Cochise Stronghold: Toofast Topos & Cochise Climbing

What does the Southern Arizona community think about how Toofast Topos are being integrated into the route descriptions and comments for Cochise Stronghold?

Examples:
Stampede
Sensory Desuetude
Jabberwocky

Questions to ponder:

• Is it appropriate to link to off-site information in route descriptions? Comments?
• Does the answer change if the information requires the user to sign in?
• Are teaser images acceptable?

Personally I have no problem with links to off-site information since Mountain Project lacks the ability to host attachments such as pdfs. I dislike the recent switch that requires users to register for a portion of the topos. While the registration is free I find a number of the questions invasive. I view the teaser images as advertisements and inappropriate. That said, the topos are well done and no real alternatives exist.

I have no problem with the Stampede example but am uncomfortable with the Sensory Desuetude (sic) and Jabberwocky examples. I am unsure of the best course of action.

Geir is giving out really accurate info on long routes. Topos that are accurate to the meter and descriptions including gear lists for free. The catch is you need to register for the site.
I registered 5 minutes ago. Very few questions to answer and I didn't find the questions invasive so much as odd. For the quality of info I can now get, I have to say it was worth letting him know who can prove I climb at the Stronghold and what the last route I did was.

MP is supposed to be helping climbers out and this info helps me and thousands of others out so let it stay what ever way it is posted.

I think there are suggestions for guidebooks to areas and those cost money.

In general, I think it's fine to link off-site, but it is really lame to not even write a description in MP. If you climbed it, and are posting the route, you should be able to write your own description.

About hosting a PDF - why not just convert it to a jpg (take a screenshot if nothing else) and upload it as a photo?

Thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming.

Answers: yes, no, yes.

John, Geir has already addressed your questions about registration on FB. Your only response to him was to "like" his response. He clearly stated that anyone who wants the topos without registering can email him. If you have more questions, why not contact him directly or, better yet, just don't register and don't use the topos.

The registration questions are directly related to climbing in the Stronghold and are not the least bit arbitrary. They are intended to eliminate annonymous and fake user names. If you find this invasive...DON'T REGISTER. It's that simple.

This was more a question regarding Mountain Project etiquette and community standards from an administrative role than a matter of personal opinion. As I see it my role is to facilitate discussion and enact the consensus not make a unilateral decision. Since this relates to Mountain Project a discussion on the site seems more appropriate than Facebook or in person. Geir can run his site as he deems appropriate and I can use it as I see fit (I registered) but the question is how is the Mountain Project site and community going to use the site.

the few times I have traveled to Cochise I never felt the need for topos on 3-5 pitch routes so its no biggy to me to not have them here. Geir makes decent topos, I saw his Endgame topo before going up it, didnt need it though. As the admin. either go climb it and write your own or wait for some good comments and borrow from those for the descriptions?

I do think its kind of lame to use Mtn Proj to get people to visit your own site though.

We can all easily agree that Geir's topos are the raddest for Cochise; like EFR said, they're down to the meter. I am grateful that Geir allows the links for his page to appear on the MP site, though I think the easiest course of action for the climbing-consumers would be for the topos to appear directly on MP. I understand that Gier probably doesn't want for his intellectual property to be spewed all over a site of which he's not in complete administrative control.

On "Jabberwocky", it would be good to move the topo thumbnail from the description to the comments; that way you have the option of eliminating it from your printout. Right now, it just adds to the size of the printout without really adding information.

Would be nice to be able to choose individual comments to print. Some have good info I might want on my printout, some are more social and general.

Christian wrote:On "Jabberwocky", it would be good to move the topo thumbnail from the description to the comments; that way you have the option of eliminating it from your printout. Right now, it just add to the size of the printout without really adding information. Would be nice to be able to choose individual comments to print. Some have good info I might want on my printout, some are more social and general.

I think this is a good idea as well. I also think that the link to the free information is helpful on MP.

I'd see the off-site links as an issue if he was charging for the service but that's not the case. In spite of the amount of time it takes to gather info and put all his topos together, he offers them free of charge; therefore "advertisement" only applies in the non-capitalist sense.

That being said, I also think that John reaching out to the community for input on the issue isn't a bad idea. It gives folks not on his fb (I am and yet missed the question/conversation) a chance to chime in with thoughts, etc. Personally, I like seeing the community being given a chance to weigh in on things. If anything it's probably just going to strengthen awareness of why things changed the way they have. Case in point: I didn't know these things had changed before I saw this thread.

Btw those Toofast topos are all jacked up. I started out following his topo for Ides of Middlemarch and I finished on Welcome to the Machine.

j/k folks TF Topos are the bees knees.

My take on this would be no. Here is why. The links don't take you to a pdf but rather a login/registration site. In order to get the topos one has to register. Registration requires providing some personal information. Once you enter the information you are informed that a real person has to verify the information before any access is granted. If you do not provide real information with a real name he turns down the application. So toofast is using Mountain Project to drive traffic to his site, which is a commercial site, and collecting information to use however he chooses. It's a common practice. If he wanted to do an ad campaign to promote some guide service special or whatever, he could with the information he has. Ads on websites drive me crazy. Putting adds (face it, that's what toofast is) inside route descriptions and comments makes me want to scream. Just my personal take on the subject.

Sorry for the delay in my reply; I have been climbing the last two days and I wanted to talk directly to the site landlords. Besides, Marcy (my wife) pretty much summed up my thoughts perfectly.

I talked with Nick Wilder, one of the site landlords. After showing him exactly what I am doing, I asked for his feedback and asked if he wanted me to change any of my posts, images, or links. The bottom line (literally) was “I think your stuff is fine.”

All of Toofast's Topos will be consolidated into a guidebook for the Stronghold. Even though it's probably not the best business practice, I have been making them available for free since I started producing them in 2008. Contrary to Mike's perfectly accurate assessment of my site, about 60% of the route topos can be downloaded without logging in. For the remainder you'll be asked to register. However, I have made it clear multiple times that if you don't want to register, I am happy to email whatever topo you want.

As a final warning, you may be aware that I teach self-rescue classes. You must use your real name in the class.

Sounds like the community consensus and higher powers are fine with the current integration of Toofast Topos. Hence I am fine with it and shall take no action. Feel free to continue to discuss as the matter, like everything else, can always be reevaluated.

The teaser images do seem to cause havoc to the printer friendly view and add no value hence it would be nice to see these moved to comments. I believe individual comments can be hidden if more than one exists.

Printer Friendly View Issue

Hendrixson wrote:The teaser images do seem to cause havoc to the printer friendly view and add no value hence it would be nice to see these moved to comments. I believe individual comments can be hidden if more than one exists.

No problem, I can change that.

Thanks Geir! I also appreciate the updated description for Stampede.

By the way, the topos look really good. I used one on The Tombstone Stripper yesterday. I also noticed that some areas are starting to fill in such as Cochise Dome. Nice work.

Regarding route descriptions like Geir's original Stampede description, I and some other posters often write "route descriptions" for Southern Arizona climbs where we just linked the Backcountry Guide with some thoughts and annotations. I feel like it's sort of a unique situation because you don't usually find entire guidebooks online. It would be a completely different story if it wasn't. Most of these are obscure backcountry routes (obviously, Stampede does not fall into this category) where, in my opinion, keeping it to the relative minimum of info to get up the route preserves the adventure a bit. I try to include information that helps people to decide if the route is one they want to do.

Examples:
Ten Years After
Crystal Line

Charles Vernon wrote:Regarding route descriptions like Geir's original Stampede description, I and some other posters often write "route descriptions" for Southern Arizona climbs where we just linked the Backcountry Guide with some thoughts and annotations. I feel like it's sort of a unique situation because you don't usually find entire guidebooks online. It would be a completely different story if it wasn't. Most of these are obscure backcountry routes (obviously, Stampede does not fall into this category) where, in my opinion, keeping it to the relative minimum of info to get up the route preserves the adventure a bit. I try to include information that helps people to decide if the route is one they want to do. Examples: Ten Years After Crystal Line

I am urging people not to do this. If you post a route, you should have climbed it and be willing and able to write a description. From a practical point of view, "link descriptions" are a total failure for people using the mobile app (offline at least). And the MP route database is a (mostly) incredible resource of original content. I hope we can keep, and actually exceed the current quality level.

Great topos, Geir! It looks like you put a filter on an actual picture, then increased the transparency and digitized lines over it. Very smart however you did it. Well done.