You can now flag a discriminatory name

SinRopa wrote: I was having some lighthearted fun messing with Colonel Mustard about using the name of the white colonialist Clue character, in the same way I'm pretty sure you're doing the same now.  You don't have to be Captain Obvious to see it...

Maybe there can be an "easily offended" option when you make an MP account that you can click and all flagged routes will disappear?

John Qwrote:

How does one "steal" a suggestion given to them regarding a potential feature on their own web site?

How does one "work hard" on nagging someone about route names?

How does one complain about a system that doesn't conform to their particular standards, and then when given exactly what they want, they complain about how it wasn't fast enough?

1.  By writing fully functioning and user tested code that was rejected at the time and now being used.

2. See 1. And nagging is a funny way of saying trying to make the climbing community more inclusive for everyone.

3. I provided some good examples in my previous posts. That's how. This could have been the norm months ago, but like I said, it wasn't trendy then now was it. Glad to see this here now nevertheless. This is a great step forward.

Thanks for your input.

Dave K wrote:

You might want to learn the basics of intellectual property law.

This is true. I'm not an expert, you got my number on that. Just pointing it out on public forum that this could have been done months ago. Not necessarily discussing the nuances of intellectual property law. Thanks for your input. 

Dave K wrote:

I apologize for the flippant way I said that. Generally if someone pays you to create something it belongs to them even if they don't use it right away. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire

Of course I don't know much about your specific arrangement. But unless you has a specific provision in place, your employer owns your code.

As for what they could have been doing... I have no idea what other priorities MP management had to sort out but I do know you can't do everything at once.

Thanks, I appreciate that. No hard feelings. 

And yes, you are correct about work for hire. And in this instance I am not the coder, I happen to know who made the proposal. As far as I know this wasn't work for hire. It was more of a "Here is what I made, you can use it should you accept my proposal" situation.
Just trying to stick up for someone who poured a lot of heart and soul into it.

Did you even read past the first sentence?  They clearly wrote:  "It’s up to MOUNTAIN PROJECT to decide if they will publish it. "
The point was the FA can call the route whatever they want (1st Amendment) AND that MP has every right to not put it on their website (also 1st Amendment).

Tricam Apostle wrote:

Freedom of speech went out the window the moment you created your account and agreed to the TOS.  MP is a private entity, and not the Government, so the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply.

This is an all-too-common misconception.

Also, the 1st Amendment says nothing about suffering the consequences of speech.  Don’t like that your offensive name gets yanked, or you get thumped by someone who objects to it? Not a free speech issue.

The 30+ people who gave that post a thumbs up could likely use a refresher on the rights granted by the Constitution and relevant laws.

It's true, the first amendment comparison is not perfect.

It might more accurate to say that the people flagging names are the Kyle's Moms outraged about violent video games, or the Karens complaining that the foam heart in their coffee is upside down.

Mountain Project is Walmart, only carrying the no-explicit-lyrics versions of the album. You can still find the correct version, you just have to look at other sources.

I'm offended when someone make derogatory references about Jesus, So if you are going to change
names of climbs make sure you do the same with climbs with Jesus in the name.

I've never cared what climbs were named because I climbed the rock not the name.
But, if you are changing derogatory names, you got to change ANY name that offends a group of people
no matter WHO!!!
PERIOD!!!

Good call, Nick. Stay the course and the site will be better for it once the dust settles. You sound like a really cool guy.

NickMartelwrote: We’re gonna CHOP all these offensive routes right?

Do I see what you did there, or just think so?

Chaz kidding 

Russ Wallingwrote: It is sad that this is the hill you chose to die on Nick...

Yes I couldn't agree more.  The world has gone mad and so has Nick Wilder.  If enough routes get flagged, someone's going to have a lot of extra work to do. MP will no longer be about documenting the facts because route names are facts.  It will become a silly attempt to sanitize the world for child friendly consumption.  The real world's not like that.  Its a dirty place.  Perhaps MP has gotten to big for its britches, and there soon will be room for internet competition.

Have you seen the list of flagged route names? Some complaints seem legit but others are just dumb. I'd like to think people are just trolling, flagging routes to be obnoxious, but I'm afraid some people are offended by some of these benign names. Ridiculous. What a can of worms.

Here are a few examples of flagged route names (how are these offensive?):

1. 69
2. A Desperate Man
3. Al Queda Area
4. Animal Farm

Mark Rolofsonwrote:

Yes I couldn't agree more.  The world has gone mad and so has Nick Wilder.  If enough routes get flagged, someone's going to have a lot of extra work to do. MP will no longer be about documenting the facts because route names are facts.  It will become a silly attempt to sanitize the world for child friendly consumption.  The real world's not like that.  Its a dirty place.  Perhaps MP has gotten to big for its britches, and there soon will be room for internet competition.

This is the dumbest crap I've yet read on here. 

FrankPSwrote: Have you seen the list of flagged route names? Some complaints seem legit but others are just dumb. I'd like to think people are just trolling, flagging routes to be obnoxious, but I'm afraid some people are offended by some of these benign names. Ridiculous. What a can of worms.

Here are a few examples of flagged route names (how are these offensive?):

1. 69
2. A Desperate Man
3. Al Queda Area
4. Animal Farm

https://www.mountainproject.com/bad-names

There are a ton of awful names on that list.

Peter Twrote:

There are a ton of awful names on that list.

And he chooses to focus on the ones that don't matter. Says a lot about his concern for what this is truly about. Racists always try to water down the message. 

T Legowrote:

And he chooses to focus on the ones that don't matter. Says a lot about his concern for what this is truly about. Racists always try to water down the message. 

The Boy Who Cried Racist. Takes away from from real racism when you call everyone you disagree with "racist." Very common these days to just throw that term around. Racist!

SinRopa wrote: We both know this happens all the time though.  

Eh, let's be clear what you mean by that. It happens sometimes. Are the majority of the route names being reported as discriminatory in that category? I don't know the answer to that, and I don't think you know the answer to that. There are some route names that are more nuanced than people's initial gut reaction, but there are also some route names that are just obviously discriminatory.

What I do know, is that I don't particularly care if the name of a rock gets changed, even if the original name was completely inoffensive. That's not some giant social injustice--it's at worst a bit dumb. I don't know the NIN song, so I can't say whether the name is discriminatory, but I do know that if I were the first ascentionist I'd change the name rather than choosing that hill to die on.

Here are some hills I'm willing to die on:

• On March 13, 2020, Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove, wearing plain clothes and no body cameras, broke down the door of Breonna Taylor and Kenneth Walker's home without announcing that they were police. Correctly believing he was being attacked, Kenneth Walker fired at the home invaders with a legally-owned firearm, and the home invaders fired back, killing Breonna Taylor in an act that can only be described as murder. Neither Breonna Taylor nor Kenneth Walker were even suspects in any crime. Mattingly, Hankinson, and Cosgrove have not been charged with any crime. Mattignly, Hankinson, and Cosgrove are murderers. Taylor and her family deserve justice.
• On August 24, 2019, Nathan Woodyard, Jason Rosenblatt and Randy Roedema assaulted Elijah McClain, pinning him on the ground and choking him with two different chokes after handcuffing him, while he pleaded for mercy. They continued to assault and choke him after he passed out, vomited, and apologized for vomiting. McClain was pronounced dead in the hospital on August 30. Officers repeatedly lied about the murder, claiming he weighed 190 pounds when he weighed 140, and claiming that somehow three body cams fell off of three officers, so that we only have audio of the murder. Woodyard, Rosenblatt, and Roedema are on paid administrative leave "for their own safety", and no criminal charged have been filed. Woodyard, Rosenblatt, and Roedema are murderers. McClain and his family deserve justice.
• On January 18, 2016, Philip Brailsford forced Daniel Shaver and his girlfriend to crawl down a hallway begging for their lives and crying at gunpoint, before murdering Daniel Shaver. You can watch this on video, but inexplicably, Maricopa County prosecutors moved to exclude the video from evidence during the ensuing trial. After Brailsford was found not guilty, he was reinstated with the Mesa PD briefly, after which he retired early on medical grounds, citing PTSD from the murder he committed. He now receives a pension of $2,500/month. Brailsford is a murderer. Shaver and his family deserve justice.

And these are just the tip of the iceberg--the cases where it's very clear. There are numerous incidents where the evidence isn't as clear, and a systemic pattern of police corruption and lies that makes it hard to know how deep the rot goes. In that context, I sort of just wish we weren't talking about route names--I don't want our community to be focusing on either side of the route name debate. Changing discriminatory names is good I guess, but I wish we could just do it without talking about it. There are people being murdered, and the murderers are walking free--that is what I want to be talking about.

At this point I don't care much. I get that people should feel comfortable and that we should do something about this things that are offensive to some. But then that shouldn't mean we have to bend the world 3 times over for whoever claims to be offended.

I like that some effort is being maid, though I'm sure this will get out of hand somewhat. Looking forward to the show and hope we'll get to learn something from our likely overresponse...

Not Hobo Greg wrote:

Yea who cares if the innocent go down with the guilty. I mean if our founding fathers didn’t want it to be that way, they should have come up with some sort of “innocent until proven guilty” clause.

Just to be clear, you are also talking about the names of rocks on a website? 

SinRopa wrote: Isn't that what you're talking about too?

Yea. I don't understand what invoking "innocent until proven guilty" has anything to do with it.