Basejumper.com - archive

We're considering adding some functionality on the new site. I'm wondering what people think of this idea:

We are considering creating a database system that catalogs BASE locals in various areas. Participation would, of course, be entirely voluntary (you'd need to separately register for participation in that database). Basically, it would work like this:

1) You can log in and register as a "local" for a particular area. This puts you in a searchable database for people looking for local contacts. The only data you need to enter is a username and area you'd like to be a contact for.

2) If someone finds your entry in the database, the system allows them to send you a message (while still hiding your actual contact details from them).

3) You decide if you are going to reply to them.



It's been suggested that we need various checks and balances to prevent abuse such as non-jumping groupies who just want to meet jumpers, press inquiries, or law enforcement using the system to investigate jumpers. While we're looking into various ways to do that, it's unlikely we'll be able to actually implement much aside from what I described above in the immediate future.

So, is this a good idea? Bad idea? Has potential, but needs more re-working?

Thoughts?

Like other parts of the site, the ability to add oneself to this database could use some sort of reference-based system (that is, you must be "approved" by n other jumpers already registered in the system, with those references available to the moderators of the site). Basically, start off with a core set of hardcore jumpers, and allow them to say "yes I know this other jumper", who then gets added to the main pool. If a bad reference slips in, it is traceable and can be undone as far back up the tree as necessary.

It occurs to me that it might be interesting to see the graphical representation of this reference tree, if it related to genealogy of mentorship. It would be cool for newish jumpers to be able to look up who their grandfather, greatgrandfather etc are, all the way back to the start of the sport...

Does any of that make sense?

I like the way it is now. Put a post where you are going...either a local contacts you, or someone who knows you reads your post and puts you in touch with a local.

Sometimes people from two or three different crews respond...great to get all sides of the perspective.

Sometimes people warn you who to stay the fuck away from I have received more than one warning from locals on who NOT to jump with - it's a nice system of checks and balances that would not function the same.

The way it is right now seems to work very well...

it is information. it can be used in many ways. it can help jumpers establish contacts as desired. or it can be used in less than beneficial ways...

if you don't expect BASE to be welcomed with open arms, why advertise it's presence?

much of BASE lives in shadows. the idea is NOT to be noticed. when someone shouts "anyone there?" jumpers can choose to remain quiet. the inquiring voice will have no confirmation of local activity.

a database risks notifying the press, law enforcement, wannabees, etc. that jumping occurs in their backyard. heck, they don't even have to ask!

I'd rather have most communities think BASE occurs elsewhere.

p.s.
two observations of human behavior:
1) people fear what they do NOT understand
2) given the choice between educating themselves or banning that which they do not understand, most people will ban. it takes less effort and creates less liability issues.

true that plus if nobody responds you get to burn everything to the ground!

They don't understand what they don't know.
20 years ago, rock climbing was seen as 'extreme sport' and climbers were seen as dangerous dummies.
Today everyone is climbing, and this sport has become as known as soccer or baseball (well at least on the east side of atlantic :o).
I firmely believe that hiding is not a solution.
The more people practicing a sport and showing it in the media, the more people get used to it and stop getting scared of it.
For base jump, I agree that could take 100 years, but there are already signs showing things are changing, like official courses, instructors, places where base jumpers are welcomed (LB, ITW, bridges in USA, some french valleys, norway...).

Creating such a database seems like a good idea.
This must not be the only one.

For me personally, if there is someone visiting in the area, they can put a post on a newsgroup. If they are newbies looking for a mentor, they can do likewise and then the assessment phase begins.

Ether makes some excellent points. While Tom's suggestion is excellent, and I think would be worthwhile to set up, the idea of law enforcement (or any other organization) having an easy reference to determine how many active jumpers operate in their backyard gives me the heebie-jeebies.

While I think the idea has merit, I'd strongly urge the designer(s) to make sure of the following:

1) There's no way to determine the number of jumpers in an area.
2) Usernames are not displayed.
3) Access should be "by reference only"

If these three points can be dealt with, I'd be all for such a system. If they can't be dealt with, I vote the system never see the light of day.



One possible solution could be the following:

* A registration hierarchy of BASE jumpers is created, as described above.

* Access to the system is voluntary and by reference only.

* Based on their position in the hierarchy (or some other ranking system), each geographical location has a small number of regional ambassadors (i.e., one designated ambassador for Wichita, three for New York, two for Washington DC, two for Madrid, etc.).

* The number of ambassadors would be dependent on the popularity of a location (or the number of locals). As such, LB, even though there are few locals, would have several ambassadors because it's a popular destination.

* Registered users (i.e., verified by reference) can send a contact request to any location's ambassador.

* All ambassadors receive that information request, and can choose to respond or not.

* If one ambassador responds, other ambassadors should be barred from responding (they can always get in contact by other means). As a result, when an info request is sent, either one and only one reply is received, or no reply is received whatsoever.

* The information request form would require some mandatory details including experience and references. In this way, upon receiving a questionable info request, the ambassador would know who to turn to to verify details.



Also, note that sooner or later the administrator is going to be subpoenaed for data from that system. Considering this, neither the server nor the administrator should be located in a country with a privacy-unfriendly court system (i.e. the USA).

I agree with the use of some kind of "vouche for" system, and not just for the "locals database" (which, like Inzite, kind of freaks me out).

I think the "vouche for" system should be used for posting (or even lurking) in certain forums on the site as well.

Why?

This would seem like it would create politics, since if two locals had disagreements, they'd be racing to respond first.

This will be one of the bigger issues.

I vote No. Do you not think that some countrr's government or other persons will not try to hack in? Sounds silly and unlikely right? But in today's post (I hate to say this) 9/11 world this is very likely.

there is potential for abuse of this system isnt there?.

It's a non-issue.

This forum, and that one, have never been hosted in the US. The forums are owned by a corporate entity in Dubai and headquartered in South Africa. The servers are located in Canada.

not the CANADIANS...
Dubai, o.k.
SA, cool.

CANADIANS, oy vey!

is there something you dont like aboot this prohcess? eh?

I'd say a better poll would be "Who would put their name/reference on the list?" Being a software guy I know anything can be hacked. Some of the best hackers work for the Gov. If something high profile happens, say a jumper gets away after jumping off the ESB, it would take the Feds no time to find that person if they were in this database. No matter what system you put in place to prevent it.

Yes, I realize that this would definitely generate "political" competition. However, my reasoning behind such a restriction is that, without it, it will be easier to gauge how many people jump in a certain region.

Imagine that I want to determine if there is a lot of jumping activity in, say, Butte, Montana. I send an info request to the ambassador(s) from Butte. Without the above restriction, one of three things will happen:

1) I get no reply, and I have received no valuable information.
2) I get one reply, and thus know that there is at least one local. There could be thousands, or there may be just one.
3) I get several replies (say, perhaps, 8). I suddenly know there were at least 8 ambassadors, and hence can assume Butte, Montana is more active than New York, NY, from which I got four responses. As a result, I decide to redirect the bulk of my fun-police task force to monitor jumpable objects in the vicinity of Butte, Montana.

Granted, it's not the end of the world if law enforcement or any other group can determine relative concentrations of BASE jumpers (hell, they can do that using YouTube or by reading the forums). However, it's one extra restriction to help lower the likelihood of such abuse.

Regardless, I expect all of this discussion is purely theoretical, because to develop and debug a system like the one I proposed would take significant time and resources. It's certainly doable, but I doubt anyone will actually step up to code it. That amount of time would be better spent jumping!!!

Legal jump database may work.

But illegal?
There is virtually no way, one can prevent law enforcement from accessing a database. Everything that is posted on the net has the possibility of being monitored by the government. Everybody is trackable.
There are many News stories about people being brought down by their emails and posts etc.
Before you accuse me of paranoid, check out this link about the government hacking PC´s.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/27/german_state_hackers/

take care
space

I agree with Tom that, at least in the mid-term, government hacking/subpoenas are probably a non-issue. However, given enough years, some government entity is going to want to get in.

Most likely they'll try to do so legally. Believe it or not, government agencies by-and-large aren't too eager to hack into computer systems. They have laws against that.

However, I can easily imagine a situation in which legal authorities would try to via subpoena or warrant get access to such a database. Imagine another ESB incident, or perhaps completely benign BASE jumping in the vicinity of the visiting French president's suite at the New York Hilton. Such incidents have already happened, and will happen again.

Especially considering the current terrorism frenzy, I'd argue law enforcement agencies would have little difficulty convincing a judge to order the server be opened up or surrendered to authorities. Hell, in the USA, they might not even have to convince a judge.

In the short term, this is all very unlikely. However, in the long term I'd argue it's very probable. And Canada (along with most other states) are not immune.

Now, I won't lose any sleep over it. There are already so many other, more important things to worry about than the idea of a government agency having access to a database of BASE jumpers (which doesn't contain any names or personal details, just a city, jump numbers, registration date, alias, and some other minor details).

Of course, if any government agency is willing to go through the trouble to acquire this database, the person they're after is already screwed, with or without the database. Recall the Jeb scenario...with or without some additional circumstantial evidence from a BASE jumper database, Jeb was already pretty much screwed over by the authorities (ignoring the fact that he was never convicted of the charges brought against him.

The real danger is that, once authorities have access to such information, they'll use it to pass legislation or fund additional countermeasures. As the situation exists today, if a legislator wants to pass laws against BASE jumping activity in his district, he has no concrete data to turn to. All his arguments against BASE jumping are based on guesswork and estimation.

Once a legislator has solid evidence (i.e. videos on YouTube, major incidents like the ESB, etc.), or worse, hard factual data (like this database), it becomes much easier to pass such legislation, or to focus countermeasures to be more effective (for example by placing extra security around antennae in high-activity areas).

Anyway, the above are the issues I think such a system would face. I still argue the system would be worthwhile (if anyone wants to build it), but I think it should only exist with some modified version of the restrictions I outlined above.

What exactly is wrong with the way this works at the moment that this new system is going to cure or improve?

Behind the scenes networking and interaction between jumpers with the odd thread here and there asking for contact information works perfectly well without the added complexity and new issues (and bias) this new system will have. There can only be at most 3 or 4 degrees of seperation in finding someone from an area.

I cant see any advantage of this what so ever, and it seems like an "old school tie club" that will just massage a few egos here and there.

No way. That again screems old boy network. What about making personal choices on people rather than who a handful of people say is in the club. That to me is controlling and so negative. Next you will be suggesting getting a "Im a local Licence".

You mean you don't have one?

Regarding this database, I'm typically all for new and cool technological innovations to organize chaos and make life easier for everyone, but I really don't think it's necessary in this case.. I agree with Mac that it could very easily become a political battleground of the 'in' crowd vs everyone who hasnt been 'approved'. Either it's too hard to be 'approved' and lots of responsible, skilled and knowledgable locals are excluded (causing tension and hostile politics), or its too easy to be approved and the quality of the system gets diluted.

Ambassadors? c'mon... as a whole, BASE jumpers can't even decide who should and shouldn't do this the way things are now.. every time somebody steps up to be a 'spokesman' for base in any way, 30 people pop out of the bushes with spears and skewer them; then 10 of them go and do it themselves, with the same result.

In areas where locals tend to get along as one happy family (cinci?) this would probably be okay... but what about certain areas that are so fragmented that crews end up calling themselves the 'A' team or 'B' team due to local politics?

I think the system works as it is.. post where your going on the forums, get a response or two.. if you dont, then make a few calls. The only people who would use the new system are probably already forum regulars anyway..

</$.02>

P.S. if it's so anonymous, how would you know which ambassador(s) to trust? Also, how would an ambassador know to trust a request from an anonymous user? the whole background check/references thing only works if people use it.. and if history provides any clues, people already don't use it all that effectively when they sell gear nowadays (correct me if I'm wrong?)

Agree 100%. the way it works now is perfect. leave it the way it is.

I think a better idea (if any) would be to set up [many] local databases (by state or major metro areas), accessed by invitation from one local jumper to another they're COMPLETELY private, and serve as a way of passing on information about who's coming to town, who's jumping what when, looking for GC, site-specific updates ("X" has a new security feature, be careful of bird's nest on "Y" etc.). This will help keep local jumping safer, keep more people in touch with each other, and help promote more unified local scenes. That way, the networks are there, and one need only "tap into" any part of it to find a local to jump with, letting the locals themselves sort out the details PRIVATELY and SECURELY.

Then again, it works pretty well the way it is. It's great when I get an email from a friend who says: "hey my buddy is coming to your area--can you arrange some jumps with him/her?"

That system rocks.

whatever. /worthless chatter.
pope

I think a better idea would be to have a section for each state or country, and locals can sign up to receive messages about their home jumping areas. The locals information and usernames should not be made public. Use of any part of the system could be by reference only.

When a jumper wants to meet locals, they post a message that gets copied to everyone who signed up as a local for that state. Bigger states could get split up.

I think it's a little too obvious when someone posts a public message saying I'm going to be in this city on this date and I'm looking to make a BASE jump at this time. If a cop reads it and cares, they could probably figure out what objects in the city are jumpable and make a bust. Even worse is when someone posts asking about a specific object and then a few weeks or months later we read about a bust there.

And actually I have just thought, this is obviously only relevant to the USA....... so I dont actually care what you guys do..

Actually, the first person to log into the test version listed their location as London, UK.


As of now, I doubt this will be included in the initial BASEjumper.com platform.

I think the idea I like the best so far is BrianFry's idea of basically creating a set of "mailing lists" for various areas, where you can "transmit" to the entire list without knowing who is on the list, or how many of them there are.

Pope: send a PM to andrewkarnowski, he's making something just like that.... maybe you'd be interested

I'm with Mac here. What exactly is the problem that needs fixing? If you see a big antenna and there's a DZ not a million miles away, there's probably a local.

Most characters I've met in BASE are uniquely resourceful types. That's what makes the "community" interesting. Why fix a theoretical problem and sacrifice what we have? We all know where the sensitive high-traffic areas are (or could easily find out) after all!

I can't believe that the people on dz.com don't have real friends, who have other friends, who have friends, etc, who can steer you to the people who are locals. If you went to the Perrine for your FJC, or made buddies with TomA, you should know someone within 1,000 miles of the next place you are taking a weekend trip with your rig, or at least have a name of someone how can guide you to the next buddy of a buddy. Its called REFERENCES and CONTACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't even keep track of the jumpers in my own town who think they are qualified to teach other jumpers here. And then those come back from the Perrine!

The internet and this board isn't the solution to all of BASEs problems, keep the personal network active, off the internet!

Why not make it like something like on myspace where you put the zip where you are searching for then how many mile radius from there you want. Then it will show how many people are regesterd in that area. Send a message then wait for a reply.

hey 935... how did we meet again?


(sorry, just playing devil's advocate)

The comparison of BASE and MySpace makes me chuckle.

that is the most ridiculous idea i have ever heard. you are done talking.

p.s. are you a cop?

cops?
where?
let's be serious. unless you are jumping in the middle of town there should be low bust factors. i'm not sure how it is everywhere else, but when i've visited other sites (excluding high pop. densities) it's always chill. why are there so many concernes about sharing sites. i know we don't want some noob getting hurt, but why would we even be talking to people about sites that are burnable and bustable. you can only share what is sharable.
and, the police or feds or whatever have way more important things to do than to hack into some non-threatening BASE site. nor would they ever go out of there way just to reallocate forces to stop BASE jumping. talk about delusions of grandure, we're cool, not national threats. not anywhere i've ever been anyway.
so. . . let's all learn to share a little, we all suffer the same site issuses (some hotter than others, yes), but most importantly we are all (or most of us) BASE jumpers who just want to jump, and occasionally with some variety of other sites.
SO PLAY NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

the 'are you a cop?' thing was a joke.

i agree that cops have much better things to do than bust jumpers, but that doesnt mean that their priorities dont occasionally get mixed up. cops like to be cops, and they get sick of the same old traffic tickets and domestic violence cases, and the opportunity to do a little sleuthing to investigate some report of base jumping would make many of them rub their hands together with glee.

there have been cases (not too far from you) where somebody was spotted on a jump and weeks later, a retired jumper got a phone call from the authorities... if they could just look on a website and see how many jumpers were listed within a given area, it might make them think it happens more often than they previously thought (and if they knew how to contact this retired jumper, then they must have had some kind of exposure to BASE in the past, so they weren't completely oblivious)

i do agree that it would take a pretty big incident to actually prompt authorities to subpoena the entire database.. but the current system works well as it is; in fact the current system has worked quite well for all the times i've visited your turf, without any internet databases. thanks for all the fun btw

no prob bob
we here, love to have jumpers come in and visit.
this site has always provided everyone with enough info to get hold of one of us. BASE725 and i would love to anyone and everyone call us up and come on out.
i do recall certain people causing problems, but that person is a bit rambunctious. they automatically thought that since thay were a jumper that they could just jump what ever. we have since talked to several people about that. just as long as they know that there is a time and a place, and always contact someone nearby since they know us.
back to cops though. not including downtown and NPS, all of the interactions reported to me have been the basic run offs. cops don't even know what to do with a jumper especially if they just saw the jump. hell, we had some friends jump an 1100' tower and the cops pulled them over and the mayor asked them to come back and jump for the local festival. sure, i'm talking about being out in the middle of nowhere, but we are discussing the what-nots of bringing noobs or any visitor to an object. so, why not choose objects like that tower. we don't have to take people we don't know or trust anywhere that you might hold sacred. just be friendly and share. i believe i mentioned that before.
SHARE!!!!!
if we don't learn to share then noobs and "don't give a shitters" will just go out and do what they want and ruin it for everyone. if you teach them the right way then we can preserve the well being of our sport. maybe this is something that should be included in a FJC. when we do FJCs around here that is the first thing the noob learns. paranoia or awareness. know the object and it's surroundings like you know your rig. if you don't know either one very well, then you have no business trying. yes, for the vets scoping and jumping are not always that in depth, but why not teach it in order to teach. . . here's the big word of the day. . .RESPECT!!!! this is something noobs and occasionally visitors take for granted. what happened to the "when in rome. . ." philosophy?

I definitely wasn't saying anything about not sharing; anyone who comes to my area and posts here looking for locals will surely be contacted and shown around to an object or two (unless they seem like a complete jackass).

In fact, you guys need to round your crew up for a weekend and get your asses up here to play for a few days

But that's exactly what I'm trying to say; the system already works... why go through all this effort just to fix what isn't broken?

Thats a really cool story about the mayor btw... does that mean that the WDD wasn't the first festival in the area that had a BASE demo?

Tom, And all the readers of this thread. I have a novel way. Actually it is only logic. If you want to BASE in Norway for example. Contact the Norwegian BASE association. In Germany? Contact the German BASE association. Italy? you guessed it. The Italian BASE association. Clever aint I.
Get your crap together (Hint, association) and you get to do stuff like skyscaper day, 9 buildings in one day and still do your illegal jumps as a bonus. Americans have been talking about doing something like this for about 20 years. Get off your ass and do something. Tom and Jason can only do a little as individuals. Work together towards a goal. Americans are lagging.
that is my take on the scene of a locals database.
take care,
space

 

The Communist BASE Manifesto...

you can always ask your friends about their contacts, or friends of your friends, or any skydivers/basejumpers from your dz who's travelling a lot.

or why don't you want to use the forum -- like many times before: if somebody's travelling he will ask for the help of locals and people who wants to meet and guide will reply or PM and locals who doesn't want to meet and guide will keep silent.

I mean even if the database will be created where will be the same number of less experienced jumpers, local outsiders, siteburners and brainless adrenaline junkies as on every skydiving or base forum in the world.
And you never know what kind of jumper are the local ready to help you unless you have recomendations from people you know or know the jumper yourself.
Database in unpersonal but base include a lot of personal stuff.