Have your say on UKC.

[Fultonius]

I haven't been on UKC much in ages. I saw a newsflash about Tim Emmit's new E10.

I replied saying "F*in hell, that must be death on a stick!!!"  which was intended as a compliment, i.e. Waddage to Tim for an impressive, bold ascent.

So, after that followed a barrage of patronsiing nonsese from 17yr olds about my lack of knowledge of the uk trad grades. WTF 

That'll be that last time I venture over that way for a while... 

[SA Chris]

I hate patronsiing nonsese from anyone

[Fultonius]

I'm considering puntering you for that, old man!   

[abarro81]

I thought that was your own fault to be honest. Lots of people on ukc do genuinely not seem to be able to understand trad grades (somehow), and unless you can be bothered to look through someone's old posts/profile it isn't always obvious what's a throwaway comment and what's someone being a retard. Plus, given it's on Welsh Connections not looking like death on a stick, I can understand why someone responded how they did.

[Fultonius]

See, if someone had written something along the lines of what you've said (i.e. it's on welsh connections and doesn't look too dangerous) I wouldn't have gone off on such a rant, it was just that within 4 posts I'd been told twice that "I know nothing about trad grades". 

I hadn't even said anything inflammatory! It's not like I said "How can it be E10 6c? I think he's over/under graded it."

I was genuinely impressed by Tim's ascent and quickly left a post without even the hint of a thought that I might get flamed! 

Lesson learned: Ignore UKC again.

[slack---line]

Lesson learned: Ignore UKC again. Don't let myself get wound up by people on t'internet

 

[thesiger]

So, after that followed a barrage of patronsiing nonsese from 17yr olds about my lack of knowledge of the uk trad grades.

It seems to me the central "problem" of UKC is that it is too successful. It is now a giant forum with a lot of participants who are variously new to the sport and lacking context or not significantly involved in the sport and lacking context. So most discussions are clogged up with idiocy. I don't see any solution to that nor would imagine that UKC's management really care much. On the positive side, the non-forum content of UKC is pretty good ... that of course is funded by the ad revenues they get from being able to show a big audience of "climbers" on the forum to their advertisers.

[Bonjoy]

Obviously this is a contrarian opinion to hold on UKB, but I use UKC little and often, I find it to regularly have decent interesting news and articles (mostly Jack Geldard's contributions).
I think the logbook thing puts 8a.nu to shame, being a simple log of ascents and useful info without all the pernicious scores and rankings. Yes I realise the logbooks are an ingenious way for UKC/Rockfax to get the climbing public to write their guidebooks for them, but you can’t knock a commercial organisation for producing a mutually beneficial tool.
The forum is what it is and can hardly be expected to be different. It’s a large and varied cross section of the climbing/general outdoorsy populace. Hence the quality of topics and discussions varies from the good to the terrible and many discussions will have significant contributions from idiots. It doesn’t and can’t have the same sort of small community vibe as UKB, it is an entirely different beast. It’s far too big to effectively self police and speak with (roughly) one voice in the way UKB does. As well as a sea of idiots UKC also has insightful intelligent contributors (often of the old wise variety), who for one reason or another prefer to use UKC rather than UKB. Heretical as this may sound, for certain topics you’re more likely to get a good thread on UKC than here.
Where I do fully agree with everyone else is on their draconian moderating policy. I too have had posts deleted without notification or explanation. The posts may have been on contentious issues, but I had gone to great pains to make sure what I wrote was neither defamatory nor insulting in any way. It is impossible to have a proper debate when pertinent questions are considered taboo and instantly deleted.
Generally speaking, if UKC wasn’t there, someone else would have started something else which would be almost the same. It is mostly a reflection of the general climbing public with all the good and bad which that engenders. I think too much tribal rivalry between here and there exists on both sides and our insults no doubt sound as bitter and blinkered as Chris Craggs’ much quoted tirade about UKB.
So there.

Edit: Wrote before Thesiger's post hence repeat of similar point

[Norton Sharley]

Well said that man.

[Fultonius]

I mainly use UKC for the logbook too, which I agree is excellent. I was bored yesterday so did battle the the 8a.unuserfriendly logbook and uploaded last years climbs for a laugh. The UKC one is vastly superior.

I used to post a lot on UKC, got in on all the grading/athics/[insert any other nonsese] arguments and probably risked getting sacked form work for spending too much time on the net

I know I can be a bit of a cock at times (at least on here people just say "oi, stop being a cock" rather than slagging you off etc. etc.) and I often got a bit too riled up, so decided there's more to life and pretty much stopped using it.

These days I just have a flick through the news/article/top10 photos etc. and maybe post the odd bit of (hopefully) usefull info if people ask.

I think that recently the "NewsFlashes" have gone downhill. With their incessant  to always be the first with the headlines, they often make mistakes, or post news that isn't much more than heresay. When the news comes out properly they often have to change the content of the original newsflash. If they concentrated on quality, in depth content I'd probably get drawn in more often.

I guess I was just having a bit of a toys-out-the pram moment the other day.  The frustration of being layed-up...

[Offwidth]

"So most discussions are clogged up with idiocy. I don't see any solution to that nor would imagine that UKC's management really care much. " 

I think some of them care and I think there have been useful suggestions made, in person, on their threads and even here.  The most important to me would be less tolerence to clear idiocy on info forums in the same way they have stricter guidelines on their host 'UKC forum'  threads.  As for advertising revenue this could even increase useage as some useful contributers driven away by the volume of crap might come back (attracting more views) and the children can still play elsewehere in less strict areas. As for over heavy moderation I dont feel great whan it happens to me and I do think they go too far at times but on the other hand I do wonder how many people had stuff deleted and really didnt know why ... they usually are sticking to their rules.

[Johnny Brown]

I've no beef with the site generally, but the moderation is excessive. Deleting external links annoys me. Someone asks a question that has a whole, sensible thread answering it on here, and you're not allowed to point them at it.

I don't like the whole Web 1.1 forum software either. Its 2010 ffs.

[Fiend]

Wise words from beegoose there.