3 ms·

All of the data submitted to Mountain Project was provided by the community for free through crowd sourcing. The owner actually bought the site back from rei a

by bruncx 4y ago

All of the data submitted to Mountain Project was provided by the community for free through crowd sourcing. The owner actually bought the site back from rei and then sold it a second time to on-x. Two the owners started webshots back in the 90s. He and his partners are serial entrepreneurs that profited of the free labor. Current a lot of people in the climbing community are unhappy that the user submitted data is not available to use in other applications. As a result there is large effort in my local community to keep climbing areas from being added to the site. As mentioned above Open Beta is a better and more honest alternative since it’s operating under a CC license. Mountain Project along with what has become Outside Magazine are two the most controversial outdoor apps in use. They are largely thought to increase crowding and other conflicts that come with managing limited resources. Mountain Project in particular is a good example of how to screw over a niche community for personal profit. At least someone in silicone valley got rich, right?

asymmetric 4y ago
Do you have more info on the controversy surrounding Outside Magazine?
- bruncx 4y ago
  Most of it has do with buying climbing and rock and ice magazines, then putting all of the previously free content behind a paywall. The magazine is trying to make money off selling NFTs, seems desperate and ironic. https://www.outsideonline.com/business-journal/brands/outside-announces-new-anti-metaverse-web3-initiative/ https://www.outsideonline.com/business-journal/brands/outsid...
qbasic_forever 4y ago
Wow I had no idea REI owned the site at one point. That's a shame they dumped it, and I bet they're regretting that decision.
snowwrestler 4y ago
“All this info should be freely available” and “all this info increases crag crowding” are both common complaints about Mountain Project, but they’re mutually exclusive. A person who is angry about crowding is not likely to support Open Beta either. I will say that the idea that route info should be freely available is not rooted in history of the climbing community. For many decades the primary way to get info (aside from asking around) was to buy guidebooks that other climbers researched and published. Making money off route info has a long tradition. And the core tradition of climbing competence is to just show up and climb what you see. This is why flash and onsight climbs are highly regarded even on sport routes with permanent draws. Free access to route beta is not essential for climbing. I certainly don’t object to Open Beta but I think some of the complaints about MP are a bit overwrought.
- rockingclimber 4y ago
  > Free access to route beta is not essential for climbing. Viet Nguyen, OpenBeta's founder here. As mentioned in my post above, besides climbing, many of us are hackers and data nerds. All we wanted is to be able to access and tinker with the community-generated climbing data to make maps of climbing walls, study Python Pandas and recommendation engines, etc. Open access to climbing data doesn’t have to be about the physical aspects of climbing, for the same reason open source enthusiasts wanting to have access to the source code. It doesn't mean we're not supporting commercial derivative of a project.

by bruncx 4y ago

asymmetric 4y ago

Do you have more info on the controversy surrounding Outside Magazine?

bruncx 4y ago
Most of it has do with buying climbing and rock and ice magazines, then putting all of the previously free content behind a paywall. The magazine is trying to make money off selling NFTs, seems desperate and ironic. https://www.outsideonline.com/business-journal/brands/outside-announces-new-anti-metaverse-web3-initiative/ https://www.outsideonline.com/business-journal/brands/outsid...

qbasic_forever 4y ago

Wow I had no idea REI owned the site at one point. That's a shame they dumped it, and I bet they're regretting that decision.

snowwrestler 4y ago

“All this info should be freely available” and “all this info increases crag crowding” are both common complaints about Mountain Project, but they’re mutually exclusive. A person who is angry about crowding is not likely to support Open Beta either. I will say that the idea that route info should be freely available is not rooted in history of the climbing community. For many decades the primary way to get info (aside from asking around) was to buy guidebooks that other climbers researched and published. Making money off route info has a long tradition. And the core tradition of climbing competence is to just show up and climb what you see. This is why flash and onsight climbs are highly regarded even on sport routes with permanent draws. Free access to route beta is not essential for climbing. I certainly don’t object to Open Beta but I think some of the complaints about MP are a bit overwrought.

rockingclimber 4y ago
> Free access to route beta is not essential for climbing. Viet Nguyen, OpenBeta's founder here. As mentioned in my post above, besides climbing, many of us are hackers and data nerds. All we wanted is to be able to access and tinker with the community-generated climbing data to make maps of climbing walls, study Python Pandas and recommendation engines, etc. Open access to climbing data doesn’t have to be about the physical aspects of climbing, for the same reason open source enthusiasts wanting to have access to the source code. It doesn't mean we're not supporting commercial derivative of a project.