On 17/09/2009 BA wrote:
> When I was Argus editor 5-10 years ago I fielded questions about "What's
>that route with the bolt just right of ..." People were using a 'selected'
>guide and didn't 'realise' it didn't contain ALL the recorded routes at
>Araps. "Has any climbing been recorded on cliff BBB?" 'Yes, 30 years ago'.
>
>A lot of it was based on the fact that I've been involved with climbing
>for over 40 years, have a reasonable collection of old copies of Argus,
>Rock (as well as Flash, Splat, Australian Rockclimber, some old Thrutches
>and write-ups of Australian climbs in OS mags, oh, and something called
>Crux) that contain mentions of routes, their histories, their repeats and
>trip reports.
The difficulty I see is, only you have access to these old sources -- they're becoming lost by keeping them off the web. Because you had this resource, you could answer these questions. But if the info was online ... everyone would have this info and the question would not be likley to occurr in the first place, or could be anwered by many people.
I appreciate what you've done for climbing, and am tempted to to say anything because it may be interpreted as deliberately antagonistioc, but I just have a completely different perspective.
NM wrote:
>What always annoyed me about the 'new route only' database concept is the basis of what it's built around. It implies that it records new routes, but ...After a few years its just a jumble of thousands of routes that have some vague connection to an assortment of print guides... I think a comprehensive online guide, that every new route is immediately added into is by the far the best solution for keeping accurate records.
100% agree.
|