Page 1 of 1

New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 9:02 am
by mikeofferman
John,

Was wondering what prompted the addition of all the flatiron peaks with no closed contours (my guess is that Brian and Brian slipped you a $20!)? I thought that was a conscious decision a while back as a way to weed out what should be included in LOJ.

Are you going to start adding in others that had been on LOJ and were deleted? Just looking at previous threads, like Michigan Hill.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=270&p=1497&hilit=closed+contour#p1497

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 12:16 pm
by Brian Kalet
:worms:

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 12:50 pm
by mikeofferman
Haha, I almost put that icon on the end of my post!

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 1:19 pm
by John Kirk
mikeofferman wrote:John,
Was wondering what prompted the addition of all the flatiron peaks with no closed contours (my guess is that Brian and Brian slipped you a $20!)? I thought that was a conscious decision a while back as a way to weed out what should be included in LOJ.


It's a slippery slope I didn't want to go down but couldn't control the slide. Consistency for one purpose becomes its own undoing for another. I guess this became (re)introduced with some Sierra Club lists that required addition of contour-less summits. Then Secor's book, then Flatirons.
Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet Toliet

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 1:40 pm
by Brian Kalet
Mike does bring up a good point, though. Should officially named summits without closed contours, such as Michigan Hill, be included in the database?

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 3:18 pm
by John Kirk
Brian Kalet wrote:Mike does bring up a good point, though. Should officially named summits without closed contours, such as Michigan Hill, be included in the database?


When there is evidence of some prominence, yes... Guidebook or photo.

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 7:48 am
by mikeofferman
For Michigan Hill, Jeremy said there was 20' - 30' of prominence.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=270&p=1497&hilit=closed+contour#p1497

Is there some kind of prominence cutoff, 1', 5', 10', 20'?? Or is it just playing it by ear and seeing what people turn in to add?

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 9:41 am
by John Kirk
mikeofferman wrote:For Michigan Hill, Jeremy said there was 20' - 30' of prominence.


Added back. Probably case-by-case unless there is demonstrable prominence.

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:33 pm
by Brian Crim
Why all the TP? Brian seemed perfectly fine without any in the Flatirons today...

:shock:

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2014 9:50 am
by John Kirk
Brian Crim wrote:Why all the TP? Brian seemed perfectly fine without any in the Flatirons today...

:shock:


Did he find the poison ivy? :twisted:

Re: New peaks added with no closed contours.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 10:14 pm
by Jeremy Hakes
Hmm... Now I have to try and remember what I did... :?