|
ncrockclimber
Jun 18, 2015, 12:01 AM
Post #1 of 29
(21552 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2006
Posts: 286
|
What happened? I visit here every 6 months or so just to see how it is going. On this visit I was absolutely shocked with the lack of activity and general neglect. Who owns this site now? What happened to the "new" owners that were going to renovate and invigorate this site? As far as I can tell, this place is a ghost-town...
|
|
|
|
|
6pacfershur
Jun 18, 2015, 8:16 AM
Post #2 of 29
(21480 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2010
Posts: 254
|
ncrockclimber wrote: ......... I visit here every 6 months or so just to see how it is going......
everyone split to supertopo.....
|
|
|
|
|
naitch
Jun 18, 2015, 3:26 PM
Post #3 of 29
(21411 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 539
|
iyup...and many on SuperTopo split for - climboing??? mtn. project??? or ???
The natural evolution of lists.
"And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We're captive on the carousel of time
We can't return we can only look
Behind from where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game"
(This post was edited by naitch on Jun 18, 2015, 3:36 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Jun 19, 2015, 6:10 PM
Post #4 of 29
(21256 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
My impression is a lot less people climb now than 10 years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
ncrockclimber
Jun 19, 2015, 7:09 PM
Post #5 of 29
(21248 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2006
Posts: 286
|
dynosore wrote: My impression is a lot less people climb now than 10 years ago.
I am sure that is it.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jun 20, 2015, 9:38 PM
Post #6 of 29
(21127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
ncrockclimber wrote: Who owns this site now? What happened to the "new" owners that were going to renovate and invigorate this site?
|
|
|
|
|
ncrockclimber
Jun 20, 2015, 10:45 PM
Post #7 of 29
(21119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2006
Posts: 286
|
marc801 wrote: ncrockclimber wrote: Who owns this site now? What happened to the "new" owners that were going to renovate and invigorate this site? Instead of making obvious and noticeable improvements on the front page and in the forums, the new owner decided to focus exclusively for a year on totally invisible back-end changes.
... and a few dictatorial "policy" statements which only served alienate the few people that were left. What happened here could actually be a case study for how to destroy the community aspect of a webpage.
There is little here for me as a user. Maybe the owner is making money off the site, but he absolutely failed to follow through what he said he was going to do on 10/31/2013:
In reply to: "The primary thing I wanted to say in this post is that my wife and I *care* about creating a good experience for users and staff, and starting right now, we are here to support you.
Yeah, right.
Edit to add... The owner has not logged on here in over a month. As far as I can tell, he has not posted here since March. RC.com is truly dead.
(This post was edited by ncrockclimber on Jun 21, 2015, 1:17 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Jun 22, 2015, 2:29 AM
Post #8 of 29
(20975 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
ncrockclimber wrote: In reply to: "The primary thing I wanted to say in this post is that my wife and I *care* about creating a good experience for users and staff, and starting right now, we are here to support you. Yeah, right. Edit to add... The owner has not logged on here in over a month. As far as I can tell, he has not posted here since March. RC.com is truly dead.
So... being that the new rc.com owner is failing so miserably. Can I buy it now? I pulled my number out of the hat to get in line quite some time ago. I think maybe I'm next at this point?
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jun 23, 2015, 3:40 PM
Post #9 of 29
(20818 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
kobaz wrote: ncrockclimber wrote: In reply to: "The primary thing I wanted to say in this post is that my wife and I *care* about creating a good experience for users and staff, and starting right now, we are here to support you. Yeah, right. Edit to add... The owner has not logged on here in over a month. As far as I can tell, he has not posted here since March. RC.com is truly dead. So... being that the new rc.com owner is failing so miserably. Can I buy it now? I pulled my number out of the hat to get in line quite some time ago. I think maybe I'm next at this point?
The answer depends on what you are planning to do to revive the dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff
Owner
Jun 23, 2015, 9:02 PM
Post #10 of 29
(20779 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm still very much around.
The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl.
Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work.
(This post was edited by Jeff on Jun 23, 2015, 9:02 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jun 23, 2015, 11:22 PM
Post #11 of 29
(20761 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
Jeff wrote: I'm still very much around. The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl. Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work.
|
|
|
|
|
ncrockclimber
Jun 24, 2015, 1:37 AM
Post #12 of 29
(20743 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2006
Posts: 286
|
Jeff wrote: I'm still very much around. The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl. Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work.
LOL. Ok Jeff.
|
|
|
|
|
mojomonkey
Jun 24, 2015, 2:35 PM
Post #13 of 29
(20672 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 869
|
marc801 wrote: Jeff wrote: I'm still very much around. The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl. Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work. Understood, but sometimes you just need to bite the technical debt bullet and make those highly visible changes to get people interested. We're not talking about a ground-up greenfield rewrite of the entire site - just refactoring the front page design (visual and interaction), removing the stale content, and maybe getting some fresh articles.
Looks like interest fell off in January.
Camhead was making a good effort on articles but those stopped in January. Photos stalled around then as well - though I am not sure if people stopped submitting or there is just nobody approving them. The most recently registered user looks to be from early January too, which it sounded like needed manual approval now too (to prevent spam accounts).
(This post was edited by mojomonkey on Jun 24, 2015, 5:04 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jun 24, 2015, 6:44 PM
Post #14 of 29
(20641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
mojomonkey wrote: marc801 wrote: Jeff wrote: I'm still very much around. The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl. Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work. Understood, but sometimes you just need to bite the technical debt bullet and make those highly visible changes to get people interested. We're not talking about a ground-up greenfield rewrite of the entire site - just refactoring the front page design (visual and interaction), removing the stale content, and maybe getting some fresh articles. Looks like interest fell off in January. Camhead was making a good effort on articles but those stopped in January. Photos stalled around then as well - though I am not sure if people stopped submitting or there is just nobody approving them.
Neither - the site software stopped allowing any uploads of either Camheads articles or any users' photos. Just two of a number of things (well documented in the Bugs & Error Reports forum) that are broken, and have been for some time.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jun 24, 2015, 9:52 PM
Post #15 of 29
(20604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
cracklover wrote: mojomonkey wrote: marc801 wrote: Jeff wrote: I'm still very much around. The only viable option for making improvements on the site is migrating to new forum software... the current software is ancient Perl code that's fairly well-written, but there's a reason very few modern websites still run Perl. Migrating to new forum software requires untangling the different pieces of the site from each other--it's fairly well integrated so have to break it apart in order to upgrade different pieces. We've been slowly chipping away at it, but it's a lot of work. Understood, but sometimes you just need to bite the technical debt bullet and make those highly visible changes to get people interested. We're not talking about a ground-up greenfield rewrite of the entire site - just refactoring the front page design (visual and interaction), removing the stale content, and maybe getting some fresh articles. Looks like interest fell off in January. Camhead was making a good effort on articles but those stopped in January. Photos stalled around then as well - though I am not sure if people stopped submitting or there is just nobody approving them. Neither - the site software stopped allowing any uploads of either Camheads articles or any users' photos. Just two of a number of things (well documented in the Bugs & Error Reports forum) that are broken, and have been for some time.
1. turn off anything that automatically updates the home page except the
new posts list
2. Manually insert links to any new content that would be of interest
3. Do a complete modernization of the visual design of the home page
4. AFTER that, then go an fix the most important things that are broken (eg: enabling user generated content upload - photos, articles, etc.)
5. THEN start on the real long-term fixes on the back end
5.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jun 25, 2015, 7:35 PM
Post #17 of 29
(20484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
What the hell is wrong with a person who feels the need to "One Star" a genuine and humble response from the damned owner of the site?
Maybe, since the site code is so fragile, the best option actually IS to start over and let the past be an archived site. Move the existing onto a site called "OldRC.com" or something(so the content isn't gone), post a "Here's the New site" on the home page, to redirect, and use the rc.com url for the new site that is whatever the vision is/was? Maybe that is a dumb idea and not a viable option, but if the site is brain dead and on life support, perhaps it's time to pull the plug.
(This post was edited by happiegrrrl on Jun 25, 2015, 7:36 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
Rokjox
Jul 9, 2015, 10:31 AM
Post #18 of 29
(19933 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2006
Posts: 71
|
Hi Happie... ok, so I gave him a 4 star... I never played with the ratings thingy before...''Back in the day I remember a lot of posters on a certain other website offered to provide what would be basically crowdsourced programming skills... kinda scary but for a brave owner new methods of upgrading might be called for.
Almost no website dealing with climbing, skiing or biking is really doing well, and climbing is doing the worst I think. Climers all wanted to meet up and get to know one another, then they found that most of the other guys were absolute jerks too.
You yourself made a bunch of asshat claims about me stalking you when I never did any such thing. I got the only emails I ever sent you, they were all very innocent and straightforward.
When some say all the posters "went" to 'topo, thats not exactly right... they went where there is still life, or they disappeared. ST and MP have a little life left, MP because of its free worldwide guidebook format and ST mostly becvause of all the old men who make a living hustling climbers there... guides, rangers, and concession employees are keeping that site open.
Old men for sure are the ST demographic. They mostly project Smug and self righteous anarchy, nothing else any more. The real need for this website is to reimagine who their readers might be. ST is going lose many hits to the new Yos. Park website, CM won't be able to pretend to be an official resource much longer, Yosemite is gonna be its own website soon enough. I expect it will help gut ST even further.
But its clear from Alexa, ST is dead, its lost tens of thousands of raking points, and now is flat off the chart, the bottom of the chart.
WHO is rockclimbing .com gonna tap as readership?
There are a few computer junkies that still are interested in climbing, like me... but I am OLD too. Too old to be lured by just a pretty home page, I need CONTENT (not necessarily climbing content, cross sport content.. I need enough community to know a little about who I am posting to and to care who is reading the posts, enough to care to post.
Somehow, I don't think a reimagining of what a forum is to climbers is gonna happen. We are going to see each forum copying whatever forum still has momentum, each chasing the others tail, hoping to interest those remaining viewers, fighting for a smaller and smaller pie. Like Little Black Sambo, eventually all the tigers will just diasppear. Dead forums.
No matter what you can offer, its easier to destroy than to build. Entropy says the universe ends in disorder.
Try not to focus on the software, its the bigger issue of attracting PEOPLE who are avid posters that is your problem. Motivation, not graphics.
It is absolutely necessary to fix the upload image features though... without pictures, you are gonna be crippled with posters.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 9, 2015, 12:53 PM
Post #19 of 29
(19918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
As a legend-tier GUDPOSTER I accept payment for aiding in community develupment in £, BTC, and HB offsets. Original cast size 8s, please.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Jul 10, 2015, 4:56 AM
Post #20 of 29
(19824 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
You take bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
rgbscan
Jul 10, 2015, 6:44 PM
Post #22 of 29
(19746 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2003
Posts: 106
|
I think a lot of it is just generational shifting too.
When I first started climbing seriously, this website, and minnesotaclimbing.com were the places to find knowledge and partners - while mining the occasional nugget of knowledge off old usenet groups using DejaNews.
These days people use Facebook and meetup.com for the same sort of thing. Forums for most of my hobbies are dead (with the exception of some radio control boards). While FB timelines are terrible for organized and threaded convo's, it's something everyone has access too and knows how to work it. I think it's also a generational thing that people don't do a lot of research and reading anymore - they just google for a quick answer or get someone to show them. No climber I've met under the age of 30 knows about "freedom of the Hills" for example - but that's just me. Most climbers my age (pushing 40) that used to frequent this site seem to do little climbing anymore, and even less spryaing on message boards about it. We've all got families, kids, dogs, and mortgages.
And then RC.com never seemed to attract the younger demo that hangs out in fb now.
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Jul 10, 2015, 8:24 PM
Post #23 of 29
(19729 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
rgbscan wrote: I think a lot of it is just generational shifting too. When I first started climbing seriously, this website, and minnesotaclimbing.com were the places to find knowledge and partners - while mining the occasional nugget of knowledge off old usenet groups using DejaNews. These days people use Facebook and meetup.com for the same sort of thing. Forums for most of my hobbies are dead (with the exception of some radio control boards). While FB timelines are terrible for organized and threaded convo's, it's something everyone has access too and knows how to work it. I think it's also a generational thing that people don't do a lot of research and reading anymore - they just google for a quick answer or get someone to show them. No climber I've met under the age of 30 knows about "freedom of the Hills" for example - but that's just me. Most climbers my age (pushing 40) that used to frequent this site seem to do little climbing anymore, and even less spryaing on message boards about it. We've all got families, kids, dogs, and mortgages. And then RC.com never seemed to attract the younger demo that hangs out in fb now. 
The other part is the homebrewer part of me...
There are still quite a few active homebrewer forums out there.
The question is, why are the homebrewers still actively interacting with each other online, while the climbers aren't...?
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jul 11, 2015, 6:13 AM
Post #24 of 29
(19656 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
rgbscan wrote: ...Most climbers my age (pushing 40) that used to frequent this site seem to do little climbing anymore, ... And then RC.com never seemed to attract the younger demo that hangs out in fb now.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 13, 2015, 2:14 PM
Post #25 of 29
(19417 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
marc801 wrote: rgbscan wrote: ...Most climbers my age (pushing 40) that used to frequent this site seem to do little climbing anymore, ... And then RC.com never seemed to attract the younger demo that hangs out in fb now. The median age on Facebook in the last study I read is 37.8 yrs old. The most active demographic group on FB is 35-54 yrs old.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This place is DEAD!
1
