[r-man]

Got together with Gareth recently and we had a look at what the site needed to improve. We've both been a bit slack in the last couple of years, but now it's time to get things sorted. Gareth has actually done quite a few less obvious fixes in recent times, but I hadn't realised. So here's a list of what's new and improved.

For starters, the server has been switched to Amazon, which should be more reliable, and also scale up whenever it is being heavily used. So it should be faster!

Also, in light of the recent yorkshiregrit demise, it's worth saying that if Gareth ever decides he no longer wants to run the site, he will happily hand over the database free to a good home.

General Changes
- The algorithm for 20 problems has been tweaked so only problems with more than 5 votes appear. Also, it's now top 50. The list looks a lot more like you'd expect now.
- There is a new link to filter problems beneath the recent updates. Several new filters have been added - eg. you can now search by crag, rocktype and area.
- The default view for crags is now to show all problems, makes it easier to use.
- On the home page, top videos have been replaced by random videos, to keep things fresh.
- Recent updates and new problems now show top 50.

New Actions
- You can now reorder buttresses if you click the edit button at the bottom of the relevant crag page.
- You can now reorder problems if you click the edit button at the bottom of the relevant buttress page.
- Moderators can now delete problems and buttresses.

Feeback
There is also an orange feedback tab on the right of the page. Click this if you want to suggest any ideas. If we get the site to a level that people are happy with, there's no reason we can't expand it to include other areas if that's what people want. At the moment I think the wiki functions are better than any other site (though of course there's always room for improvement), but I am aware that user profiles and ticklists are lacking. Oh, and the map still needs fixing. Anything else?

http://peakbouldering.info


Currently in Progress
- I've started adding the Anston Stones problems - if anyone wants to help, feel free. Now that it's easy to reorder and delete, it doesn't matter if you cock up a problem. There are loads of Anston beta videos out there, so it would be nice to get these on the site so that people can see them all in one place.

- If there are any crags/buttresses/problems that were cocked up by mulitple entries in the past, please can you post details here, and moderators can easily delete them, or get Gareth to merge them if they have ascents logged.

[Johnny Brown]

Effort.

[Bonjoy]

Nice one!  That's most of my gripes sorted out. I've got a backlog of stuff I need to update.

[T_B]

Nice work and nice touch sending out emails to people who's videos you are embedding to check that they don't mind.

Great site - use it all the time.

[tomtom]

A bit more spry on the new servers: Excellent.

[Dolly]

Nice one well done

[nai]

General Changes
- The algorithm for 20 problems has been tweaked so only problems with more than 5 votes appear. Also, it's now top 50. The list looks a lot more like you'd expect now.

Great effort making the changes, doesn't look like this is working on a regional basis though, looks like crag number, buttress number then problem number is the sort order for problems tied on star ratings. 

Really hope more people start using it, could be so good with more logged ascents

[r-man]

Glad people are liking the tweaks. 

Nai, well spotted! Only showing top 20 as well. It's now on the fix list.

[lagerstarfish]

I know that photos/topos can be put on the same as any other picture, but could they be tagged or listed separately or something to make them easier to spot when you look at a buttress or boulder?

not that I've actually got around to making such pictures, but I do think about it

I realise that I may have missed something really obvious and that this existed all along

[rich d]

I know that photos/topos can be put on the same as any other picture, but could they be tagged or listed separately or something to make them easier to spot when you look at a buttress or boulder?

not that I've actually got around to making such pictures, but I do think about it

I realise that I may have missed something really obvious and that this existed all along

I've probably missed it too, but how about a bit more of a detailed map for the areas too? Appologies if it's already there and I'm just being an idiot.

[highrepute]

I've probably missed it too, but how about a bit more of a detailed map for the areas too? Appologies if it's already there and I'm just being an idiot.

I'd have thought this something that the users would have to create?

[Kermit]

Great news.

Seems to be running much quicker although I thought i'd link a few vids and keep getting errors and tried to log a problem and got errors too.



All seem to be server errors.

[garethC]

All seem to be server errors.

  That was my fault - I was deploying a new version of the site and in a fit of uncontrollable excitement forgot to check if anyone was on there. It's back again now and I will try harder to keep the enthusiasm under control check in future.

On the plus side:

doesn't look like this is working on a regional basis though

it is now - top 30 problems with 3 or more ascents for areas and top 10 problems with 2 or more ascents for crags seemed to give a good balance

Really hope more people start using it, could be so good with more logged ascents

I agree - the more logged ascents the better. You should now be able to like / tweet / share most problems / crags etc so hopefully that'll encourage a bit more traffic?

[abarro81]

Last time I went on it I wanted to do something, can't remember what - maybe vote on a problem or add a comment - but it wouldn't let me because I had to log the problem first. Is it still like that? I have no desire for another log book and would only add info that doesn't involve having to log stuff.

[garethC]

Last time I went on it I wanted to do something, can't remember what - maybe vote on a problem or add a comment - but it wouldn't let me because I had to log the problem first. Is it still like that? I have no desire for another log book and would only add info that doesn't involve having to log stuff.

Short answer: you can post an arbitrary comment on a problem without "logging" it, but pretty much anything else requires a log.

Long answer:
Maybe I shouldn't have used the term "log" - the idea wasn't to form a logbook, but rather to collect a load of structured data about the problem. The site has the option to run an advanced search that lets you find, for example, all of the 7a-7b grit aretes that get at least 3 stars. For this sort of search to work well, you need either a very clever computer, or else lots of structured opinions from people who have climbed the various problems - this is the point of "logging" ascents of problems. If you go to the site and log an ascent of your favourite problem you'll see that this gives you the chance to cast your opinion on the grade, quality and number of mats needed to climb the problem, along with a bunch of yes/no qualities such as whether you thought that it was powerful / scrittly / highball / stays dry in the rain etc. These opinions are then merged and presented as a (somewhat) anonymised distribution of opinion - as an example: 88% of respondents feel that trackside involves using a heel http://www.peakbouldering.info/problems/134-trackside

Originally, we thought that if you hadn't climbed a problem, you didn't really deserve to comment. I'm not sure if that's the right approach or not - I always think that every grit problem is desperate, until I get the knack climb it, then I realise it is easy and downgrade it

Basically the best parts of the site only work if people register their opinions (i.e. log ascents), so if you like to use the site and don't take the time to register ascents, there's a fair chance that karma will bless you with poor friction and thin tips...

[abarro81]

I still think you should make it so you don't have to log the problem to vote, that's what will put me off bothering to vote. Just being logged in as a user should be enough IMO, it's not like ticking a box to log it proves you've done it anyway.

[Bonjoy]

One problem with the no log no vote set-up is that very undercraded problems end up not getting flagged up as such. Nobody or very few folk get up said problems because they are too hard for the grade (even 8b climbers don't like putting in 7b+ efforts on 7as in my experience). Therefore no feedback on just the sort of grade outlier that the system could be correcting.
Not sure  how you could get round this. Personally I think the fact that when you vote you're name and your opinion of the grade are logged is enough to stop abuse if you did swithc to log-less voting. You can get round the 'things feeling hard before you suceed' problem by making a vote amendable (if it isn't already).

[r-man]

I've probably missed it too, but how about a bit more of a detailed map for the areas too? Appologies if it's already there and I'm just being an idiot.

If you mean a map of all crags in an area, it does exist, but is hidden for the time being while Gareth works on improvements.

Worth pointing out that although the map doesn't show right now, it is also quite easy for users to add coordinates for individual boulders and buttresses at a crag. May be especially useful for developers of new crags.

I still think you should make it so you don't have to log the problem to vote, that's what will put me off bothering to vote. Just being logged in as a user should be enough IMO, it's not like ticking a box to log it proves you've done it anyway.

Are you saying you'd like an option for anonymous voting? We have discussed this in the past, but opinions are welcome...

You can get round the 'things feeling hard before you suceed' problem by making a vote amendable (if it isn't already).

It's not already possible, but that's worth considering. Instead of a grade vote, there could be felt soft/felt ok/felt hard options for people who haven't completed the problem?

[Bonjoy]

How about vote weighting. A vote has value of one for a user who has not logged an ascent of a problem and a value of two if/when the voter has logged the problem? This kind of reflects how we intuitively weight people's opinions anyway.

I do reckon votes should be by logged in users only rather than anonymous. This avoids multiple votes from one user.

[r-man]

If we did that, it could just be half a vote for non-climbed problems, wouldn't need to fiddle current data.

It would be possible to allow logged in users to make anonymous votes, so multiple votes is not an issue. What I'd be interested to know is why would people want to be anonymous? I'm not entirely sure that's what Alex was suggesting anyway - or was it?

[highrepute]

i thought Alex's problem was that the effort required to create a user account then log an ascent just to give a problem a rating was too much.

I can see his point but... the usefulness of the site for me is the information you gain when people log an ascent with all the extra details. Would allowing people to just rate a problem mean there is less incentive to log ascents?

[abarro81]

I just ditched bothering to vote on anything as soon as I saw I had to log ascents. I have an account already. Maybe it's just me, be I suspect not and I would guess there'd be more voting if it didn't look like you basically have to use it as a logbook to vote on stuff. If I want to do that I'll use 8a or ukc

[slackline]

I just ditched bothering to vote on anything as soon as I saw I had to log ascents. I have an account already. Maybe it's just me, be I suspect not and I would guess there'd be more voting if it didn't look like you basically have to use it as a logbook to vote on stuff. If I want to do that I'll use 8a or ukc

Are either of those as comprehensive as peakbouldering.info is/aims to be/will be (if users add content)?

I don't log much bouldering myself as I don't do a lot, but the UKC logbooks look patchy on that front from what I recall.

[highrepute]

I just ditched bothering to vote on anything as soon as I saw I had to log ascents. I have an account already. Maybe it's just me, be I suspect not and I would guess there'd be more voting if it didn't look like you basically have to use it as a logbook to vote on stuff. If I want to do that I'll use 8a or ukc

pb.info isn't a logbook and can't be used as such. You are logging ascents to provide details for other users. I guess in this sense it's quite altruistic as you don't get much back (i.e. as a logbook) for providing info.

Are either of those as comprehensive as peakbouldering.info is/aims to be/will be (if users add content)?

I don't log much bouldering myself as I don't do a lot, but the UKC logbooks look patchy on that front from what I recall.

You add routes/problem to all of these databases quite easily. so they are as comprehensive as you want it to be. What ukc/8a lack is the useful info.

[slackline]

Crag moderation is variable on UKC though, there are some very popular peak district venues with a lot of problems awaiting verification as they're shown in red.