RakeInTheCache

See my post above. For nvtriker it was Hello xxx, I am writing you concerning the 1000 places to see before you die category. Over the last several months, this category has become increasingly neglected by the long standing officers including the category leader. As I particularly like this category, it has been sad to see it become neglected. This is why I would like to work to make it more active and make it easier for new officers who may not have the books to approve submissions in this category. The category leader has not responded to my ideas to improve the category, and none of the other officers, including you have responding to recent efforts to reach out. For this reason, I am initiating an action to take over leadership of this category. I would like to know whether you are still interested in remaining an officer and would assist me in becoming the leader. I'm asking you to respond to me within 24 hours to indicate your intention, after which, without a response, I will assume that you no longer wish to be active in this category, and will initiate actions to demote you. In case you are demoted and wish to remain an officer, I will promote you after the action is completed. Best regards, RitC.

No news from Bootron. My last Waymarking e-mail was received Tuesday. I'm a bit fed up with these e-mail technicai issues. I believe I've done everything I can to do this transition tactfully. I'm going to proceed to vote out the longstanding officers.

Just messaged Bootron Hi Bootron, I have sent several e-mails in the last few days using Waymarking and geocaching with the option to receive a copy of the mail but have not been receiving the copies. Is there something now working correctly on the Groundspeak side? Thank you, Best regards, Robert.

Funny, so far I haven't received the copies of the e-mails I sent from Waymarking. I hope the e-mail system is not on the blink again.

Hi, the problem is the book has been around so long there are many editions, each edition adding (and maybe removing) some sites. So if you only have one edition this might not cover all submissions. Therefore, I'm proposing to change the rules so that the waymarker uploads a photo of the edition page plus the entry page of the site with it's title in the book. That way, no officer even needs to have any of the books to approve or deny waymarks.

I have never received any response from GT.US to my e-mails. I have no idea what her intention is for this category or her role in it. I think the only way for me to take over leadership is to initiate votes to demote the old officers first and then finally initiate a vote to demote the leader. Someone correct me if there is another way.

To update the community on this topic, we now have the requisite number of officers to begin taking an action to replace the category leader. In order to do this as tactfully as possible I am sending Waymarking messages to the long standing officers along the lines of the following below. New officers, don't forget to vote yes for the next few actions. Hello xxx, I am writing you concerning the 1000 places to see before you die category. Over the last several months, this category has become increasingly neglected by the long standing officers including the category leader. As I particularly like this category, it has been sad to see it become neglected. This is why I would like to work to make it more active and make it easier for new officers who may not have the books to approve submissions in this category. The category leader has not responded to my ideas to improve the category, and none of the other officers, including you have responding to recent efforts to reach out. For this reason, I am initiating an action to take over leadership of this category. I would like to know whether you are still interested in remaining an officer and would assist me in becoming the leader. I'm asking you to respond to me within 24 hours to indicate your intention, after which, without a response, I will assume that you no longer wish to be active in this category, and will initiate actions to demote you. It is with a certain sadness that I write this as you have contributed greatly to the category in the past. In case you are demoted and wish to remain an officer, I will promote you after the action is completed. Best regards, RitC.

Interesting. Then they must have done something to undo what they did before?

This submission passed the group vote and is now published. I have an old edition of the book so could not determine myself if the submission met the requirement so I put it to a vote and abstained. As the other voting officers are inactive, the submission passed the vote by default. Waymarks can be subject to an second review after submission. To insure that your waymark passes another evaluation, I would upload 1) a photo of the page indicating the edition of the book you are using, and a photo of the site which clearly shows the name of the site in the book and if your waymark name is not the same a photo justifying why it is not the same (this could be at least two if the entry covers multiple pages).

it's a real PitB because for all my waymarks with a cover photo affected by this I have to edit them, upload the photo again, and mark it as the cover photo. ahhh technology. :-(

I'm finding that many of my waymarks from 2016 with photos in the vertical position have been repositioned horizontally. I vaguely remember that about that time I was having problems uploading vertical photos in the upright position. I was posting from either Windows 7 or Windows 10 at the time. I had to rotate them to get them to appear correctly on the web (Waymarking and maybe facebook as well). Is anyone else having this happen to them? For the moment this only seems to be happening to photos in the first half of 2016.

Just to reiterate what I mentioned before, as someone pointed out this is a new waymarker and there is an "undesirable feature" in the Waymarking interface that inadvertantly puts the waymarker and reviewer at odds with each other. The waymarker tries to justify his submission using the Private message box but changes nothing in the submission so his justification is never communicated to the reviewer and the reviewer assumes that the waymarker is being unreasonably obstinate. If the waymarker and reviewer don't end up communicating by e-mail the situation degenerates.

Yup, that's it. This probably explains the whole incident. The waymarker was trying to justify his submission using the Private message box but nothing in the submission had changed so his justification was never communicated to the reviewer and the reviewer had to assume that the waymarker was being unreasonably obstinate. In this case, I believe the only solution is communication by e-mail. I apologize to the waymarker for jumping to conclusions.

Here's the text of the comment - "Sorry, I think I missed your photo when you posted a second time. But please note in the category description "With the exception of major cities (New York, Rome, London, etc.), only one waymark submission per indexed site (in the book) will be accepted. Some indexed major cities include multiple sub-indexes which are acceptable submissions." I do not consider Santiago de Compostela to be a major city." I don't see anything inappropriate there.

In this case I provided my handle to the waymarker and made a specific request to e-mail me. And again, as I recall (although not 100% certain), the waymarker did not use the Private Message box. In any case, a comment was not clearly visible on the resubmission. I'm not sure why someone would be any more uncomfortable sending e-mails through the interface which insures privacy to an officer than sending something through the Private Message box.

As I recall, there was no information in the Private Message box. I have not found the Private Message box to be completely reliable. Why not send an e-mail?

I'm sorry, but you forgot to mention that I did ask you to contact me. Which you did not do. The problem could have been resolved via an e-mail exchange rather than repeatedly submitting the waymark. By repeatedly submitting a waymark after receiving a reason for the decline, you give the impression of wanting to play games. Please use the e-mail facility to clarify points.

This was the question I asked myself as I don't have all of the editions (mine is 10 years old). So I did what I would intend to add to this category which was to ask the waymarker to upload a photo of the entry in the book which they did. They entry has not changed since my edition and the plaza is merely cited in the text of the description of the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostella entry.

But in this case, who would the third-party be?

This is in the problematic 1000 places to see before you die category. Officers are incommunicado and don't vote. I'm working to try and improve this.

It most likely could go into another category but I'm not sure which. In this case the category is 1000 places to see before you die. The waymarker submitted the plaza on which stands the Santiago de Compostella church which is an entry in the book. It has already been Waymarked. The category description is clear that a site should only be waymarked once. So in this case the rule is clear and it was explained to the waymarker.

Not sure what you mean by that.

How do you handle a waymarker who keeps insisting on submitting an ineligible site after it's been declined?

What I find particularly exasperating is that the leader and Scooter Bill logged in but never bothered to evaluate my waymark submission. Thanks to Philippe for approving my waymark.

Group leader logged in 7/20. Interestingly enough Scooter Bill, who originally created the category, but is now just an officer, logged in yesterday.