Admins Can Suppress Route Scores!?

I feel like Admins should have the ability to do what they feel is correct. If a gang of dudes wanted to make an outstanding area look less appealing to keep crowds away, they could simply bomb the whole area, which is an obvious problem. Not to say anyone would, or even has done this, but Admins should be able to head off bs ratings and grades when noticed, in my opinion. Though, this power should be used appropriately, and maybe only by concensus between all the area admins. Im pretty neutral on this particular case, because it sounds like there's a substantial back story that we're only getting a bit of the details from.

Ben Kwrote:

I think its funny that an admin suppressed my initial comment on a page concerning admin suppression. I was not being a jerk, I was being honest and giving a valid opinion. 

Hasn't this been happening now for a bit of time now?  Or have you not  yet swallowed the MtnPrahjiBrahji Pill yet?

I'm on the fence about awarding this thread four or zero stars.

RRRwrote:

I feel like Admins should have the ability to do what they feel is correct. If a gang of dudes wanted to make an outstanding area look less appealing to keep crowds away, they could simply bomb the whole area, which is an obvious problem. Not to say anyone would, or even has done this, but Admins should be able to head off bs ratings and grades when noticed, in my opinion. Though, this power should be used appropriately, and maybe only by concensus between all the area admins. Im pretty neutral on this particular case, because it sounds like there's a substantial back story that we're only getting a bit of the details from.

Screw the admins... I feel the owner can do what ze feels is correct.  Admins follow the owner on leash, and the minions stay, or go...

I dislike the admin censorship, route control, and complete lack of notification when they change route submission aspects. There should be a process all admins have to abide by in order for them to make changes to submissions.

They often change routes, descriptions, and route names without notification in response to incorrect or disagreeable comments. Or just because they "feel" another way is better. That's dumb. 

We also have some dude locallly who fancies himself a grammar king despite having sh*tgrammar skills. How much time do you have on your hands to add idiotic commas to every sentence?

Ryan Marsterswrote:

I dislike the admin censorship, route control, and complete lack of notification when they change route submission aspects. There should be a process all admins have to abide by in order for them to make changes to submissions.

They often change routes, descriptions, and route names without notification in response to incorrect or disagreeable comments. Or just because they "feel" another way is better. That's dumb. 

We also have some dude locallly who fancies himself a grammar king despite having sh*tgrammar skills. How much time do you have on your hands to add idiotic commas to every sentence?

You do realize that most changes to route descriptions and such are usually submitted by other users through the "improve this page" function, and that the admins simply approve them right? Also why do you care if someone is taking the time to correct grammar?

^The admins should not be approving those changes without input from the original submitter. The admins are not always "correcting" grammar. Some of their suggestions lead to erroneous information/phrasing which should be vetted.

Ryan Marsterswrote:

^The admins should not be approving those changes without input from the original submitter. The admins are not always "correcting" grammar. Some of their suggestions lead to erroneous information/phrasing which should be vetted.

The original submitter gets a notification of any page improvements. If they don't respond to the suggestions, the area admins have the ability to do so. Ideally, the original submitter would vet the info, and the admin never has to take any action at all.

Andrew Krajnikwrote:

The original submitter gets a notification of any page improvements. If they don't respond to the suggestions, the area admins have the ability to do so. Ideally, the original submitter would vet the info, and the admin never has to take any action at all.

Right, but there have been several times when I've edited my own submissions and an admin has gone ahead and made additional edits without consulting or notifying anyone. Nothing major, just annoying changes like adding non-standard punctuation and capitalization. I wouldn't mind except that I'm still identified as the author, so it looks like I'm the one that can't proof-read.

Is anyone else really tempted to go bomb the route now? Or is it just me?

Andrew Krajnikwrote:

The original submitter gets a notification of any page improvements. If they don't respond to the suggestions, the area admins have the ability to do so. Ideally, the original submitter would vet the info, and the admin never has to take any action at all.

This was recently changed so that submitters are not notified and have no mechanism to review suggested changes.

Randy Von Zeewrote:

This was recently changed so that submitters are not notified and have no mechanism to review suggested changes.

+1 for this being bullshit.  Ditto for deleting someone's quality rating - the change that started this thread is a textbook example of why that's a bad idea.  I know someone has to have veto power, but that one should be in Nick's hands and no one else's

SinRopa wrote:

In keeping with the latest trends on Mountain Project, MP should no longer tolerate star ratings on a route (or the context behind any of those scores, or lack thereof) that make anyone even a little uncomfortable.

Can we get a bad star rating list going?  Or the ability to flag routes with star ratings we perceive as troublesome?  Then we can finally begin to redact star ratings

Yelp needs to by banned!!! All 1,2,3 and 4 star reviews on backcountrydotcom should immediately be removed!  Sanitize the PRAHJ!!!  the list goes on...