Crag Moderation rant

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Route Adjuster 15 Jun 2018

<rant> Don't you just love it when someone adds one or more new climbs to a crag you are moderating but none of them have any descriptions or any clue as to where they might be.  What do people expect to happen to these additions?  Oh, and their UKC account won't accept emails either so you can't even ask them for further information.........</rant>

Right, I feel better now.

Post edited at 09:41
2
In reply to Route Adjuster:

It is n annoying problem. Let me know the routes and crag and I will try and follow it up.

Alan

1
 LeeWood 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

just bin 'em !

edit : I have never done this - my emails usually get through

Post edited at 12:32
1
 springfall2008 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

> Don't you just love it when someone adds one or more new climbs to a crag you are moderating but none of them have any descriptions or any clue as to where they might be.  What do people expect to happen to these additions?  Oh, and their UKC account won't accept emails either so you can't even ask them for further information.........

In that case, if they are in the guide book add them, otherwise delete

 Toerag 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

I normally add a 'buttress' called 'unsorted climbs' and put it last in the list for the crags I moderate. That way any routes submitted automatically go into it. I think it would be useful to have this 'buttress' implemented as default on all crags.

It annoys me when people submit routes without FA details.

In reply to Toerag:

> I normally add a 'buttress' called 'unsorted climbs' and put it last in the list for the crags I moderate. That way any routes submitted automatically go into it. I think it would be useful to have this 'buttress' implemented as default on all crags.

I also use this approach, keeps them out of the way - that's where the routes that caused the rant are currently residing.

 

In reply to Route Adjuster:

Just checked and an email is sent out to the person who uploaded the route when you mark it as 'Cannot be Confirmed'. The email text is:

Thank you for adding the climb 'NEW CLIMB' to the UKC Logbooks: {climb link}

Unfortunately I can't mark it as correct as I don't have enough information about the climb. Please can you update the climb, using the link above, with with a brief description, including its location relative to existing routes in the database?

Many thanks

This means that the person should be aware of what is required, however they may choose to ignore it, or it could easily get 'spammed' since it will come from an unknown address.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Cheers - that's good to know.

 Pay Attention 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

Easily solved.  Just set the grade of the route to "Moderate" until the details for verification emerge.

This is what a Moderator does ....

In reply to Pay Attention:

> Easily solved.  Just set the grade of the route to "Moderate" until the details for verification emerge.

> This is what a Moderator does ....

 

Now I like that approach.....Evil genius

 Andy Hardy 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Could you have a couple of mandatory fields on the form when entering a new route for location and description? That way the FA has to record the minimum info.

All the above assumes that you do have to fill in a form to enter FA details (never been in that happy position, personally)

 kristian Global Crag Moderator 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

The best ones to try organising are eliminate boulder problems that have featured in various guide books and volumes of guides all under a different name. Then someone decides to make the eliminate even more eliminate blindfolded with one hand tied behind the back and enter it as a 3* problem. The joys of minus ten and pinches wall.

 Bone Idle 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

People post with good intent. Would not wish to post without the permission of the route setter .Moderator please keep up.

Post edited at 20:26
 Mark Kemball 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> Could you have a couple of mandatory fields on the form when entering a new route for location and description? That way the FA has to record the minimum info.

I would not want that - as far as I'm concerned, if the route is in the definitive guidebook, then all you need is the name and grade. (As I moderate many of the Cornish crags myself, and have attempted to put the existing routes in for at least some of them, I can't be doing with more than name, grade and L-R order.) Obviously if it is a new route, then more details would be useful. It would also be useful if the person adding the route were able to put it into the correct L-R position so the mod has a little less work to do.

 Andy Hardy 15 Jun 2018
In reply to Mark Kemball:

I was thinking of new routes not existing.

 Paz 15 Jun 2018

I added in an 8b DWS the other day - I've no clue where it is or how it relates to the crag, I just saw it in a UKC news article.  But I'd be really interested to see who ticks it, and it's an important route for the country.

 

Having done it myself for a bit, I really appreciate the good and often thankless work crag moderators do, and yes uploaders sometimes supply the bare minimum of information just so they can get it in their logbook (or haven't worked out the logbooks system yet, or the routes should go into a separate new crag of their very own, because the uploader was too lazy to create a new entry for a separate crag).  But if none of the above apply, and a moderator can't work out where these routes are, e.g. by looking in the guidebook, then should the mod be modding that crag at all?

 

3
In reply to Paz:

> I added in an 8b DWS the other day - I've no clue where it is or how it relates to the crag, I just saw it in a UKC news article.  But I'd be really interested to see who ticks it, and it's an important route for the country.

> Having done it myself for a bit, I really appreciate the good and often thankless work crag moderators do, and yes uploaders sometimes supply the bare minimum of information just so they can get it in their logbook (or haven't worked out the logbooks system yet, or the routes should go into a separate new crag of their very own, because the uploader was too lazy to create a new entry for a separate crag).  But if none of the above apply, and a moderator can't work out where these routes are, e.g. by looking in the guidebook, then should the mod be modding that crag at all?

For existing routes then yes you can check a guidebook, this rant really relates to new routes. This might just be because one of the crags I moderate is seeing a lot of development with little information being published.

 Mr. Lee 16 Jun 2018
In reply to Route Adjuster:

Personally I try to email them directly for more details. Failing that I use the cannot be confirmed symbol as Alan suggests and write something directed to the contributor in the route description. Sometimes I just delete the entries at a later date if the contributor hasn't got back and I'm confident it's not an obscure forgotten route. I suspect these routes with no info are often duplicates, only with a made up name due to the contributor not owning or having access to a guidebook. I see this more so with sport routes. People wanting log climbs without knowing what they've climbed. If there's some sort of description I'm happy to work out on their behalf what they've climbed and merge their contribution with the actual route entry. 

 Simon Caldwell 17 Jun 2018
In reply to Mr. Lee:

It's surprising how often people will add a well known route to a crag without even stopping to wonder why it was missing and check whether they have spelled the name wrong or picked the wrong crag...


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...