[Johnny Brown]

Its not the anonymous bit, I just don't think half the voters have done the routes they vote on. Obviously you get the extreme side of this with stuff like Gaskins', but I'm sure it goes on right down to the Vdiffs.
The fact that the stats make up normal distributions doesn't prove anything other that voters tend to follow a herd. There'e the old story of the BMC meet where they had a vote on Sentinel crack. Everybody voted, only two for an upgrade. Guess which two had done the route... but it didn't stop the others from having an opinion.

[Sloper]

The whole question on grading also depends on the person expressing an opinion.  My view counts for little as I'm often told I couldn't grade flour (i.e. doing 80% of an E5 thinking it was a VS albeit bloody hard for the grade).

Just off on a tangent for a moemnt, when was the last time an established route was downgraded?

I'm quite happily looking forward to the day when I can claim to have onsighted E9 on grit (the knock for example)

[Bubba]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women

Any on here?? 

yes.

Would that be your other forum, uktransexualswithidentitycrisis.com ? 

only at weekends

[BenF]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women

Any on here?? 

yes.

Damn, I've been found out. 

[Alan James, Rockfax]

I always find this strange - "Putting your name to something" on the web is meaningless.

There is a huge difference between a pure anonymous comment with no history or future, and that from a registered user to a site. It doesn't matter whether the registered user is a 10ft gorilla or a 13 year old school girl, they have an identity which can be associated with the comments; they are engaging in a debate by registering and putting a name to it; they have a past and future posting record to refer to which gives you an idea of their stance on other issues and whether or not they may have agendas.

I don't know 'tc' but I do know that he is always knocking Rockfax be it here, or on UKC as Oldskool, however he is engaging to debate with and I know where I stand when answering his comments. Contrast that to a bolt-from-the-blue anonymous comment. By its very nature it isn't entering any debate since it can't really associate itself with any future anonymous comments. It is a one off with no background, no follow up, nothing. It just sits there being nasty and negative usually, and any argument presented is hugely undermined because of this reluctance to enter into debate. In my experience on UKC most straight anon comments are rarely followed up.

As for the relevance to the Rockfax databases; see my answer below.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

At the end of the day there is no more or less validity or comeback from someone registering and voting on a route grade than there is for someone posting on a forum unregistered. Its not as if owning an email address is the internet equivalent of a passport, a driving licence and a recent utility bill!

I am not sure what your point is here. If you are trying to point out a contradiction in Mick's and my arguments then you are arguing from a contradictory point yourself.

You suggest that anonymous votes on the Rockfax database have no validity, and anonymous comments on forums do. You can't have it both ways.

I don't think there is such a contradiction since the information being presented anonymously is being used in different ways. Anonymous votes are just having a small influence on an online voting system which, overall, is proving itself to be incredibly useful in guidebook writing. I am not saying it is perfect, but it is better than any current alternative. As long as we interpret the votes carefully then there isn't a problem and the dodgy votes are just a statistical anomaly.

Contrast that to anonymous negative comments on public forums and I am sure I don't need to spell out the difference.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

The fact that the stats make up normal distributions doesn't prove anything other that voters tend to follow a herd. There'e the old story of the BMC meet where they had a vote on Sentinel crack. Everybody voted, only two for an upgrade. Guess which two had done the route... but it didn't stop the others from having an opinion.

It was actually Cave Crack at Froggatt - 20+ votes for leaving the grade, 2 for the upgrade (Chris Craggs and Paul Nunn - the two who had done the route).

So what is your point here? That online database votes are not a good method for getting accurate grade information and we should go back to the old committee method?

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Just off on a tangent for a moemnt, when was the last time an established route was downgraded?

We estimate around 100+ routes in Eastern Grit will be downgraded based on the voting on the databases.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Any chance we could get back on topic on this thread for a moment at least.

I now have the following suggestions for grades from the old thread on here, plus a couple of emails for people.

Technical Genius - V6

Gritstone Megamix - V5

Oarsman Start - V4

Hornblower - V5

The Brigand - one comment for Font 8a, another for Font 7b+, but both were guesstimates from people who hadn't done it.

Desperot at Chatsworth has had no suggestions yet - does anyone actually do it?

Alan

[Johnny Brown]

It was actually Cave Crack at Froggatt - 20+ votes for leaving the grade, 2 for the upgrade (Chris Craggs and Paul Nunn - the two who had done the route).

So what is your point here? That online database votes are not a good method for getting accurate grade information and we should go back to the old committee method?

I thought the point was obvious - on the database you can't ask 'hands up who's actually done it?' You just have a 95% vote for the grade staying as it is. Hence one opinion like Chris or Paul's may often be worth 50 anonymous votes.

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route, and then beneath your vote it explains what your limit is, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and whether you were having a bad day...
A conversation between three climbers checking a guide script will take all these factors into consideration and is more likely to give an accurate grade.


I've heard V8+ mooted for The Brigand though I haven't done it myself.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route

Of course this is impossible although it could be stressed a bit more maybe. However, I think it is a fair assumption that the majority of votes on the majority of routes (except the special ones we have discussed already) are from people who have done the route.

A conversation between three climbers checking a guide script will take all these factors into consideration and is more likely to give an accurate grade.

Well this is where we have been before and it hasn't led to great grading, especially in the lower grades.

What if those three climbers are talking about a VDiff but all lead E5? To do it properly using this method you would need representatives from all the different grade bands - maybe three from each of, say, 4 grade bands - that's 12 people giving admittedly excellent feedback. However, no guidebook producer could ever manage such a system and you would still only have 3 votes on each route.

Give me 345 votes any day - http://www.rockfax.com/databases/r.php?i=5801

I've heard V8+ mooted for The Brigand though I haven't done it myself.

Thanks

[Ru]

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route, and then beneath your vote it explains what your limit is, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and whether you were having a bad day..

This is what bleau.info do. Before you can vote on a grade you must register that you have climbed the route, ie like the log book system on UKC.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

This is what bleau.info do. Before you can vote on a grade you must register that you have climbed the route, ie like the log book system on UKC.

That is a possible answer although it would be hard to implement, would still be open to abuse and would reduce the number of votes dramatically. (Logbook sees very little voting and most of the routes with big sets of votes are actually just the imported data from the Rockfax site that we set the thing up with).

Having analysed the huge amount of data built up on the Rockfax databases, I can only comment how useful and accurate the system appears to be. 99% of the time it is just used to confirm what everyone already knew.

Alan

[Fiend]

Contrast that to a bolt-from-the-blue anonymous comment. By its very nature it isn't entering any debate since it can't really associate itself with any future anonymous comments.

Well, if Nick had implemented the "search for IP address" function when I suggested it a few years ago...

I do agree though. An online identity is still some form of identity, for the reasons you gave. And there does seem to be a higher correlation of snide, purposeless posts from anonymous users than registered ones.

Anyway...

[tc]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?
Sounds like the bullshit conspiracy theory again

[Fiend]

From my perspective:

No, you're TC, you probably correspond to someone with those initials offline, you're an experienced boulderer in the north of england and quite a good one from what I pick up. You're involved with the Lakes scene, and most of your posts seem sound and sensible apart from the more vitriolic anti-Rockfax (don't worry I am too in general ) comments.

You have that at least as an identity.

[Palomides]

Internet anonymity is really about not trusting newbies 

This forum doesn't allow non-registered posts, but you still get new people making inflammatory comments - which are usually ignored.

Anyone with an established persona may still be divorced from their "real life" name, but i reckon that eventually the real opinons will become clear. And if any of us turn out to be a different sex, height, weight or species in real-life - does that really matter? Even people you've known for years can turn around and surprise you.

[tc]

Not "anti-Rockfax" per se, just anti-mediocrity and anti- shoddy jobs, when other alternatives quite obviously exist. Oh yeah, and very anti- self-important self-publicists. Egotism is nature's compensation for mediocrity. Rockfax often exhibit both in equal measure.
Lets up the ante,
Auntie TC

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?

No.

Did you actually read my reply to Bubba on the last page?

[Houdini]

There is a huge difference between a pure anonymous comment with no history or future, and that from a registered user to a site.

Balls.  Comment is comment.  I don't need to write my name at the bottom of the page to justify shit.  It's too late Al, now you read it! 

I've been looking at scandalous, fucking outrageous examples of  German city-grafitti for years.  The nature of the protest and it's effect on us all - remains the same.


Bleeeeeuurghhh! but now you gatta un-think it!

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground-up  Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.


Houdini.

[tc]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?

No.

Did you actually read my reply to Bubba on the last page?

Yes, I did, but thank you for pointing it out again in that inimitable way you have. I am not "always" knocking Rockfax, I merely took issue with that heap of garbage you produced as a bouldering guide to the Lakes, for the reasons posted above and elsewhere, and with some of the comments posted by you and your colleague Mick. Some of your publications are OK. Some are sub standard, in my opinion. You might wish to devise a method of coping on a personal level with the inevitable criticism that poor work will always attract. Or you might not. In either case, I make no  apology for my robust opinions. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fucking kitchen.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground up?   Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.

Looks good. Not much to say about it yet really. Obviously it is still 'work in progress' but there looks like there is plenty of potential there to make a decent site.

They might want to look at the sampling on the jpegs which currently seem to be saved at max quality making them about four or five times bigger than necessary and hence they slow down the page loading, however I suspect that is in hand as well.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Yes, I did, but thank you for pointing it out again in that inimitable way you have. I am not "always" knocking Rockfax,...

Actually I was referring to the fact that you seem to have not understood my description of what I felt 'anonymous' was judging from your initial reply. I actually have no problem with you questioning Rockfax, it keeps us on our toes.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fucking kitchen.

If this isn't the 'kitchen' then I don't know what is.

[Mick Ryan]

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground-up  Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.


Houdini.

It about time. More independent guidebook producers the better. It means more choice and better guidebooks for all climbers. In the case of Ground Up they have one of the best guidebook authors and all-round-good-chaps ever, Mr. Streaky Desroy, Hudderfield's best boy, Simon and Al the designer.

Nice to keep it in the family.

It's all gold.

Mick

[Houdini]

Mick,

Streaky is a rabid collector of guide books! 



                                               Hmmmm...



I like my guidebooks like I drink my women:  small, square, and covered in plastic.