This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
![[Pete Robins on Carnage at Fontainebleau, 2 kb]](http://img.ukclimbing.com/t/135800.jpg "[Pete Robins on Carnage at Fontainebleau, 2 kb]")
January 2010 has been a record month for UKClimbing.com and to celebrate, we are setting up a new Bouldering Forum.Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51676
If the Forum looks a little strange then you will need to Force Refresh - Ctrl+F5 keys (or the Shift key on a Mac) - to get the latest Style Sheet with the new icons in it loaded.
In reply to Tall Clare:
But the Big Mac he's about to enjoy doesn't reflect a healthy lifestyle?
> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> I'm loving that little beanie in the icon for the new forum!
>
> I'm loving that little beanie in the icon for the new forum!
But the Big Mac he's about to enjoy doesn't reflect a healthy lifestyle?
In reply to UKC News:
No new icon appearing for me -just a blank and the the thread title being indented by an inch
Yes I am using IE (v8) and yes I have tried deleting cookies, refreshing, restarting IE
No new icon appearing for me -just a blank and the the thread title being indented by an inch
Yes I am using IE (v8) and yes I have tried deleting cookies, refreshing, restarting IE
In reply to UKC News:
Nothing to do with the ownership issues over at UKB I suppose. Must be pure coincidence.....
Nothing to do with the ownership issues over at UKB I suppose. Must be pure coincidence.....
In reply to UKC News: i hate to be negative but im going to be...
i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
In reply to chris_j_s:
Ah yes, so it does, knew there was some some extra refresh, couldn't remember how.
So now I can see the icon - is that meant to be a beanie, or are they saying that only gingers boulder ?
Ah yes, so it does, knew there was some some extra refresh, couldn't remember how.
So now I can see the icon - is that meant to be a beanie, or are they saying that only gingers boulder ?
In reply to ksjs:
No. I agree. There are far too many spoof threads and you really have to wade for any sort of quality. I got pretty bored of UKC last year for that reason, but just after new year (possibly due to the recent cold snap, and new years resolutions I think), there were far more climbing-related interesting threads. It has started the descent to nonsense again though.
> (In reply to UKC News) i hate to be negative but im going to be...
>
> i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
>
> i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
No. I agree. There are far too many spoof threads and you really have to wade for any sort of quality. I got pretty bored of UKC last year for that reason, but just after new year (possibly due to the recent cold snap, and new years resolutions I think), there were far more climbing-related interesting threads. It has started the descent to nonsense again though.
In reply to ksjs:
Forums come and go in most people's thinking which is well-illustrated by the fact similar comments to yours have been made once a month on these forums for the last 10 years.
You are forgetting that UKC is far more than just forums, and that is why the stats are going up.
News, Articles, Logbooks, Photos, Videos, Information
Please don't judge our stats on the Forums alone.
Alan
Forums come and go in most people's thinking which is well-illustrated by the fact similar comments to yours have been made once a month on these forums for the last 10 years.
You are forgetting that UKC is far more than just forums, and that is why the stats are going up.
News, Articles, Logbooks, Photos, Videos, Information
Please don't judge our stats on the Forums alone.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
On my options I clicked off bouldering - why hasn't it gone from my forums page?
On my options I clicked off bouldering - why hasn't it gone from my forums page?
In reply to ksjs:
No. There seems to be a number of long time users drifting away (or banned?) combined with a bunch new users and spoofs. Quality does seem to have dipped somewhat in the forums over the last year or so.
jk
> i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
No. There seems to be a number of long time users drifting away (or banned?) combined with a bunch new users and spoofs. Quality does seem to have dipped somewhat in the forums over the last year or so.
jk
I get fed up of some idiot saying search before you post as there is a topic like this already.
In reply to jon:
Same here. No bouldering for me.
> (In reply to Alan James - UKC)
>
> On my options I clicked off bouldering - why hasn't it gone from my forums page?
>
> On my options I clicked off bouldering - why hasn't it gone from my forums page?
Same here. No bouldering for me.
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
I didn't want to sound too negative - I really like UKC for many reasons. It is a fantastic resource, which is continually improving. I've been using these forums for over 10 years now. Maybe I am becoming jaded, but I do think there is an increase in nonsense on the forums, which hides the better content to an extent. I won't be going anywhere though!
I didn't want to sound too negative - I really like UKC for many reasons. It is a fantastic resource, which is continually improving. I've been using these forums for over 10 years now. Maybe I am becoming jaded, but I do think there is an increase in nonsense on the forums, which hides the better content to an extent. I won't be going anywhere though!
In reply to ash2020:
Don't understand.
Jon has got the bouldering despite the fact that he doesn't want it, and you haven't got it yet are looking for it?
I suspect both are a Refresh problem - see OP - since I can't reproduce either scenario here.
Alan
> Same here. No bouldering for me.
Don't understand.
Jon has got the bouldering despite the fact that he doesn't want it, and you haven't got it yet are looking for it?
I suspect both are a Refresh problem - see OP - since I can't reproduce either scenario here.
Alan
In reply to Monk:
If I had a pound for every time someone has said that, then I'd have about £250, which is quite a lot.
Fantastic new home page coming next week
Alan
> I didn't want to sound too negative - I really like UKC for many reasons. It is a fantastic resource, which is continually improving. I've been using these forums for over 10 years now. Maybe I am becoming jaded, but I do think there is an increase in nonsense on the forums, which hides the better content to an extent. I won't be going anywhere though!
If I had a pound for every time someone has said that, then I'd have about £250, which is quite a lot.
Fantastic new home page coming next week
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC: some of the content is superb and many of the features are extremely useful but, and its not your or the teams fault, theres some real drivel (more than ever?) in the posts.
i think many long-term posters would share the view that post quality is down and, while this is subjective, its surely hard to argue with. a bit of perspective in the editorial view would be refreshing...
i think many long-term posters would share the view that post quality is down and, while this is subjective, its surely hard to argue with. a bit of perspective in the editorial view would be refreshing...
In reply to ksjs:
Of course it is, but you don't seriously expect Alan to agree do you!
UKC has a very good news section and some good articles but the signal to noise ratio in climbing threads is so low as to make it almost worthless as a resource for asking advice now.
> i think many long-term posters would share the view that post quality is down ...
Of course it is, but you don't seriously expect Alan to agree do you!
UKC has a very good news section and some good articles but the signal to noise ratio in climbing threads is so low as to make it almost worthless as a resource for asking advice now.
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
im the same as Jon, unchecked , refreshed again again again,
open in in a new *different* browser, i still get bloddering
Rob
im the same as Jon, unchecked , refreshed again again again,
open in in a new *different* browser, i still get bloddering
Rob
In reply to duncan:
A kind of self-fulfilling statement that one.
Just sampled the top 10 threads on Rocktalk:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=392890 - interesting discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393381 - fun discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393261 - informative discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393444 - quick answer to a question
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393163 - more informative discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393172 - another thought-provoking topic
The other four threads are pretty harmless too.
That is a very good signal to noise ratio. Try turning The Pub off and it is very revealing.
Alan
> UKC has a very good news section and some good articles but the signal to noise ratio in climbing threads is so low as to make it almost worthless as a resource for asking advice now.
A kind of self-fulfilling statement that one.
Just sampled the top 10 threads on Rocktalk:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=392890 - interesting discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393381 - fun discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393261 - informative discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393444 - quick answer to a question
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393163 - more informative discussion
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=393172 - another thought-provoking topic
The other four threads are pretty harmless too.
That is a very good signal to noise ratio. Try turning The Pub off and it is very revealing.
Alan
In reply to jon:
Sorry about that - a bug that I've now fixed.
Cheers
> On my options I clicked off bouldering - why hasn't it gone from my forums page?
Sorry about that - a bug that I've now fixed.
Cheers
In reply to jon:
Thanks; me too. (and @ Alan James; I meant 'no bouldering for me, thank you very much!' in the post above. Apologies for the confusion)
> (In reply to Nick Smith - UKC)
>
> Thanks, gone now!
>
> Thanks, gone now!
Thanks; me too. (and @ Alan James; I meant 'no bouldering for me, thank you very much!' in the post above. Apologies for the confusion)
In reply to Monk:
I'd agree totally, but I think it's more to do with the fact that UKC seems to accurately reflect society in general, which I can't help feeling has seriously dumbed down over the last few years. The reason(s) for this is the subject for a separate discussion.
> (In reply to Alan James - UKC)
>
> .... but I do think there is an increase in nonsense on the forums, which hides the better content to an extent. I won't be going anywhere though!
>
> .... but I do think there is an increase in nonsense on the forums, which hides the better content to an extent. I won't be going anywhere though!
I'd agree totally, but I think it's more to do with the fact that UKC seems to accurately reflect society in general, which I can't help feeling has seriously dumbed down over the last few years. The reason(s) for this is the subject for a separate discussion.
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
Those threads you listed are hardly typical. I was thinking to myself is it the snow and rain thats done this, as we really have had a resurgence in quality in the last few weeks with some good climbing posts and the children mainly staying clear? (Albeit the second post you listed is on the wrong forum really, or an excuse to duck that). Overall average quality on climbing posts is down very much over the years IMHO (gradually worse each year) but quantity well up and it takes a brave site owner to tell the mass of posters, that bring revenue with them, to think more before they post climbing stuff (they can do what they like down the pub as far as I'm concerned). Some forums fare better than others, notably the winter forum continues to impress even though I miss some of the old stalwarts, especially Norrie.
Those threads you listed are hardly typical. I was thinking to myself is it the snow and rain thats done this, as we really have had a resurgence in quality in the last few weeks with some good climbing posts and the children mainly staying clear? (Albeit the second post you listed is on the wrong forum really, or an excuse to duck that). Overall average quality on climbing posts is down very much over the years IMHO (gradually worse each year) but quantity well up and it takes a brave site owner to tell the mass of posters, that bring revenue with them, to think more before they post climbing stuff (they can do what they like down the pub as far as I'm concerned). Some forums fare better than others, notably the winter forum continues to impress even though I miss some of the old stalwarts, especially Norrie.
In reply to Offwidth: Offwidth.....you need to think more before you post.
In reply to Offwidth:
I wanted to sample the latest ten threads in Rocktalk just to prove to Duncan that his statement "signal to noise ratio in climbing threads is so low as to make it almost worthless as a resource for asking advice now" was nonsense. If I had tried to find 'typical' threads then this would have negated the exercise since I could have just cherry-picked them.
As the users increase, the number of new users, and less experienced users, also increases. Those who have been around for years begin to have fewer personal connections and the 'mates' factor diminishes. Take a look at UKBouldering - everyone knows everyone on there and they all love it. They probably think the quality of their posts is much higher than here too, but to a new outsider it appears to be a closed group of mates chatting to each other and a difficult clique to penetrate. That's why there aren't many different posters.
For experienced UKCers the repetition factor on certain topics also begins to grate over time, and the desire to get involved in discussions you have discussed a dozen times before also reduces. The instant connection with a thread is diluted with things you've seen before, or things that are less relevant as UKC reaches a wider audience.
I know all this since I have been here longer than anyone else. I too breath a sigh every time someone asks again where the nearest climbing wall is to wherever, and each time we get a spoof "I've bolted Stanage" thread. However, I can also see that we have more users, we have more topics and we have an incredible depth of knowledge available on these forums that are often quicker and more reliable than Google to find any answer to any question.
Take a look at the amazing technical responses people get for their computer techy questions, the detailed responses to their domestic DIY questions, the personal ascent accounts of any route you care to mention, the instant tips for people enquiring about any climbing destination.
UKC Forums are an amazing place and one that I am almost more proud of than Rockfax.
Alan
> Those threads you listed are hardly typical.
I wanted to sample the latest ten threads in Rocktalk just to prove to Duncan that his statement "signal to noise ratio in climbing threads is so low as to make it almost worthless as a resource for asking advice now" was nonsense. If I had tried to find 'typical' threads then this would have negated the exercise since I could have just cherry-picked them.
> Overall average quality on climbing posts is down very much over the years IMHO (gradually worse each year) but quantity well up ...
As the users increase, the number of new users, and less experienced users, also increases. Those who have been around for years begin to have fewer personal connections and the 'mates' factor diminishes. Take a look at UKBouldering - everyone knows everyone on there and they all love it. They probably think the quality of their posts is much higher than here too, but to a new outsider it appears to be a closed group of mates chatting to each other and a difficult clique to penetrate. That's why there aren't many different posters.
For experienced UKCers the repetition factor on certain topics also begins to grate over time, and the desire to get involved in discussions you have discussed a dozen times before also reduces. The instant connection with a thread is diluted with things you've seen before, or things that are less relevant as UKC reaches a wider audience.
I know all this since I have been here longer than anyone else. I too breath a sigh every time someone asks again where the nearest climbing wall is to wherever, and each time we get a spoof "I've bolted Stanage" thread. However, I can also see that we have more users, we have more topics and we have an incredible depth of knowledge available on these forums that are often quicker and more reliable than Google to find any answer to any question.
Take a look at the amazing technical responses people get for their computer techy questions, the detailed responses to their domestic DIY questions, the personal ascent accounts of any route you care to mention, the instant tips for people enquiring about any climbing destination.
UKC Forums are an amazing place and one that I am almost more proud of than Rockfax.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
I aware of all those points and try to take that into account. I still think the average quality is down on climbing threads, albeit not quite so bad recently. As a regular and longstanding user I'd like to see this change for the better and have said before I think occasional tighter moderation might help. Say the odd 'parental style email' to advise persistent offenders to cut down on chatter or other voluminous junk, or to those repeatedly giving ill informed advice. Lots of things are way better on the site: news, features, databases, and yes even some forums (eg culture and photography)
I also regularly view UKB and one reason I hardly ever post there is someone nearly always got there first: IMHO their average climbing information quality on posts is far better, despite the lower traffic levels. I know a few people there but far from most, and of those I do know, some I won't realise it's them through their pseudonym. For say a computer fix thread do you think UKC is that much better than a similar post on UKB?
I aware of all those points and try to take that into account. I still think the average quality is down on climbing threads, albeit not quite so bad recently. As a regular and longstanding user I'd like to see this change for the better and have said before I think occasional tighter moderation might help. Say the odd 'parental style email' to advise persistent offenders to cut down on chatter or other voluminous junk, or to those repeatedly giving ill informed advice. Lots of things are way better on the site: news, features, databases, and yes even some forums (eg culture and photography)
I also regularly view UKB and one reason I hardly ever post there is someone nearly always got there first: IMHO their average climbing information quality on posts is far better, despite the lower traffic levels. I know a few people there but far from most, and of those I do know, some I won't realise it's them through their pseudonym. For say a computer fix thread do you think UKC is that much better than a similar post on UKB?
In reply to Offwidth:
I'm amazed anyone would want tighter moderation, from what I can gather its the moderation that puts many people off ukclimbing and on to ukb.
I have had really useful info/help from both sites when I have asked questions but find ukb threads much more interesting in general, obviously that may just be me!
I'm amazed anyone would want tighter moderation, from what I can gather its the moderation that puts many people off ukclimbing and on to ukb.
I have had really useful info/help from both sites when I have asked questions but find ukb threads much more interesting in general, obviously that may just be me!
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
It's OK Mick, Lynn gave him his tablet just before posting.
An idea for Al and Nick, is it possible to pop out the contents of things like Articles, Classifieds etc when you hover your mouse over them to show people what is there without clicking, much like the thumbnails of photos linked in the forums?
It's OK Mick, Lynn gave him his tablet just before posting.
An idea for Al and Nick, is it possible to pop out the contents of things like Articles, Classifieds etc when you hover your mouse over them to show people what is there without clicking, much like the thumbnails of photos linked in the forums?
In reply to Chris Craggs:
i can see where you're coming from with that one. But if it is crisps then what type?
i can see where you're coming from with that one. But if it is crisps then what type?
In reply to Mr Plow:
these perhaps...
http://www.moodfoodcompany.co.uk/Top-Foods-for-Relaxing/Snapz-Carrot-Crisps...
these perhaps...
http://www.moodfoodcompany.co.uk/Top-Foods-for-Relaxing/Snapz-Carrot-Crisps...
In reply to Mr Plow:
It's one of those enormous chalk bags that they can't carry 'cos they're not strong enough.
It's one of those enormous chalk bags that they can't carry 'cos they're not strong enough.
In reply to sutty:
If you mean the menu bar at the top: then we are working on it along with the new home page for next week.
Alan
> An idea for Al and Nick, is it possible to pop out the contents of things like Articles, Classifieds etc when you hover your mouse over them to show people what is there without clicking, much like the thumbnails of photos linked in the forums?
If you mean the menu bar at the top: then we are working on it along with the new home page for next week.
Alan
In reply to Offwidth: I just answered someone asking about climbing in Oulu a rather small city in Northern Finland. The chap had got four reasonably useful answers in as many hours. You can't possible get that degree of crowd sourced material without a crowd.
I remain amazed at how useful UKC can be at turning up the most obscure information on all sorts of things. I read far fewer threads these days that I used to, because of more volume, but find loads of interesting things still.
Partly I think the forums now serve as social network that brings together non-UKC held information, people linking to blogs or other internet sites with relevant info. I use twitter in the same way for my professional interests, but for climbing UKC does this very well.
I remain amazed at how useful UKC can be at turning up the most obscure information on all sorts of things. I read far fewer threads these days that I used to, because of more volume, but find loads of interesting things still.
Partly I think the forums now serve as social network that brings together non-UKC held information, people linking to blogs or other internet sites with relevant info. I use twitter in the same way for my professional interests, but for climbing UKC does this very well.
Nothing to do with bouldering, but the caching isssue has made me curious.
What's the adavantage of merging all the forum icons in a single file http://img.ukclimbing.com/forums/fsprites.gif with complicated CSS positioning rather than having lots of small files and no (or simpler) CSS positioning?
What's the adavantage of merging all the forum icons in a single file http://img.ukclimbing.com/forums/fsprites.gif with complicated CSS positioning rather than having lots of small files and no (or simpler) CSS positioning?
In reply to md@r:
Nick told me about this today.
Faster and much less bandwidth is the answer.
Alan
> Nothing to do with bouldering, but the caching isssue has made me curious.
> What's the adavantage of merging all the forum icons in a single file http://img.ukclimbing.com/forums/fsprites.gif with complicated CSS positioning rather than having lots of small files and no (or simpler) CSS positioning?
> What's the adavantage of merging all the forum icons in a single file http://img.ukclimbing.com/forums/fsprites.gif with complicated CSS positioning rather than having lots of small files and no (or simpler) CSS positioning?
Nick told me about this today.
Faster and much less bandwidth is the answer.
Alan
In reply to Offwidth:
Depends who replies I guess. More people is likely to mean more potential good answers on most topics though.
Alan
> For say a computer fix thread do you think UKC is that much better than a similar post on UKB?
Depends who replies I guess. More people is likely to mean more potential good answers on most topics though.
Alan
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
I'd guess I'd miss your rather unique editorial style if everyone was forced to behave (Lynn is away so I'm still working out how to open the medicin bottle). Its not the rude stuff or occasional loss of temper that bugs me (all part and parcel of climbing) it's the commonplace inane and the obviously ill informed I think is most damaging.
I'd guess I'd miss your rather unique editorial style if everyone was forced to behave (Lynn is away so I'm still working out how to open the medicin bottle). Its not the rude stuff or occasional loss of temper that bugs me (all part and parcel of climbing) it's the commonplace inane and the obviously ill informed I think is most damaging.
In reply to UKC News:
Hi Nick, Alan, Mick (or whoever is online... but it'll probably be Nick that fixes it...)
Is there something wrong with the bouldering forum settings? On the main forum page there is no little icon and the thread title is centred...
Wasn't sure who to email so figured this might catch your attention.
Hi Nick, Alan, Mick (or whoever is online... but it'll probably be Nick that fixes it...)
Is there something wrong with the bouldering forum settings? On the main forum page there is no little icon and the thread title is centred...
Wasn't sure who to email so figured this might catch your attention.
In reply to Alan James - UKC: I don't have ctrl F5 on my phone :oS
In reply to chris05: no, not just you. if in fact there is more moderation on UKC (which i guess there is) i think this is irrelevant; UKB has less posters / posts but the quality is markedly higher (generally speaking and UKC still has the occasional very good climbing thread) and i think its pretty much self-policing ie post crap and expect criticism in some shape or form, nothing wrong with that.
i agree with the suggestion above that UKC unfortunatly has started to reflect the amoeba-like attention span / aspirations of many out there...
i agree with the suggestion above that UKC unfortunatly has started to reflect the amoeba-like attention span / aspirations of many out there...
In reply to Alan James - UKC: well put (and no, thats not sarcastic). i see the problem / situation and yes, the quick and often very useful responses you get on a vast range of stuff is amazing - theres always someone who knows something about whatever it is youre after. that doesnt change the fact that theres (now) a lot of rubbish on the forums which virtually drowns out the better stuff and makes the site almost not worth visiting for those interested in something a bit more relevant, insightful and informed.
In reply to UKC News: Two of the best forums are Rock Destinations and Winter Climbing. Winter climbing has been very informative lately.
In reply to ksjs:
Some of my favourite bits of UKC ksjs, not sure if you have noticed these as you are so focussed on internet forums...which are great...
Is the news page..
Check this out: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51697
What a great service to those interested in conditions up in Scotland at the moment. Say thanks to Dan and all those climbers who contribute.
Have you ever noticed the great regular articles UKC runs on all aspects of climbing..
See this page here: http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/
If you like logging the climbs you have done, don't miss this feature..
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/
Do you like photos? Search by votes to see the best..
http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/search.html?thismonth=1&nstart=0&s...
Interested in the latest gear.
The gear page: http://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/
Or for people's experience of gear, the gear forums: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/i.php?f=11
Destination articles, a database of crags and routes....and on and on..
There's just so much.
Say thank you now and again to all of us who contribute. You've no idea how much work goes into UKC and to the attempt to providing the climbing and mountaineering community with a decent media.
Do you want some cheese with that whine?
Cheers,
Mick
Some of my favourite bits of UKC ksjs, not sure if you have noticed these as you are so focussed on internet forums...which are great...
Is the news page..
Check this out: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51697
What a great service to those interested in conditions up in Scotland at the moment. Say thanks to Dan and all those climbers who contribute.
Have you ever noticed the great regular articles UKC runs on all aspects of climbing..
See this page here: http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/
If you like logging the climbs you have done, don't miss this feature..
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/
Do you like photos? Search by votes to see the best..
http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/search.html?thismonth=1&nstart=0&s...
Interested in the latest gear.
The gear page: http://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/
Or for people's experience of gear, the gear forums: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/i.php?f=11
Destination articles, a database of crags and routes....and on and on..
There's just so much.
Say thank you now and again to all of us who contribute. You've no idea how much work goes into UKC and to the attempt to providing the climbing and mountaineering community with a decent media.
Do you want some cheese with that whine?
Cheers,
Mick
In reply to ksjs:
It's user-generated content - over to you!
There are still plenty of interesting discussions on the climbing forums (there might be on the other ones as well but they don't really interest me). Lots of historical tit-bits and of course very useful conditions updates for winter climbing.
> i really enjoy UKC (usually) but, despite all the positive / big stats and numbers being touted, i cant help feel that the quality and relevance of many of the posts is debatable; quantity may have gone up but quality has gone down. am i alone in thinking this?
It's user-generated content - over to you!
There are still plenty of interesting discussions on the climbing forums (there might be on the other ones as well but they don't really interest me). Lots of historical tit-bits and of course very useful conditions updates for winter climbing.
In reply to ksjs:
o, tempora! o, mores!
> (In reply to Alan James - UKC) theres some real drivel (more than ever?) in the posts.
o, tempora! o, mores!
To UKC
I'm quite new to this world of internet forums and stuff, I'm curious about moderation.
We've been on Greencycle and it seems they check every post on there, a huge delay before it appears, unlike UKC where one's post comes up instantly.
I assume you lot can't possibly check every post on here, you'd have been locked up in a padded cell a long time ago...
I'm just wondering how much time of each day you spend reading through all the stuff that's posted on here
I'm quite new to this world of internet forums and stuff, I'm curious about moderation.
We've been on Greencycle and it seems they check every post on there, a huge delay before it appears, unlike UKC where one's post comes up instantly.
I assume you lot can't possibly check every post on here, you'd have been locked up in a padded cell a long time ago...
I'm just wondering how much time of each day you spend reading through all the stuff that's posted on here
In reply to ksjs:
I suspect I'm guilty of dubious input, but to me, it's only an internet chat space after all and you're bound to get some nonsense.
If I think I've made someone smile with what I've posted, it's good enough for me.
UKC is great; pictures, articles, info, advice etc. etc.
I suspect I'm guilty of dubious input, but to me, it's only an internet chat space after all and you're bound to get some nonsense.
If I think I've made someone smile with what I've posted, it's good enough for me.
UKC is great; pictures, articles, info, advice etc. etc.
In reply to Lusk:
Between us we spend a lot of time scanning the forums, but much less time reading each thread if we aren't involved in it. You get pretty good at spotting problems though from titles, certain users, and the OP.
The best moderation by far comes from the users though who are really on the ball and let us know whenever something is going wrong. It also ensures that the moderation level is much closer to what the users want rather than being dictated by us.
Article about moderation here - http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=713
Alan
Between us we spend a lot of time scanning the forums, but much less time reading each thread if we aren't involved in it. You get pretty good at spotting problems though from titles, certain users, and the OP.
The best moderation by far comes from the users though who are really on the ball and let us know whenever something is going wrong. It also ensures that the moderation level is much closer to what the users want rather than being dictated by us.
Article about moderation here - http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=713
Alan
In reply to ksjs:
It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
Chris
> UKB has less posters / posts but the quality is markedly higher (generally speaking and UKC still has the occasional very good climbing thread) and i think its pretty much self-policing ie post crap and expect criticism in some shape or form, nothing wrong with that.
>
>
It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs: Its banter between friends, which i find you get much less on ukc as the majority of users only know each other by there username.
In reply to Chris Craggs: i dont think its supposed to be aesthetically the best (its not a commercisl site?) so not sure thats fair. not sure that it is juvenile: i dont see many (any) "what shall we talk about today" or "what did you do at the weekend" threads. ok, the 'dead fit birds who go climbing' thread might be offensive to some but its harmless and no worse than UKC's recent softcore video of the Slovenian (i think) girl doing DWS - the video was rubbish but got some interest due to scantily clad girl climbing; puerile.
what i will give you is that many on UKB seem to think they have a monopoly on climbing knowledge and that anything else i.e. UKC is rubbish; this is plainly wrong and just irritating.
what i will give you is that many on UKB seem to think they have a monopoly on climbing knowledge and that anything else i.e. UKC is rubbish; this is plainly wrong and just irritating.
In reply to Lusk: maybe thats my issue: i dont see UKC as an equivalent of 'social' sites so all the stuff on here that should be there just gets in the way for me
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: i contribute (and they arent always moaning posts like this one)! as i said above theres some brilliant resources on here and there are still occasionally excellent discussions on the forums. despite my gripes id be disappointed if UKC wasnt about and i can imagine comments like mine might seem ungrateful but you surely dont do this for charity? therefore reasonable feedback is fair and should be part of your quality control.
yes, these bigger numbers might be nice for attracting money / advertising to the business and yes, things have been added to the site but im not sure its actually any better. plenty of others seem to agree.
yes, these bigger numbers might be nice for attracting money / advertising to the business and yes, things have been added to the site but im not sure its actually any better. plenty of others seem to agree.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Crikey Chris !
It certainy has it's moments ( DFBWGC being one of them ) and is a much more testosterone fuelled site for sure and can appear a bit elitist/cliquey. However it is a very useful forum for local info, training ideas and has a much more positive atmosphere than a lot of UKC threads. A bit strong to say it's that bad on all levels.
I use both and agree that this site is obviously much more professional but UKB is run by 1 guy who doesn't do it as a job.
> (In reply to ksjs)
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
Crikey Chris !
It certainy has it's moments ( DFBWGC being one of them ) and is a much more testosterone fuelled site for sure and can appear a bit elitist/cliquey. However it is a very useful forum for local info, training ideas and has a much more positive atmosphere than a lot of UKC threads. A bit strong to say it's that bad on all levels.
I use both and agree that this site is obviously much more professional but UKB is run by 1 guy who doesn't do it as a job.
In reply to UKC News: I lurk on both ukc and ukb, they are very different in terms of attitude, user size and sense of humour. I've never been made to feel that ukb is a clique, yes it's often the same posters, but I often see the same names on ukc. For bouldering info ukb is class, ukc is good for info too. But like anything user content led you sometimes need to filter stuff out.
I don't think the drivel background noise on ukc is any higher now than it has always been, there's always been fluffy rubbish on it and probably always will be. Doesn't stop me enjoying both sites in different ways.
I don't think the drivel background noise on ukc is any higher now than it has always been, there's always been fluffy rubbish on it and probably always will be. Doesn't stop me enjoying both sites in different ways.
I know he keeps on overstepping the mark and getting banned for saying something or other, but people like Franco certainly keep the forums more amusing when they are allowed to post.
The forums would certainly become bland if everybody who was opinionated was banned.
The forums would certainly become bland if everybody who was opinionated was banned.
In reply to TobyA:
Indeed. Unfortunately the corollary of that crowd effect is a multitude of inane answers to simple questions, like, say: "Does a climber have to push weights to climb good [sic]".
> (In reply to Offwidth) I just answered someone asking about climbing in Oulu a rather small city in Northern Finland. The chap had got four reasonably useful answers in as many hours. You can't possible get that degree of crowd sourced material without a crowd.I remain amazed at how useful UKC can be at turning up the most obscure information on all sorts of things.
Indeed. Unfortunately the corollary of that crowd effect is a multitude of inane answers to simple questions, like, say: "Does a climber have to push weights to climb good [sic]".
In reply to sutty: a brilliant idea!
In reply to UKC News:
There's been a lot of talk about UKB being very cliquey. When i joined I didn't know anybody and it has only been over time that I've got to know several posters. I still don't know the majority of people on there.
Knowledge and debate about hard and easy trad and bouldering (and cooking, and wood burning stoves and DFB/BWGC and current affairs etc) is second to none. Alan and Mick may dispute this but that's because their income depends on the success of the "other channel".
The "mates" factor that Alan has spoken about is what makes UKB good. Very few people post trolls because nobody wants to receive negative karma from their mates and the fact that many of the contributors know each other in the real world means that people are more likely to put more thought into a post rather than reeling off an ill-written post of drivel.
That said, anyone who doesn't know anyone who starts posting on the site can expect a warm welcome.
I haven't sworn or been abusive in this post. I did however hint at the possibility that UKC might not be the best website dedicated to climbing out there. Ooooo. Scandalous. Lets see how long it lasts.
There's been a lot of talk about UKB being very cliquey. When i joined I didn't know anybody and it has only been over time that I've got to know several posters. I still don't know the majority of people on there.
Knowledge and debate about hard and easy trad and bouldering (and cooking, and wood burning stoves and DFB/BWGC and current affairs etc) is second to none. Alan and Mick may dispute this but that's because their income depends on the success of the "other channel".
The "mates" factor that Alan has spoken about is what makes UKB good. Very few people post trolls because nobody wants to receive negative karma from their mates and the fact that many of the contributors know each other in the real world means that people are more likely to put more thought into a post rather than reeling off an ill-written post of drivel.
That said, anyone who doesn't know anyone who starts posting on the site can expect a warm welcome.
I haven't sworn or been abusive in this post. I did however hint at the possibility that UKC might not be the best website dedicated to climbing out there. Ooooo. Scandalous. Lets see how long it lasts.
In reply to Will Hunt:
Hi Will
We wouldn't remove a post like this - never have, never will.
Alan
> I haven't sworn or been abusive in this post. I did however hint at the possibility that UKC might not be the best website dedicated to climbing out there. Ooooo. Scandalous. Lets see how long it lasts.
Hi Will
We wouldn't remove a post like this - never have, never will.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
!
What happened to that kid who criticized UKC not paying their contributors a few days ago? He was banned. I've lost count of the times that posts and posters have been removed because they made critiques of UKC practice. It is so frequent and so well known about that it's unbelievable that you would even refute that this has happened!
!
What happened to that kid who criticized UKC not paying their contributors a few days ago? He was banned. I've lost count of the times that posts and posters have been removed because they made critiques of UKC practice. It is so frequent and so well known about that it's unbelievable that you would even refute that this has happened!
In reply to Will Hunt:
In reply to In reply to Will Hunt:
Well his point was about paying the climbers featured in the news pieces, not contributors of the news and articles, and the question was really for the media as a whole, not specifically UKC. The thread was eventually closed to replies after a few days because it had developed into a slagging match with most of the criticism being aimed at the individual in question, but it is still readable - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=392229
He was banned because he went on a rampage posting obscene rubbish on about a dozen threads.
We never remove reasonably argued posts like yours where you present points for discussion even if we don't agree with the points.
Alan
In reply to In reply to Will Hunt:
> What happened to that kid who criticized UKC not paying their contributors a few days ago? He was banned. I've lost count of the times that posts and posters have been removed because they made critiques of UKC practice. It is so frequent and so well known about that it's unbelievable that you would even refute that this has happened!
Well his point was about paying the climbers featured in the news pieces, not contributors of the news and articles, and the question was really for the media as a whole, not specifically UKC. The thread was eventually closed to replies after a few days because it had developed into a slagging match with most of the criticism being aimed at the individual in question, but it is still readable - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=392229
He was banned because he went on a rampage posting obscene rubbish on about a dozen threads.
We never remove reasonably argued posts like yours where you present points for discussion even if we don't agree with the points.
Alan
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Some of the stuff on UKB is primitive, juvenile and offensive. And all the better for it.
UKB is a stunning resource for all climbers, whatever the level they climb at. The conditions reporting has saved me, and countless others, many wasted trips, time and money. The training and injury information is second to none.
There are some 'risque' threads, but they can also be incredibly funny. The Internet and UK climbing would be a poorer place without UKB.
Andy F
> (In reply to ksjs)
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
Some of the stuff on UKB is primitive, juvenile and offensive. And all the better for it.
UKB is a stunning resource for all climbers, whatever the level they climb at. The conditions reporting has saved me, and countless others, many wasted trips, time and money. The training and injury information is second to none.
There are some 'risque' threads, but they can also be incredibly funny. The Internet and UK climbing would be a poorer place without UKB.
Andy F
In reply to andy farnell:
I agree Andy. UKB is great and fills a niche.
Be interesting to see what happens now that it has been sold for five figures....good on Bubba, he deserves some payback for his efforts.
Be interesting to see what happens to UKB now, someone will need a return on that investment.
As a climbing sub-culture bouldering has many obsessives, and needs a home on the web. I always thought that someone like Si Panton or Greg Chapman would be great to build a great online resource for bouldering, more than just a forum.
Got to beware though. Bouldering.com was once similar to ukb, now it's a shop
http://bouldering.com/
Cheers,
Mick
I agree Andy. UKB is great and fills a niche.
Be interesting to see what happens now that it has been sold for five figures....good on Bubba, he deserves some payback for his efforts.
Be interesting to see what happens to UKB now, someone will need a return on that investment.
As a climbing sub-culture bouldering has many obsessives, and needs a home on the web. I always thought that someone like Si Panton or Greg Chapman would be great to build a great online resource for bouldering, more than just a forum.
Got to beware though. Bouldering.com was once similar to ukb, now it's a shop
http://bouldering.com/
Cheers,
Mick
In reply to Adam L:
should have put according to sources, thought it sounded high, still.... good on Bubba
> (In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com)
>
> Five figures? Not sure about your sources Mick.
>
> Five figures? Not sure about your sources Mick.
should have put according to sources, thought it sounded high, still.... good on Bubba
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Great post Chris, have you seen the new banner over on UKB?
> (In reply to ksjs)
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
> [...]
>
> It must just be me but I think UKB is dire at every level; ugly, primitive, juvenile and offensive!
>
> Chris
Great post Chris, have you seen the new banner over on UKB?
In reply to Dave C:
Indeed.
OK I was a bit OTT!
Chris
> (In reply to Chris Craggs)
> [...]
>
> Great post Chris, have you seen the new banner over on UKB?
> [...]
>
> Great post Chris, have you seen the new banner over on UKB?
Indeed.
OK I was a bit OTT!
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs:
No Chris you were spot on.
When I want to find out information about anything important I'd always choose UKC and when I want to find out when the last time anyone ate corned beef, have a never ending, pointless argument about God/science (yawn), go over and over and over the definition of "on site" (sic) or other such purile, juvenile, offensive nonsense I nip over to UKB.
Oh no, hang on a minute.....the irony etc.
No Chris you were spot on.
When I want to find out information about anything important I'd always choose UKC and when I want to find out when the last time anyone ate corned beef, have a never ending, pointless argument about God/science (yawn), go over and over and over the definition of "on site" (sic) or other such purile, juvenile, offensive nonsense I nip over to UKB.
Oh no, hang on a minute.....the irony etc.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Yeah ... it was a shocking post: you used a semi-colon instead of a colon. Yeesh ...
> OK I was a bit OTT!
Yeah ... it was a shocking post: you used a semi-colon instead of a colon. Yeesh ...
In reply to Eric Herring:
Yeah, that's the other thing I hate about UKB. They're so bloody pedantic.
Yeah, that's the other thing I hate about UKB. They're so bloody pedantic.
In reply to seagull:
Yes, so annoying when they put sic after something in that pedantic way and then get something wrong themselves
Yes, so annoying when they put sic after something in that pedantic way and then get something wrong themselves
In reply to Will Hunt:
I totally agree with that Will.
Si.
> (In reply to UKC News)
>
> There's been a lot of talk about UKB being very cliquey. When i joined I didn't know anybody and it has only been over time that I've got to know several posters. I still don't know the majority of people on there.
>
> Knowledge and debate about hard and easy trad and bouldering (and cooking, and wood burning stoves and DFB/BWGC and current affairs etc) is second to none. Alan and Mick may dispute this but that's because their income depends on the success of the "other channel".
>
> The "mates" factor that Alan has spoken about is what makes UKB good. Very few people post trolls because nobody wants to receive negative karma from their mates and the fact that many of the contributors know each other in the real world means that people are more likely to put more thought into a post rather than reeling off an ill-written post of drivel.
>
> That said, anyone who doesn't know anyone who starts posting on the site can expect a warm welcome.
>
> I haven't sworn or been abusive in this post. I did however hint at the possibility that UKC might not be the best website dedicated to climbing out there. Ooooo. Scandalous. Lets see how long it lasts.
>
> There's been a lot of talk about UKB being very cliquey. When i joined I didn't know anybody and it has only been over time that I've got to know several posters. I still don't know the majority of people on there.
>
> Knowledge and debate about hard and easy trad and bouldering (and cooking, and wood burning stoves and DFB/BWGC and current affairs etc) is second to none. Alan and Mick may dispute this but that's because their income depends on the success of the "other channel".
>
> The "mates" factor that Alan has spoken about is what makes UKB good. Very few people post trolls because nobody wants to receive negative karma from their mates and the fact that many of the contributors know each other in the real world means that people are more likely to put more thought into a post rather than reeling off an ill-written post of drivel.
>
> That said, anyone who doesn't know anyone who starts posting on the site can expect a warm welcome.
>
> I haven't sworn or been abusive in this post. I did however hint at the possibility that UKC might not be the best website dedicated to climbing out there. Ooooo. Scandalous. Lets see how long it lasts.
I totally agree with that Will.
Si.
Having been a frequent poster on both UKB & UKC in the past, but very infrequent now. In the case of UKB, you have to keep up, it's fast moving and quite 'political'. In the case of UKC it's generally pretty trivial and often boring. That aside personal circumstances have been much more important.
However UKB retains it's sense of irony and fun and general all round piss taking with the UKChris Crags banner. Sadly UKC is too professional for this type of 'climbers' banter. UKC is probably one of the most heavily policed, politically correct forums on the internet to the point where it detracts from the appeal of the grass route climber.
However UKC does offer a lot of other great features, News, articles, reviews etc. But most people are attracted by the forums.
Personally I hope the new UKB forum owners are able to make money while not selling out to the PC right on consensus as has UKC over the last ten years.
UKB Keeping it real!
However UKB retains it's sense of irony and fun and general all round piss taking with the UKChris Crags banner. Sadly UKC is too professional for this type of 'climbers' banter. UKC is probably one of the most heavily policed, politically correct forums on the internet to the point where it detracts from the appeal of the grass route climber.
However UKC does offer a lot of other great features, News, articles, reviews etc. But most people are attracted by the forums.
Personally I hope the new UKB forum owners are able to make money while not selling out to the PC right on consensus as has UKC over the last ten years.
UKB Keeping it real!
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
This is the most laughable thing you've ever spouted Alan!
UKB is superior in my opinion, most posts on here are drivel.
so if I put a post about Rockfax plagiarism, it wouldn't be pulled then?
> (In reply to Will Hunt)
>
> [...]
>
> Hi Will
>
> We wouldn't remove a post like this - never have, never will.
>
> Alan
>
> [...]
>
> Hi Will
>
> We wouldn't remove a post like this - never have, never will.
>
> Alan
This is the most laughable thing you've ever spouted Alan!
UKB is superior in my opinion, most posts on here are drivel.
so if I put a post about Rockfax plagiarism, it wouldn't be pulled then?
In reply to rooroo:
This is what Will said too but then he shut up as soon as I pointed out the the topic he thought had been removed, hadn't been removed, and that the person he thought had been banned for posting it was in fact banned for completely different reason.
If you posted a reasonably argued discussion about Rockfax and plagiarism then of course it wouldn't be removed. There are plenty of such posts in the archives if you care to look, and they will all have replies and sustained discussion. If you came on spouted some unqualified rubbish bordering on libellous to test the moderating system, then it is likely that would be removed.
Here is an old topic that wasn't even reasonably argued but it is still there - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=67767
Alan
> This is the most laughable thing you've ever spouted Alan!
> UKB is superior in my opinion, most posts on here are drivel.
>
> so if I put a post about Rockfax plagiarism, it wouldn't be pulled then?
> UKB is superior in my opinion, most posts on here are drivel.
>
> so if I put a post about Rockfax plagiarism, it wouldn't be pulled then?
This is what Will said too but then he shut up as soon as I pointed out the the topic he thought had been removed, hadn't been removed, and that the person he thought had been banned for posting it was in fact banned for completely different reason.
If you posted a reasonably argued discussion about Rockfax and plagiarism then of course it wouldn't be removed. There are plenty of such posts in the archives if you care to look, and they will all have replies and sustained discussion. If you came on spouted some unqualified rubbish bordering on libellous to test the moderating system, then it is likely that would be removed.
Here is an old topic that wasn't even reasonably argued but it is still there - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=67767
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
I have better things to do with my time than argue with you Alan. UKC is not my job and nor is looking at it a hobby of mine so please excuse me if I'm not as prompt at replying as you are.
It's hard to drag up evidence of overzealous or unfair moderation because it is, by definition, destroyed. Only examples of threads being left intact remain. I have been a victim in the past of this sort of moderation. After being accused of homophobia by a moderator (a serious offence in my eyes especially as I post under my real name and not a pseudonym. The grounds on which the accusation were made were very unreasonable and tenuous. It was also contested by several other UKC users. Nobody supported the moderators view) all of the very well reasoned arguments refuting this were removed although I believe the apparently "offending" post was left in place.
Perhaps your standards of forum moderation differ from those of some of your colleagues.
Apologies for such a long winded reply but you were looking for an example and this is the only one that springs to mind. I am aware of critical threads that have disappeared very quickly in the past but they stay for such a short time and therefore have such little discussion that they slip from memory easily.
I have better things to do with my time than argue with you Alan. UKC is not my job and nor is looking at it a hobby of mine so please excuse me if I'm not as prompt at replying as you are.
It's hard to drag up evidence of overzealous or unfair moderation because it is, by definition, destroyed. Only examples of threads being left intact remain. I have been a victim in the past of this sort of moderation. After being accused of homophobia by a moderator (a serious offence in my eyes especially as I post under my real name and not a pseudonym. The grounds on which the accusation were made were very unreasonable and tenuous. It was also contested by several other UKC users. Nobody supported the moderators view) all of the very well reasoned arguments refuting this were removed although I believe the apparently "offending" post was left in place.
Perhaps your standards of forum moderation differ from those of some of your colleagues.
Apologies for such a long winded reply but you were looking for an example and this is the only one that springs to mind. I am aware of critical threads that have disappeared very quickly in the past but they stay for such a short time and therefore have such little discussion that they slip from memory easily.
In reply to Will Hunt: Dare i suggest that people make mistakes?
In reply to Will Hunt:
Drop me an email next time you notice the kind of thread removal your are looking for, but it certainly isn't our policy. The incident you quote was far more complex from what I remember and it was about language, not people being critical of UKC.
If you are referring to threads questioning the moderating, then yes we do remove those - the "where has my thread gone" type. That is just a policy to make moderating easier since we simply haven't got the resources to have public inquests every time we remove a thread, but we will always respond to emails about thread removal.
Alan
> I am aware of critical threads that have disappeared very quickly in the past but they stay for such a short time and therefore have such little discussion that they slip from memory easily.
Drop me an email next time you notice the kind of thread removal your are looking for, but it certainly isn't our policy. The incident you quote was far more complex from what I remember and it was about language, not people being critical of UKC.
If you are referring to threads questioning the moderating, then yes we do remove those - the "where has my thread gone" type. That is just a policy to make moderating easier since we simply haven't got the resources to have public inquests every time we remove a thread, but we will always respond to emails about thread removal.
Alan
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
It does strike me that UKC is more aware and self conscious about contentious posts that may affect the public image of UKC.
If UKC was less regulated and more pro-active in what posters say then the long term credibility of this site may be progressive. As it is because of the 'policing policy' of the mod's the forums have few climbing threads but lots of fluffy shite.
Yes it pays the bills, but in the long term will it attract advertisers, time will tell.
It does strike me that UKC is more aware and self conscious about contentious posts that may affect the public image of UKC.
If UKC was less regulated and more pro-active in what posters say then the long term credibility of this site may be progressive. As it is because of the 'policing policy' of the mod's the forums have few climbing threads but lots of fluffy shite.
Yes it pays the bills, but in the long term will it attract advertisers, time will tell.
In reply to A Nidderdale boulderer.:
Oh god! Did you just invite Mick to do the old "statistics reel spectacular" where he demonstrates that people all over the world have developed the ability to put "climbing uk" into Google and click the first link that appears? A fascinating evolution of human behaviour and one that is proving quite lucrative.
Oh god! Did you just invite Mick to do the old "statistics reel spectacular" where he demonstrates that people all over the world have developed the ability to put "climbing uk" into Google and click the first link that appears? A fascinating evolution of human behaviour and one that is proving quite lucrative.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...