SP doesn't have a good solution. This has been argued about for a long time. Some argue that such pages should be passed to others even if the owner objects, but I certainly wouldn't want that. But I don't see a solution that will make everybody happy.
So far, the only headway that has been made is when someone adopts a page, but then does nothing to improve it. In that case, if someone else asks to adopt that page, that request will be granted.
What this article describes is not the advent of a "fast food culture" that wants results without putting in any work. People have been complaining about our society using terms like those for the last 50 years. What this article describes is a community dying.
Summitpost currently survives on its database, even in the 5-odd years I've been here I've seen a marked decrease in the number of serious climbers contributing to the site. I suspect the forum wars and the voting/power-points system are to blame. One of the biggest problem with this site is that people vote on page quality and not on route quality. Contributions are judged first by how pretty they are, as if they were in competition with each other.
Example: several years ago I did a couple climbs at WA pass and put together some skeleton pages, nothing fancy, just some placeholders that i intended to flesh out in the coming weeks, and within a couple days I had a site administrator deleting my photos and tagging my pages for major revision. He seemed incensed that I dared to post these routes without regard for his quality standards. I got pissed and deleted the pages. Those routes, classic moderates many on this site would enjoy, are still not represented.
Summitpost is very, very far from being the premier climbing website. I can go to sites like CascadeClimbers and MountainProject and hear about important first ascents from the first ascensionists themselves, I can post a historical query on Supertopo and get responses from some seriously famous climbers. On Summitpost I can read about some random guy's hiking trip.
While I understand the emotional attachment some of you guys have to this site I kind of wish you would let it die its natural death. I had some good times on Myspace but I don't really care that I haven't been to the site in 6 or 7 years. Times change and Summitpost is a dinosaur – a weird, insular, out of touch reptile that pops up a lot on google searches. There never was any glory to getting the summitpost page for a cool peak, it never meant anything special, let it go.
Aaron Johnson - Mar 7, 2015 11:52 am - Voted 10/10
SP HISTORY V5-OLD TIMER'S PERSPECTIVEFor those of you who are wondering about the guy that Bob mentions at the beginning of this well-written article, I'm that guy. With his previous article "Volume 4," I asked that he notify me when Volume 5 was done and he politely did so. My thanks, Bob. Bob's recent writings have been cathartic in compelling me to reminisce about a special and unique time.
• Do newcomers really care about SP’s history in this age of temporary? It's been made clear for those that really are interested, the history of SP can be found on internet. I could resubmit the articles-it would take considerable work to make them appealing, but if I did, would it make a difference, would it be worth the time invested? How would the SP community truly benefit?
• Bob chronicles the voting system’s changes very well, and it was just as he says. It was always a problem that plagues staff members to this day, but back then, it was a fierce and daily battle. I recall as a staff member removing many votes for a myriad of reasons, from rivalries to downright hatred.
• Voting played an important role in establishing SP’s reputation for excellent info. SP’s most important years were those formative ones in which it had to establish itself and its reputation. In later years, that reputation has slid somewhat into mediocrity, but SP is still the best information source of its type thanks to the early submissions from passionate members in those formative years. It is through their efforts SP’s reputation was established, and internet and media attention contributed to cementing SP into its current status.
• Bob is right about the voting system overall though. The damage has been done. Fortunately though, this does not have that much bearing on current society’s “must have it now “ attitude. SP is still relied upon by all sorts of folks, including me. I’m always interested in what SP might have to say on a possible destination.
• In today’s SP, name recognition may have an equal influence as quality when people vote on a submission. Back in SP’s formative years though, members knew who submitted good pages. They looked forward to it and were excited when a page from a favorite contributor would appear on the WHAT’S NEW page. I’d venture to say that while it is the same today to a certain degree, this is not the case as often anymore. Sure, the “choice real estate” has all been claimed, but a truly good member concerned with the quality of their submission could establish a reputation easily as a first rate contributor.
• But Bob’s right. In this day and age, who has the time to do that, especially in this rushed society where everything is so temporary and our attention span is focused on one thing for a maximum of a minute? It’s a lot to ask for a fleeting moment of visibility on a monitor. I certainly understand and saw it coming toward the end of my service on the SP staff. Yep, our society and the internet has changed that much since 2001.
• Bob relays the photo voting problems accurately. This will always be a problem and an admitted flaw at SP, but IMO, it is not important, and overlooking it won’t adversely affect SP’s reputation as a good source of information.
• While good members departed over the photo issues and other problems, IMO the chief problem that caused people to leave SP was life changes. Changes in their own life, followed by changes in the internet’s role in their lives.
• A significant number of those departed, including me, left SP because of their unhappiness with what was happening at the web site and/or having the realization that the “old guard” no longer mattered in today’s SP. This is nothing against SP. It just how things are in the rapidly changing world of the internet. The values and motivations of SP’s founders were no longer relevant, and SP’s current members couldn’t begin to relate to these attributes, regardless whether they knew us personally or if The History of SummitPost articles were still posted, or if all those old members were still active. For me personally, it was best and certainly my queue to move on to life’s next journey and challenge. I hold that period of time dear to my heart. I’m proud to have played a major role in the formation of this grand website, and when appropriate, I’ll mention it in conversations with folks. Despite that “wonderfulness” though, it’s the past and is as insignificant to a current member as a piece of chewed bubble gum in the gutter. Everything is temporary and fleeting. Live for the moment, and more importantly, for your future. Reveling in past glories is whistling in the wind.
• Bob is right about the WHAT’S NEW page. I remember submitting a page and by the end of the day, it was almost pushed off the What’s New page. Things happened very fast back then. SP was blessed with lots of excellent contributors that cared about and supported the vision Josh and Ryle had in mind, and I was pleased to see Colorado leading the way in the effort. But again, now that the work is done, what does it matter? Sure, people benefit from it. That’s the intent. Had it not been done here, though, it would have been done somewhere. That’s the nature of the internet. SP had the blessing of timing and being in the right place at the right time. It was a magical moment to be sure, and clearly I was destined to be part of it. And many others have benefited-which was the intent. But of those that benefit, very few actually care. So it’s only natural that SP has quietly slid into “routine mediocrity” for lack of a better term. As Bob suggests, SP’s reputation is only slightly affected.
• Squatters were a problem back in SP’s young days and I see this is still the case, although there’s probably much less choice real estate to squat on, and people as Bob says, don’t waste their time on such endeavors any more. The life that drove the site has since departed, but SP is now living the life it was designed to live-be an information site, which was always the emphasis I stressed as a staff member. Being an information provider is not unlike being a library. It is a quiet, mundane and routine, if not happy existence, but it’s an honorable one. In turn, it’s only natural that the forums would quiet down as well. But that’s fine, because that is no longer SP’s focus. You want soap-opera style forum action, go to 14ers.com.
• Wikify SP? No. This would destroy the original mission statement of the web site, which is the very heart of the matter.
• I like Bob’s analogy on why people don’t vote or comment. Makes perfect sense.
• Will moving to a like/thumbs-up voting system, as much as it might displease heavy contributors, increase user participation? No.
• Does increased participation matter as long as site traffic continues to grow and content does not disappear? No.
• Does SP want to regain lost ground? If so, how? I’ll answer with another question. Has SP fulfilled its original mission statement, and if so, would it not be a good idea to stay focused on that mission rather than be something else that it isn’t?
• Can SP evolve as the Internet does, or is it going to bank upon its database for survival? Perhaps SP has already evolved in its maturity. I’d be interested to see what others think SP should evolve into? The internet may be evolving, but is it for the best? Does SP need to evolve and perhaps change into something else to achieve its intent, or would it be better for SP to focus on its mission and continually improve so that it can be the best source of information of its kind?
• Things may be quiet and mellow at SP in this day and age, but is that a bad thing? Compared to what I dealt with back then, I’d be grateful today for SP’s current atmosphere, which is quiet and much less contentious. Yeah, it’s not as interesting or exciting, but back then, SP was still evolving, and it wasn’t as close to being where it needed to be as it is now. So seeing SP “grow” will mean many things to many different people. Keeping SP’s focus will be important though if SP is to actually thrive in today’s very temporary climate.
• Bob’s closing comment: SP is not the best climbing site out there and probably never will be, but it is the best mountaineering site. Let's keep it that way. This is my point exactly, and it has always been my view since day one. I would recommend to SP’s current community that this is the vision the membership should stay focused on, should they decide to become involved with something that can easily vanish in the blink of an eye. If it is a worthwhile endeavor, and a wise use of your time in which you will feel rewarded (which is was for me), I highly recommend you take up the torch, and may you be blessed in the process!
Best regards,
Aaron Johnson
Former SP Staff Member
PS-Bob-Great job on the article. Thanks for posting and alerting me to it as I requested. I enjoyed it, especially seeing that my perspective wasn’t as narrow as I thought It was.
Dean - Mar 7, 2015 3:43 pm - Voted 10/10
Well writtenBob, I think you've hit this one out of the park. If someone doesn't know much about Summitpost and how it has developed over the years, by reading your articles they will get a great background and a feel for what has transpired. Thank you.
Most of my mountain pages border on obscure peaks in Nevada, Utah and other western states but when I started looking for information on the ones I was interested in, I found little out there. It became one of my goals to "share" the information that I acquired with others that might become interested in visiting some of these peaks and in return hope that they too would add some helpful information to the created page. Many of the peaks I've been to are rarely visited but are gems in their own right, deserving of more appreciation. To do a page right, it takes time and effort and I can only hope that others will find it helpful. I don't want to make this sound self serving since I'm the one who gets the most out of a peak I share on Summitpost.
Summitpost is a valuable resource to me, I hope others will also take the time (as you do) to keep building it and making it the tremendous resource it has become. It is unique in the fact that it has developed through a communal effort and overall, the pluses have outweighed the minuses. Thanks to the elves and contributors who have made this site happen, I salute you.
LongLost - Mar 7, 2015 5:12 pm - Hasn't voted
ThanksI much appreciate the effort you and Aaron have put into various articles, and comments, describing the history of this site. I joined a little before things started going south, then left because of some of what I saw, and later came back under a different name.
I think whenever you set up something involving an assessment of better/worse on this that or the other, with accompanying votes on quality and etc., you invite the kind of result you've experienced. Human beings are often very weird (read: immature) when it comes to things like that, no matter the specific topic involved. Better to just let people post things and comment thereupon, and leave it at that, IMO.
Silvia Mazzani - Mar 10, 2015 2:26 pm - Voted 10/10
Easy to say and hard to do, but it's worth a tryVery good article, Bob, thanks for explaining to a relative newcomer like me what was to be the site in its moments of glory, but also what were the difficulties and rivalries, certainly due to human nature, unfortunately so often inclined to misconduct not only in real life but also in the virtual one.
I have joined SP in 2011, after the fall you’re writing about, but I could still attend to misconduct and manipulation, such as those perpetrated by that escaped member , whose rigged photos had deceived me and other people in good faith as me for a long time. From this point of view, things have improved now, but not at all in other ways, such as the dramatic decrease of voters and the number of submitted pages.
However, we must keep in mind that most of the mountains have already been posted and it is increasingly difficult to find non-existing ones, especially for USA users.
As you yourself have written, a perfect voting system doesn’t exist and will never exist , it’s rather the bad use that people make of the vote to make the system flawed and a source of frustration and dissatisfaction. Things change, even mountains change, so also Internet has changed : now the users seem to prefer the information “hit and run” rather than full, rich and competent information. I think not for this reason SP should become a site for throwaway information about mountain, in fact much can and must be done to improve SP info.
I fully share your acute analysis, but I think what's done is done and now the most important thing is to focus on the present.
I wish to give my contribution, albeit small, so I would like to focus on some points that I consider essential for the future of SP:
- Definitely the most important mission to make SP living very well is to update and improve the countless mountains and routes pages that have become obsolete, containing old information and not current or incomplete, or even unattractive.
This is not at all a novelty, this point had been well understood and encouraged, so that a great work had been started, but now greatly slowed with starting enthusiasm collapsed. It’s not always possible to update an old page attaching a route with fresh news, and when possible sometimes the operation can be a bit ridiculous: at the end you have a route page with much more information than the main mountain page! The road is hard, especially due to the fact that the owners of the pages are completely unwilling to share their pages, fearing confrontation and eventually losing those
- This is a huge obstacle. How to get around it? Wikify SP? I think that only if the working team is very close-knit we could obtain positive results, otherwise we would witness to endless discussions and disagreements and eventually the remedy would be worse than the disease.
- In my opinion the trump card to overcome the obstacle of the owners refractory to share their pages with the potential updater is to find the way to stimulate this latter, but without humiliating and above all affecting the original owner. I don’t know what could be the system, but it shouldn’t be too complicated for an expert of mathematical algorithms and power points.
- SP is primarily a mountain and alpinism site, so we should not tolerate that it becomes a photography site or a place to post breathtaking photos but having nothing to do with mountaineering. However beautiful photos are blessed, because we must admit that these latters convey information more effectively than not the bad photos.
- Commit ourselves in the first person to participate in the vote
Thanks again!
JRB - Mar 13, 2015 6:52 pm - Hasn't voted
Why I joined and contribute to SPMy son, John, Pookster1127, joined SP in 2012 to record our trip to the Blue Glacier and Mount Olympus. He was 15 years old at the time and just looking for a way (beside Facebook) to easily document the trip. In our research for the trip we relied heavily on the Mount Olympus SP page by Redwic and the SP trip reports which had the best video of the route. From my perspective the info was far superior than we obtained anywhere else. It was also more entertaining with a great "personality".
We did not know or understand anything about the mission of the website or the voting system but when the votes for his pics and the report came in it let him know others reviewed his work.
I encouraged him to write an article on why he started climbing which got good reviews and made the front page of SP several months after he posted. John is off to college now and he never goes on the site anymore. I hope he will be back.
I joined in 2013 and am still a regular in reviewing the site for ideas for next trips. We climb at Seneca occasionally and I wanted to climb on the west face up to the notch because of one of your posts. We went to the Grand Teton in part because of the work by PanamaRed.
I am saddened Bob, you feel the site is no longer as vibrant as it once was.
By the way I could care less for the voting system for evaluating the quality of the contribution. I can not see the point. I look at all the contributions to a potential climb. I do not need someone else to evaluate its quality for me. Up and down votes seems like they measure popularity not quality and isn't that what the SP voting system has evolved to anyway? Sorry, just the way I feel.
I, for one, would challenge the leadership of the site to open all the pages up to contribution by all members. I think unless you do so the pages that are up will become static and stale. The people most motivated to contribute to a climb are the ones who were on the mountain last. If your concerned about quality and accuracy give the page owner rights to accept or deny the changes and a certain time to review the material. Or perhaps put the changes up in a beta format and give the membership a chance to review them and let the page owner decide. If the page owner is too busy then give the page to someone else with more time. Keep a history of page ownership so that others know of the "old timer's" work
I recently wrote an article on the history of The Grand. Chugach Mtn Boy liked the article but was unhappy that I had referred to the Grand as volcanically formed. He objected politely to my error and I changed the article. Simple peer review. BTW had I been able to contribute to PanamaRed's Teton page I might would have written the article differently but it might have been good content for that page. My article now rarely gets any hits so it might have been more useful to SP as content for the main page. (or maybe the content is boring - what author really knows?)
My contributions are far less than most active members on the site. I much appreciate those, like yourself, who have dedicated themselves to clear, accurate, useful, and interesting content. Still, if SP made it easier to contribute to the main pages perhaps SP would attract more folks who have a few hours - rather than the few dedicated people who have a "second career" as a SP contributor.
Redwic - Apr 3, 2015 7:15 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: Why I joined and contribute to SPThanks for the honorable mention, JRB! Much appreciated!
If I can ever be of help regarding another peak, or if you are having difficulty finding information regarding a peak in the Northwest (primarily), just let me know.
LincolnB - Mar 16, 2015 12:45 pm - Hasn't voted
VotingI was never much of a voter on SummitPost, but the new system made me vote even less. In my day job as an engineer I periodically have to rate each of our suppliers on a variety of measures -- I think of 7/10 as a good score; suppliers are sometimes hurt and want to know what they did wrong; that leads to useful discussions about our relative expectations. All of which takes a lot of time and thought.
Much as I love SummitPost, I just don't have the mental bandwidth to think carefully about each vote, or worry about what the submitter might think of a 7/10. So once in a while I'll give a 10/10 to something spectacular; otherwise I don't vote at all.
Maybe this would be too complicated -- but what about a dual system, where we could "like" something that looks cool, and have a numerical scale for those who want to go deeper?
MoapaPk - Mar 16, 2015 5:38 pm - Hasn't voted
broken systemOccasionally I will read a page, realize it has ambiguous or outdated instructions, and I will submit a map with an extended caption. Such maps and captions are a quick way to give the information missing from the page; for simple routes, that is about all one needs. And here's what usually happens: No one votes for the map, so it sinks to the bottom of the summitpost ratings. People continue to read the main page, ignore the low-ranking images, and take a bad or illegal route.
Redwic - Apr 3, 2015 7:17 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: broken systemI totally agree.
StartingOver - Mar 17, 2015 12:27 pm - Hasn't voted
Why do I Visit SummitPost?I visit SummitPost to get information about mountains that are within my reach, to view spectacular photos of those mountains, and to read fun and inspiring stories.
I'm a hiker and aspiring trekker interesting in climbing as many mountains as I can. Sadly, I've concluded that I will not be the type of person to summit Everest, Denali, or anything that requires highly-technical rock climbing skills. Anything over class 2 is likely out of reach for me, though I did climb Borah as a youngster. When I climbed Borah, the guidebooks categorized it as Class 2. Now the consensuses seems to be that it is Class 3. So maybe Class 3's are doable for me as well. After attempting Rainier several years ago, however, I suffered spontaneous lung collapse--caused solely by bad luck and not bad conditioning or anything else that could have been prevented--that set me back for some time. I am now slowly, cautiously getting back into the swing of things, taking care I don't tackle anything without adequate preparation that could cause any further medical problems. Make sure I can handle 10,000 feet before trying 10,500 feet, and so forth. It is dramatic altitude change that can cause spontaneous lung collapses like the one that I had.
Forums? Really not that interesting to me. I suppose if I had a very specific question for which I needed an answer I might wander in there. Otherwise, I don't find them enticing, and that may be why participation is down (Note that I just joined several months ago, so I have no historical perspective on this).
I think this site will thrive if it focuses on providing up-to-date information about all kinds of mountains, from the Class 5.11 routes I would never even dream of attempting to walk-ups and class twos (my focus), along with providing photos and stories about those mountains.
It's fun to get votes on my pictures, but I don't expect to -- and honestly shouldn't -- ever become a member with great "power." I post photos both for my own enjoyment and as a reference for me and ones that I think others might enjoy too. I'm no professional photographer, and it is unlikely I will ever manage to take a photograph of a mountain worthy of a 99.99% rating. But there's absolutely noting wrong, in my opinion, in taking photos from roads, or along the trails, that provide information about the mountain or route at issue. Indeed, that is the primary reason why I started visiting the site in the first place.
I think this site does a pretty good job of this already. Hopefully participation will become more active during the summer. I suspect less people visit during the winter time. Many of the pages are too short and do not contain enough detailed information about the routes and conditions. Many of the pages are too old and have not been updated in quite some time.
In short, I have no interest in a site focused solely on highly-experienced mountaineers reminiscing about routes that are not accessible to the vast majority of people. SummitPost is not that, and it should not become that -- and I don't think you are advocating for that either. If the focus remains on quality postings about beautiful (or even not-so-lovely) mountains, the site will continue to thrive.
scramblingbadger - Mar 17, 2015 4:10 pm - Voted 10/10
Another view to add to the mix...Twelve years ago, I was transferred to the Pine Ridge area of northwest Nebraska. I loved the many thousands of acres of forest, small peaks and buttes, canyons and numerous streams. But finding any useful information to access all that beauty was extremely difficult. It was surprising to find widespread indifference to the surrounding beauty of that area. So, I began exploring, mostly on my own, and eventually started a website (Panhandle Trails) to share what I was learning. And about that time, I also discovered SP. It provided another useful means to share info that had proven hard to come by. This has been mostly a solo venture for me. I have grown to appreciate the "big umbrella" of SP that also includes lesser peaks, canyons, buttes, and more. It's great to learn about and share hiking opportunities for those of us who are in our declining years.
After my 2012 retirement, my wife and I moved to the nearby Black Hills. Our goal has been to share though our site and SP what we have learned so that other hikers visiting the Black Hills-Pine Ridge region will not have to go through the same difficulties we have in finding useful hiking information.
Yes, SP is evolving. Change is inevitable, and there are good things we hate to see disappear. But I am glad to have people like Bob working for positive change at SP. Proactive changes are generally quite difficult wherever you are "charting new waters". But I believe the benefits to hikers and climbers worldwide are worth all the efforts (and headaches that sometimes go with the territory). My wife & I will continue to share what we learn from our region (that is not nearly so popular as the Rockies, Sierras, Alps, etc.). We are glad to be a small part of a much-larger group effort to continue to grow the SP database.
In my early days at SP, I did not vote or comment much. I actually understood little about SP. But I have come to see the importance of peer review and encouragement through comments and votes. Because I am not a technical climber, I try to stay away from voting on anything that I believe I know nothing or next to nothing about. Votes should be real. I agree that voting should be more than a popularity contest or a clique thing. But I also recognize that some members turn in consistently good work - well researched and thorough. There is a reason those people get a lot of votes. I appreciate how they "set the bar a little higher" for people like me to aspire to. I'm sorry I missed "the good old days" at SP, but I have no problem with the way it is right now and am glad to be here. My thanks to Bob and all the others who share at SP!
MoapaPk - Mar 17, 2015 6:45 pm - Hasn't voted
the reasonSome people get more votes because they produce good pages. But most people get more votes due to mutual back-patting, or by having objects (e.g. Mount Whitney) that get a lot of enthusiasts who want to vote on something emblematic of their accomplishment. Please don't kid yourself into thinking that a good page correlates with a good score.
"Peer review" here is pretty silly. Twice I have found highly-rated pages that were plagiarisms. I would be more in favor of voting for elves who simply decide if a contribution adds to the knowledge base. Most of the pages could replaced by a single map and gpx file, or rock-climbing topo with a detailed caption.
KeithN - Mar 19, 2015 9:17 am - Hasn't voted
Merely evolutionThe site has simply changed into the creature that best fills the nearest niche, and that creature is a jazzed up version of Backpacker magazine. The online guidebook concept doesn't really work - for SP or any other site. It's nice for a weekend visit to an area, but not for anyone who seriously wants to explore an area's climbing potential.
Besides, let's face it, the vast majority of members/readers of the site are pedestrian tourists (and I do not mean to denigrate them with that label, I just mean that they like to walk around and see things). The site serves their needs and provides some motivation for their interest. That is not the same interest that most climbers have when they venture out to climb. Why pretend the situation is otherwise? Why lament the change?
The photography is very nice, anyway.
gimpilator - Mar 20, 2015 3:56 pm - Voted 10/10
Nice SummaryI think just about anyone else would have been reluctant to touch the voting issue with a ten foot pole, but you have accurately described the issues we have faced, including why voting and other feedback is an important issue, and how it affects the rest of the site. For anyone unfamiliar with SP, this article might seem like dry reading, but not for those of us who have sat back over the years and watched these issues unfurl.
As someone who has invested vast amounts of unpaid hours into SP, I want to see the site not only survive but thrive as well.
My sentiments exactly.
MoapaPk - Mar 20, 2015 4:18 pm - Hasn't voted
Irony: forums now best part of siteI get good info here. The participants are eclectic.
Mike Lewis - Mar 20, 2015 7:47 pm - Voted 8/10
Lots of good pointsI've also wondered why there wasn't more participation in commenting. The instant gratification status of society sounds like it would explain everything except if you look on youtube or twitter, you'll find that people are more than willing to voice their opinion. It could be a digestion issue, and by that I mean reading. This site might evolve into a photo/diagram/video climbing blog but it could also still be informative. Newer members don't seem afraid to post video TR's or massive photo maps of their routes. Mudrat Mackenzie always puts together detailed lines. Wish we could spark more discussion there.
As far as the wiki thing goes, SP does allow members to share pages, something that we rarely see. I wonder how much of this is egos getting in the way as opposed to pride in work on a given page? Certainly members could share pages with other knowledgeable members and improve the information on their page without having to relinquish ownership. I have done this with some of my pages already. I really wish it caught on more.
ToOldForThis - Mar 23, 2015 1:41 am - Hasn't voted
Long Time LurkerI have been coming to SP for the past two years looking for information on hikes that I want to attempt and getting ideas for hikes/climbs I didn't know existed. I appreciate the info available and I enjoy reading the trip reports as much as or in some cases more so than the pages themselves.
As far as new pages, there are few summits that I could not find already. I may decide to post something, but I question the value of posting my experiences from climbing some small peak in my proverbial backyard that I doubt anyone else would be interested in or will ever search for on these pages. The fact that you have so much information available should not be viewed as a negative.
Second, I have noted that some pages are very outdated and contain incorrect information. How should this be corrected? Certainly not by allowing anyone and everyone to edit pages. This would likely result not only in wars over what should be on the page, but also more inaccurate information, possibly intentionally inaccurate. However, there should be a way to open certain peaks, etc. to new posters if the current "owner" has moved on. I like the idea posted above where a page owner has a set amount of time to reply to a formal request for an update/change to his page. A lack of response should be viewed as an abandonment of the page and a loss of "ownership." This would allow outdated or incorrect content to be replaced by current and correct information, which is what I came for. As it is now, I rely as much or more so on the Trip reports for my information on a particular mountain or route.
Lastly, thanks for what you and the other moderators and contributors do in providing and maintaining this site. It has been an enjoyment and a useful tool in getting me back into hiking.
P.S. I couldn't care less about the scores at the top of a page. I can judge for myself if the information was useful, without seeing what other people thought of it.
rgg - Mar 23, 2015 2:38 am - Voted 10/10
Re: Long Time LurkerPages can be adopted by other members. While the normal process is to ask the owner about it, if the owner of an outdated page has been inactive for a long time it is automatically considered to be up for adoption by others who are willing and able to improve it. See this thread.
However, outdated or poor pages for which the owner is still active, but just not willing or able to either improve the page or let someone else adopt it, well, that's a problem for which SP doesn't have a good solution. This has been argued about for a long time. Some argue that such pages should be passed to others even if the owner objects, but I certainly wouldn't want that. But I don't see a solution that will make everybody happy.
So far, the only headway that has been made is when someone adopts a page, but then does nothing to improve it. In that case, if someone else asks to adopt that page, that request will be granted.
jacobsmith - Mar 23, 2015 11:44 pm - Hasn't voted
The real problemWhat this article describes is not the advent of a "fast food culture" that wants results without putting in any work. People have been complaining about our society using terms like those for the last 50 years. What this article describes is a community dying.
Summitpost currently survives on its database, even in the 5-odd years I've been here I've seen a marked decrease in the number of serious climbers contributing to the site. I suspect the forum wars and the voting/power-points system are to blame. One of the biggest problem with this site is that people vote on page quality and not on route quality. Contributions are judged first by how pretty they are, as if they were in competition with each other.
Example: several years ago I did a couple climbs at WA pass and put together some skeleton pages, nothing fancy, just some placeholders that i intended to flesh out in the coming weeks, and within a couple days I had a site administrator deleting my photos and tagging my pages for major revision. He seemed incensed that I dared to post these routes without regard for his quality standards. I got pissed and deleted the pages. Those routes, classic moderates many on this site would enjoy, are still not represented.
Summitpost is very, very far from being the premier climbing website. I can go to sites like CascadeClimbers and MountainProject and hear about important first ascents from the first ascensionists themselves, I can post a historical query on Supertopo and get responses from some seriously famous climbers. On Summitpost I can read about some random guy's hiking trip.
While I understand the emotional attachment some of you guys have to this site I kind of wish you would let it die its natural death. I had some good times on Myspace but I don't really care that I haven't been to the site in 6 or 7 years. Times change and Summitpost is a dinosaur – a weird, insular, out of touch reptile that pops up a lot on google searches. There never was any glory to getting the summitpost page for a cool peak, it never meant anything special, let it go.
yatsek - Mar 28, 2015 3:42 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: The real problemSummitPost is NOT supposed to be another MountainProject.
"SummitPost is a collaborative content community focused on climbing, mountaineering, hiking and other outdoor activities."