duejensen

Just a quick info. The category did pass peer review, and is now active. Description has been improved as promised.

As leader of the group behind the Danish Benchmark category I will like to comment here. First of all, I were not expecting that kind of responses. The situation completely was a surprise for me. This is obviously my first experience in establishing a new category, and I were not aware of the steps and the pitfalls. My idea was to make a quick and dirty sketch of the category, and so I did. That was sent to officer review very quickly and we were too eager of getting the category running, to do a real internal review. We focused on getting the category up and running more than actually writing a good description. My idea has been from the first draft to have the category accepted and through peer review, and then we can concentrate on writing a good description. I now learn this isn't the right way to do it, but that was how it was done. I still hope this category will pass peer review, and afterwards we will certainly do adjustments of the description, if technical possible prior to making it visible. It was never meant to be the final version. A few comments on other issues: The missing "global" aspect. I was from start aware of this globality issue. However since several other regional subcategories of the benchmarklike waymarks already exist, we think the missing global aspect is acceptable. Such a local category could hopefully increase the awareness of Waymarking in Denmark, which is one of the reasons for creating this category. Leader and officers have no experience. Well, as to creation of new categories, that is correct. We have never tried this before. I have been officer in the group Coin Operated Rides for Children for around two years, and have experiences In reviewing of waymarks. I suppose all persons doing a new category have made the first without having experiences. I have personally not been visiting or posting more than only very few waymarks. However as I posted my first waymark in 2007 I have been studying Waymarking in some years, though not much real practical experience. The number of waymarks in Denmark is not very high; the awareness of Waymarking in Denmark is very low, compared to number of active geocachers. Anyway despite of the low statistics, I don't consider my self as a newbie. Description is poorly written. I agree, it was done more or less as a copy/translation of the description from the "German trigonometric points" category. My thought was, if the German description could be accepted, then our Danish description should be acceptable too. A lot of votes from inactive Correct, we have be advertising in different Danish geocaching groups. One of the rationales for this (and for the category itself) is to try to make Waymarking more visible and known in Denmark. Just the fact that we have asked danish geocachers to vote, have already given a bigger attention to Waymarking. No discussion in Forum I do not see any text telling that a discussion in Forum have I to be made before creating a new category. In this case again I see lots of parallel categories. E.g I was not expecting any problems. Finally I will repeat the fact that I am fully aware that the description needs a lot of adjustments. It has from the beginning been my idea to improve it. If we pass the peer review, I intend to make adjustments before activation. As the description need to be related to local/danish aspects we need Danes to be (major) part of the team, but I would appreciate if any of you experienced guys will join us in adjusting the description. Hope this comments will bring some understanding to the situation.

That Would be very great :-) ,

If the forms of logging caches include the text (mm/dd/yyyy) after the Date input field - it would be a great improvement.

today is 16th of August, 2007

I agree, I want a log for 10th June 2007 so I type in 10/06/2007. Nothing could be easier. However if I tried that the site would tell me I logged the cache on October 6th! Note - until the very recent changes yould could not type in 10/06/2007 - You had to select June, 10 and 2007 - No really change of misinterpretation. After the latest changes having months to be typed as numbers - the confusions really started.

And have to find someone having a GSAK including GCNXPQ