Jump to content

bluesnote

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    351
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bluesnote

  1. Been a few weeks since the WWI Sites category has been live. Think it's time for a new category icon, besides the default one. Similar to the WWII sites, I feel the category should have the same icon. But instead of "WW II" it should have "WWI" at the top of the monument. I also feel the WWI memorials/monuments category should also have this fix, from the default memorial/monument icon to differentiate it from others. Thoughts? Comments? Let's hear them!
  2. It's sold directly at the Geocaching Shop, owned by Groundspeak. I think they only ship to US and Canada addresses.
  3. Sounds a lot like "small town, big name" category. Not exactly sure what your idea entails. Could you further explain?
  4. Superfund sites are part of the EPA, a federal agency in the US. Not sure how other countries do or tackle them. Not sure if or even how to expand the existing category to be more inclusive. I am against a new category, as to me that would seem redundant. If you can prove superfund sites (or their equivalent) lie outside the US, I might also agree with option 2. Could you possibly make a list of what the EU or other regions have to offer?
  5. I noticed this too and glad I am not the only one. Seems to be an issue with the current update. As before updating the app the other day, I was still able to edit and rate ALs through the app. Now, on ones I've completed since the update I am no longer able to create a rating for the specific AL. Even then, it shows on the map that I've completed the AL even though I have several waypoints to finish. Super bizarre. Hopefully this can be fixed soon.
  6. Category passed peer review and is currently live. Let's see some great submissions!
  7. The reason to not include artillery is because these are small and are everywhere. Cannons and shells, for example, may be located all over a military park or cemetery. We do not want to waymark each one, as that would be redundant. Instead, we would allow battlefields because there's only one waymark for a large site (instead of hundreds of waymarks for the same size of site). Like I replied to T0SHEA's comment, as we get submissions we might have to update what is accepted and what is not. I am open to include artillery, but I think the category would get flooded with waymarks where the intention of the category is to mark sites that are of historical importance. I don't think artillery falls in that definition, but as time goes on (i.e. as we get submissions), I could be wrong. I am willing to make this change if there is a need to make this change.
  8. My intention for this statement was for us (officers) to update the lists of what is accepted and what is not. Many categories in their early days of infancy will go through changes, after it passes peer review. I wanted to be explicit about this as we get submissions in the first few weeks. This is not for us to change the category all together.
  9. Ok, just sent it to peer review. Fingers crossed!
  10. Ok, so I decided to cancel the group vote and make the slight edits as discussed here as I feel like they needed to be added. The clause that uncategorized waymarks are the only exception was added to the photo section. I also removed "Even if permission has been granted to use photos that are not yours, your waymark will be denied." because permission may have been granted for uncategorized waymarks. I will re-call an officer vote in a few hours if I do not hear anything else on this page and then send it off to peer review by tomorrow if all goes well.
  11. I did not think of that. We would allow uncategorized waymarks (as should all other categories) because the original submitter is properly credited on the waymark. I can edit the category once is passes/fails peer review to include this clause. I don't think we would get too many uncategorized waymarks, but we might get a few.
  12. I see what you are saying, however I disagree. I believe we should only use photos we personally taken to be added to the gallery. If I do open it up, it might be abused and cause problems down the line. Let me explain: If there are historical photos the submitter would like to use, links can always be provided of that. I can add that technically to make it explicit after peer review. Right now, the category passed an officer group vote so it's auto-locked from editing until peer review is complete. In my opinion, photos uploaded to the gallery should only be photos the submitter or visitors took. If we do open it up to allow photos from the internet, this could be a problem for reviewers trying to decide if a photo was personally taken by the submitter. I had an experience in the last year or so where one of my waymarks was declined because my photos didn't match (even though I took them at different times of the day while visiting a theme park). I happened to walk back and take another photo a few hours later and they said the clouds/shadows/lighting didn't match. This has been the norm for all categories (with exceptions from those that require internet photos: There's a Book about it, Tourist Stamps, Numismatic Photographs, just to name a few). I don't think we need to break that norm with this category.
  13. Updated. Thank you. In 24 hours, I will create a group vote to approve the category. Then I'll move forward with peer review.
  14. Thanks Erik. I guess typing up the write up at 1am allowed for a few grammar/spelling errors to slip through the cracks. I made the necessary changes and added a few more clauses. I'll leave this open for discussion for a few more days before I call a group vote and send it off to peer review.
  15. Should be on the group page: Category Status: The World War I Sites category has been created (with variables). If you can't see it, here's the direct link: https://www.Waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=42887aa0-984e-4f4c-b699-3a704896cd19&gid=6&exp=True
  16. Ok, I just wrote up the rough draft of the category. Anything I should add or subtract?
  17. I just created the group. Feel free to add yourself. I will be adding officers accordingly. https://www.Waymarking.com/groups/details.aspx?f=1&guid=bbbb33b0-41f6-4913-ad96-e7a0a1a2ba07
  18. I've notice this too. We do have Civil War Sites and WWII sites. WWI sites might be an interesting topic. I could get is started, but it is up to others if this is even worth pursuing to create a proposal.
  19. All these votes lately are crazy. The Waymarking algorithm tends to favor yea than nay for some reason, and this has been an issue for as along as I can remember. Likely because of the "abstain" which should be counted as neither yea nor nay, isn't.
  20. It appears that there is a certain member of the community, who I will not name, that is out to get me. He has continued to set votes forward to remove me from my officer positions in at least 100 categories I review in. I have contacted this member several times over the past few months, and he has continued to ignore me. I have contacted the website administrator and Groundspeak about his full out assault and borderline harassment towards me. I know I am not the only one who has had an influx of "group vote" emails in the last few minutes. I don't understand what has gotten into this member, but they clearly do not want to listen to reason and want to see my demise, and fail, in Waymarking. Most of these groups he has called votes in, I have been around since the very beginning of the category. Some over a decade old, long before he began Waymarking. I have began to contact every other member of all the category he has called votes in, some of them have voiced their concern too about this particular member these last few weeks. I wanted to see what others thought about this full scale attack, as I hope he is not doing this towards anyone else. As a side note, please vote "nay" in the categories you manage. I have already been removed in several groups he is an officer in for no reason other than he "hates" me. Thank you.
  21. You can try the Smithsonian inventory if it's listed there. When all else fails, try the relief art sculpture category. At least it'll go somewhere. IOOF should accept these as they have in the past. You might also want to try the citizen memorials category. If this is not a grave, I will approve it there.
  22. Must be a European thing as I've never seen a "barefoot path" here in the states. I feel this might be enough to create a new category at the very least. Interesting, yes. Is a new category redundant, in my eyes no. Prevalent, maybe. Don't feel like any of the existing categories would be a good fit. Maybe outdoor science displays, but its a stretch.
  23. All emails from Waymarking seem to have disappeared for me this afternoon. I can see that when I submit new ones, I don't get a confirmation email. Same happens when I get an approval. Checked my spam/junk mail but nothing is in there. I seem to be getting emails from geocaching still. Anyone else having this issue with Waymarking emails or is it just a one way thing?
×
×
  • Create New...