Even Reviewers Have A Life

August 21, 2005

Just reading some these threads, and in previous conversations, it becomes more and more apparent that as cachers, quite a few of us seem to forget some common sense when it comes to reviewers, and those who work for Groundspeak.

Why must people take a game, and make it into yet another source of stress? Why must they confront reviewers in public, when at events, on the trail, etc., and make them feel uncomfortable being there?

Reviewers usually have two accounts, which I think is smart. Keep one role seperate from the other.

But the more I hear and see about the "hate mail", "threats" and overall stress these people receive, the more I wonder why they accept the volunteer postion that they have.

Why can't we play a game, and not make it into soemthing far more stressful than it needs to be. If you don't like a rule, a decision, and aspect of the game... Deal with it. In the grand scheme of things, will the world end tomorrow if the event you went to was not what you expected? if a cache you placed can't or isn't approved for soem reason?

JMO

1k · August 21, 2005

C'mon, now!

What if Jerry Springer just had people that talked it out and hugged at the end of the show?!

*This is my sense of humor for those of you who feel an angsty need to repond.*

:laughing:

2.1k · August 22, 2005

Why can't we play a game, and not make it into soemthing far more stressful than it needs to be. If you don't like a rule, a decision, and aspect of the game... Deal with it. In the grand scheme of things, will the world end tomorrow if the event you went to was not what you expected? if a cache you placed can't or isn't approved for soem reason?

Edit: Nope! (That is what I meant to say) Yep! I agree with this post. Sorry about giving the wrong response.

Edited August 22, 2005 by Team Sagefox

August 22, 2005

Agreed! It seems like there has been a lot more whining about things not being exactly how someone wants them lately. For chrissake, it seems some people thing because they've sent $30 to Groundspeak or maybe just $3/month, they've been given the golden key to the web and should be consulted on everything. Yes, I realize that people will have their questions, people will be upset about some things, but jeepers, let it go! Pick up your GPS and go caching!

August 22, 2005

AGREED, am having a difference of opinion with my reviewer right now that has been going on for a many weeks but no one knows or sees it here. We may or may not fix it, but neither of us needs the stress or grief, so we play through and deal with it as we can.

No one volunteers for their own benefit but for that of others, I say let them have the joy it brings to them and play on.

1.4k · August 22, 2005

Unfortunately, this is a symptom of the Internet Age, where instant gratification and faceless interactions are the norm. I doubt the $30 premium membership fees have any impact on this at all.

I'm thankful to the volunteer reviewers in my area for having very thick skins. Since I see no real solutions in sight for the ever-increasing amount of whining everywhere, I'm just going to quietly treat them with respect and try to shut out all the noise around me. :lol:

5.3k · August 22, 2005

Yes, of course they do, but...

Is it really a life worth living?

:lol: :lol: :anibad:

24.7k · August 22, 2005

...Why can't we play a game, and not make it into soemthing far more stressful than it needs to be. If you don't like a rule, a decision, and aspect of the game... Deal with it. In the grand scheme of things, will the world end tomorrow if the event you went to was not what you expected? if a cache you placed can't or isn't approved for soem reason?...

Bulls*** runs all directions. Players, approvers, mods, and TPTB all sling their share for their own reasons. I've had a cache denied made a federal case over it and lost. Then had a cache approved while providing exactly the same information and the question that got my first one denied was a non issue exactly as it should have been the first time. That's just wrong. I didn't create the situation or the contrast. I just tried to participate in a frigging activity.

If I don't like something I say so. I don't lose sleep over it. There is no need. If people can't discuss it without getting upset that’s their problem because I am willing to discuss things with them.

We need to be able to discuss when we should dump an approver, or when a player is too much trouble in the game to be worth keeping. Players turn up banned all the time. I've had mods threaten me out of fear I would disrupt their section of these forums for a post that was 100% fine by any mod who would venture to comment on it even now. Should I have tolerated the blatant bullying in that case, because it's a game? When I called them on their bullying maybe it saved another player with a thinner skin from the same treatment, or maybe not, but hopefully they thought twice about it the next time. People can and do abuse their positions. We have good approvers and mods and we have power tripping dweebs as well. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know who generates the most angst filled discussions.

As you so aptly put, there is no need to make it more stressful than it needs to be. There is no reason to keep it all bottled up, there is no reason we can't discuss it, and there is no reason why we can't say it all in the forums because that is their purpose. Why else would you post a topic like this one?

7.2k · August 22, 2005

You know, it’s really sad sometimes. I was thrown under the bus today for temporarily closing a topic. I even asked people to go out and go geocaching for the day. Instead, one person decided to indirectly crucify me for closing the topic so the ultimate subject of the topic could enjoy his weekend. We can’t have that now can we.

I feel I should go ahead and explain another reason why I closed that topic.

It relates directly to the topic title, so bear with me.

I was also gone all day today myself. Where you might ask? I traveled 2 hours to my mom and dad’s house. Why you might ask? Well, my dad had a stroke about three weeks ago. I have been going over each weekend since then and even spent the night the first weekend. (I even stayed up that first weekend and reviewed caches on my dad's computer after everyone went to sleep no less.) My mom cannot take care of herself totally and my dad does most of the work. Right now the kids have been marshalling to make things easier for my parents, but as in all families some take that responsibility more seriously than others. I owe my mom and dad a lot and he knows why I have come over each weekend to help out. It also gives the kids that live in town some time off so they can enjoy their weekends. My dad is fine and really looked good this weekend. Don’t make the topic about me. Again, my dad is OK. It is a simple illustration that reviewers and admins all have lives outside of geocaching and the forums. The last thing I wanted to worry about was that topic. It looks like someone took it upon themselves to make a big deal out of something as simple as letting a few people take a day off. We can't have that now can we.

Sometimes that life is good and sometimes it stinks.

You know, geocaching isn’t that important in the big scheme of things. I am amazed that some people make such a big deal out of such trivial things sometimes. If we make mistakes on a cache does the world get plunged into utter chaos? Do governments fall? Nope. Life goes on.

Yes, even reviewers have a life. Sometimes life is good, sometimes life stinks. Life is what you make it. I try to make the best of it. The glass is half full, not half empty.

I've had a long day. I'm going to sleep. :lol:

24.7k · August 22, 2005

Even cachers have a life.

You know it’s just a game and these people try to give back. They figure out a nice cache find the container, chose the contents and pick the best spot they can think of. Then they time out of their busy lives to place it hopes that the geocaching community will enjoy it.

Then a problem happens. The reviewer says “no” and follows standard operating procedure. The exited owner has just had a wet blanket thrown on their plans and they are upset and they don’t’ know that a note generates an email that will be picked up by their spam filter and tossed out in the trash. It’s just a game but now they are being told they can’t play.

They come to the forums to try and understand and maybe get some help getting their cache approved only to be slammed by the regulars, the sycophants, the mods, and posts about popcorn and llamas and what a bunch of crybaby whiners they are.

Nobody had to make this game hard, but it happened anyway. Instead of a working with them to guide them down the right path they were pretty much hit with the forum equivalent of a double barreled shotgun. It’s the same with a lot of newbie’s who ask a question for the first time in a forum. Their rashion of crap starts with Do a search moron! and it gets worse from there.

When it comes to blame there is always enough to go around.

August 22, 2005

Personally, I think hashing things out in the forums is fine. That's where it should be kept. Or private emails, messages, etc. But, when it start spilling over into "real life" that's when I think a line needs to be drawn.

A reveiwer should be allowed to enjoy his anniversary weekend with out having to worry about uproars in the forums. When people are told this is why a thread will be temporarily closed, and re-opened when necessary, then by go, accept it and move on. When a reviewer, under the guise of their own "caching identity" is at an event, he/she should not have to worry about being accosted for not approving caches fast enough, or being a proponant of a point of view differing from our own. They should be able to enjoy themselves just like you or I get to. NOr do I believe reviewers should be subjected to "hate mail" and threats. Personally, I believe that the first time a cacher crosses that line, they should be banned, but that's just me. As for "Well, he was rude to me", or anything of the ilk...get over it. Reviewers do not only deal with YOU (singularly) on any given day, and quite frankly, usually don't display "attitude" until provoked. I chalk it up to having bad service at the coffee shop. Don't tip. If they have upset you that badly, don't renew your premium membership, and tell Jeremy why. After all...we all have made our choice to play this game, support this "business". We have the free will to take our business elsewhere.

But, for the love of all things merciful, stop the reviewer bashing, and let them get on with their "jobs". And when you meet one at an event, or on the trail, try one of two things. First, say "THanks", and leave it at that. Or, simply ignore the fact that that person is a reviewer, and treat them just like any other cacher.

2.1k · August 22, 2005

A reveiwer should be allowed to enjoy his anniversary weekend with out having to worry about uproars in the forums.

If Rothstafari had a bad weekend because of something going on in the forums, then I wish him all the luck in the world making it to Anniversary #2.

They're not hummel figures.

Any cacher disturbed enough by something that happens on this website and therefore carries it with them to an event isn't going to be influenced by what 4leafclover demands of them for civilized behavior and how to interact with other people. If it's truly a large enough problem in real life, there are also solutions in real life for people who can't handle themselves correctly.

Anyone else who feels that they got the bum rush from an approver and brings it here is doing the right thing. You can't please everyone all the time, but you can improve the situation for next time ONLY when problems are brought to light.

Let people complain and rant here and they'll let anyone commiserating with the reviewers post all the popcorn, ice cream, mock sympathy violin emoticons...deal?

August 22, 2005

I wonder how many people have a gripe with reviewers and would like to vent here but are afraid of getting blackballed?

7.2k · August 22, 2005

No one gets blackballed, and frankly I am insulted by your accusation. :laughing:

If you list a cache that conforms to the geocaching.com guidelines, then it will be listed. If your posts in the forums follow the forum guidelines, then you are free to speak your peace.

Reviewers must review caches impersonally. If they don't, they will have to face Hydee.

21.9k · August 22, 2005

I wonder how many people have a gripe with reviewers and would like to vent here but are afraid of getting blackballed?

Look around the forums at all the threads complaining about this thing or that thing. Presented constructively, such threads are a good thing. There are even "frequent complainers" who have been making their views known for years. A good forum poster will present constructive criticism within the boundaries of the forum guidelines, and should theoretically never encounter problems, or at the most, a very spirited answer back from one or more of the site volunteers. An extremely small percentage of forum posters have been banned from the forums, and only after a persistent pattern of violating the forum guidelines over a long period of time. People should not be worried about voicing their opinions.

I would much rather have those opinions expressed in forum threads, where I can choose whether or not to respond to them as a site volunteer and forum moderator, than to be confronted with them at a geocaching event. Unless I'm giving a speech or holding a Q&A presentation at an event in my capacity as a site volunteer, I'd much rather attend the event as just another geocacher who is trying to have fun. I'd like to be able to bring my young daughter along with me. Unfortunately, I no longer feel comfortable doing this. I think that's sad. Events used to be so much fun for me.

August 22, 2005

I don't know who the reviewer is in my area but s/he seems to be very nice so far I have placed 3 caches and all of them were approved quickly although my first was was placed to close to an archived one so i just moved it to another location. I would give him/her props if I knew who it was... abilene tx anyone? anyone?? all I know is that is is "PrimeApprover"

Edited August 22, 2005 by wreckelite

August 22, 2005

* I will keep my mouth shut...I WILL keep my mouth shut* even though my blood boils at certain observations......

August 22, 2005

what kind of observations are those?

21.9k · August 22, 2005

what kind of observations are those?

Ummm, certainly not your post! Thank you for taking time to recognize Prime Approver. Not only does he have a staggering workload as the Texas reviewer, he also works very hard on some behind the scenes projects that make the cache review process far more efficient for the rest of us.

7.2k · August 22, 2005

4leafclover, your words are most appreciated. More than you know.

Thanks.

August 22, 2005

what kind of observations are those?

um...would it be that a reviewer is afraid (or at least uncomfortable) going to events, much less taking his child with him, because of the thoughtlessness and audacity of some cachers?

Edited August 22, 2005 by 4leafclover

1.8k · August 22, 2005

Pinster56
Posted: Aug 22 2005, 01:26 PM

I wonder how many people have a gripe with reviewers and would like to vent here but are afraid of getting blackballed?

It's true that some of us tend to "form ranks" around those we have come to respect, and even love. The majority of cachers are probably sort of oblivious to these matters. A few are constant critics, a few of us are a bit protective about those IN THE SPORT (and also the sport) we have come to care about. That, however, is nothing official. It just happens. As was said just a bit above here, when you follow the rules things work smoothly.

August 22, 2005

4leafclover, your words are most appreciated. More than you know.

Thanks.

de nada, sir.

there are just some tenets I hold firmly to, and common courtesy and decency are a couple of them. And it makes me really really peeved to know that people I have met, and like, are in essence, mistreated for performing a volunteer service for ingrates.

(Note: I do not think all cachers are ingrates. But I think you'll know yourself if you are one....)

August 22, 2005

what kind of observations are those?

um...would it be that a reviewer is afraid (or at least uncomfortable) going to events, much less taking his child with him, because of the thoughtlessness and audacity of some cachers?

that makes sense. they do a lot of hard work for the pay(none) that they don't get. I think I would dread going to one of those events too. I kind of reminds me of the referees for little league games... the parents go nuts if they don't like the refs call... sit down and shut up, let the kids have fun!!

August 22, 2005

A reveiwer should be allowed to enjoy his anniversary weekend with out having to worry about uproars in the forums.

If Rothstafari had a bad weekend because of something going on in the forums, then I wish him all the luck in the world making it to Anniversary #2.

They're not hummel figures.

it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility for it to cross his mind...

Any cacher disturbed enough by something that happens on this website and therefore carries it with them to an event isn't going to be influenced by what 4leafclover demands of them for civilized behavior and how to interact with other people. If it's truly a large enough problem in real life, there are also solutions in real life for people who can't handle themselves correctly.

I'm not demanding anything from any one. Would I like it if people stopped for a minute, and thought before they acted...you bet. All I can hope for is for people to read this, and maybe remember it at the next event they attend.

August 22, 2005

mtn-man

Glad your father is doing better.

5.3k · August 22, 2005

And it makes me really really peeved to know that people I have met, and like, are in essence, mistreated for performing a volunteer service for ingrates.

You realize that here you are calling Groundspeak ingrates, right? I think that is inappropriate. In my experience, Groundspeak has been very appreciative of their volunteer reviewers. IMHO, you owe them an apology.

Maybe you don't realize it, but the volunteer cache reviewers are performing a service for Groundspeak, not for their fellow cachers. It may be that their service is indirectly helpful to their fellow cachers for a variety of reasons, but that does not change the fact that the service is actually given directly to Groundspeak.

The geocaching community does not get to set cache-placing guidelines or standards for this site. Groundspeak does, and, as a result, is completely responsible for the results. It is unfortunate, but not my choice or responsibility, that the system is set up so that the people who have to tell geocachers that their caches will not be listed are volunteers.

I find it very annoying (and, incidentally, very rude) when people try to use the fact that the reviewers volunteer their services to Groundspeak to make them immune to criticism from Groundspeak customers. Speaking only hypothetically, if you went into a store and a clerk was rude to you, but the clerk was working as a volunteer for the company, would you then have no right to complain?

I personally have never had any problems with my local approvers. They are great people and I get along with them very well. But if an approver was rude to me, I would not hesitate to let Groundspeak know.

Edited August 22, 2005 by fizzymagic

38.2k · August 22, 2005

If they don't, they will have to face Hydee.

I've seen pictures of Hydee. Is that such a bad thing?

Maybe you don't realize it, but the volunteer cache reviewers are performing a service for Groundspeak, not for their fellow cachers. It may be that their service is indirectly helpful to their fellow cachers for a variety of reasons, but that does not change the fact that the service is actually given directly to Groundspeak.

They are providing a service for both, but I'm sure if you ask most reviewers,they are doing it to give back to the geocaching community and not Groundspeak.

If I volunteer at the local hospital it's give back to my community, not to provide a service to "United Healthcare Hospital Systems Inc". Though in effect, a for profit enterprise benefits from my service.

I think its similar for the Groundspeak volunteers.

Edited August 22, 2005 by briansnat

August 23, 2005

mtn-man,

tough stuff with your dad. My mom had a stroke 2+ years ago. We just lost her. So to re-interate what you stated, there are other items bigger in the scheme of things than geocaching. 'Hope it gets better with your folks.

:laughing:

August 23, 2005

And it makes me really really peeved to know that people I have met, and like, are in essence, mistreated for performing a volunteer service for ingrates.

You realize that here you are calling Groundspeak ingrates, right? I think that is inappropriate. In my experience, Groundspeak has been very appreciative of their volunteer reviewers. IMHO, you owe them an apology.

Maybe you don't realize it, but the volunteer cache reviewers are performing a service for Groundspeak, not for their fellow cachers. It may be that their service is indirectly helpful to their fellow cachers for a variety of reasons, but that does not change the fact that the service is actually given directly to Groundspeak.

The geocaching community does not get to set cache-placing guidelines or standards for this site. Groundspeak does, and, as a result, is completely responsible for the results. It is unfortunate, but not my choice or responsibility, that the system is set up so that the people who have to tell geocachers that their caches will not be listed are volunteers.

I find it very annoying (and, incidentally, very rude) when people try to use the fact that the reviewers volunteer their services to Groundspeak to make them immune to criticism from Groundspeak customers. Speaking only hypothetically, if you went into a store and a clerk was rude to you, but the clerk was working as a volunteer for the company, would you then have no right to complain?

I personally have never had any problems with my local approvers. They are great people and I get along with them very well. But if an approver was rude to me, I would not hesitate to let Groundspeak know.

no...the "ingrates" I refer to (and I apologize if I was unclear) are those who seem to believe that reviewers are there to personally serve them. Those who never say "hey, thanks", and those who make reviewers dread looking at their queue.

THAT'S who I was referring to.

I agree with you, that although they are volunteers, we should have the right to complain about them...in the forums, and through email/messages. NOT in a public event, or when a reviewer is out caching. there are ways to handle complaints, and it would seem that a lot of people could use a refresher course on how to constructively do so.

Edited August 23, 2005 by 4leafclover

21.9k · August 23, 2005

I find it very annoying (and, incidentally, very rude) when people try to use the fact that the reviewers volunteer their services to Groundspeak to make them immune to criticism from Groundspeak customers. Speaking only hypothetically, if you went into a store and a clerk was rude to you, but the clerk was working as a volunteer for the company, would you then have no right to complain?

I personally have never had any problems with my local approvers. They are great people and I get along with them very well. But if an approver was rude to me, I would not hesitate to let Groundspeak know.

Suppose that you did have grounds for criticism of a cache reviewer or forum moderator. I don't for a moment dispute your right to express that criticism via e-mail or in the forums, consistent with the site's terms of use. And you've done that a few times. :laughing: I don't think that's what this thread is about.

I ought to be able to have a spirited debate with a geocacher here in the forums about cache review guidelines, wearing my Keystone hat, while not having to worry about seeing that same geocacher at an event cache two weekends later, when I am attending purely as a geocacher wanting to have fun. For example, I am honored that you once took the time to find one of my caches while you were in town, and I'd make it a point to *try* to solve one of your puzzles if I knew I'd be traveling to your area. I'd also enjoy meeting you at an event.

There are, however, enough people out there who cannot differentiate between the two hats. They make it personal. After having enough fingers pointed in my face at events, after receiving enough "I know where you live" and "I'll be looking for you" e-mails, it rather sours me on the idea of travelling somewhere just to run the risk of further abuse. My daughter doesn't understand why she rarely gets to see other geocachers anymore. I think that's sad.

4.8k · August 23, 2005

I think that it can be easy (and very normal) for people not to separate the reviewer role and the cacher role at events. I have seen some reviewers get swamped with reviewing questions and concerns at events when they really wanted to be there to be social and get away from all that for a bit. I have also been told of circumstances where overly angry cachers have threatened reviewers and made them feel uncomfortable about attending events. That is unfortunate.

What I would hope is that people reading this try to separate the roles a bit. Sure, an event can be a great time to ask the reviewer questions, and I think part of taking on that job is the knowledge that people will have questions at events and such and expect the reviewer to be helpful there. But if you attend an event and talk to a reviewer, maybe you should try to keep the business aspect to a minimum and mix it with lots of general caching talk. If there is animosity, save it for email and/or a complaint to GC.com. An event won't be fun for either an angry cacher or the reviewer if it is used as a way to vent/argue. That will also just make others at the event uncomfortable too. I don't think that happens often, and has never happened in my area, but I am told the concern is there.

Mostly though I think being polite and friendly solves most issues. Have a complaint or an issue with a person? Express it politely and things will work out much better than sending hate mail or being threatening. In the end we are all people who like caching and share that common bond. :laughing:

August 23, 2005

both carleen and Keystone have succintly stated what I have been trying to get across...the seperation of "hats" or roles if you will.

Keeping business where it belongs, and if you need to talk about it at an event...try to do so quickly, and most definately, politely.

5.3k · August 23, 2005

I ought to be able to have a spirited debate with a geocacher here in the forums about cache review guidelines, wearing my Keystone hat, while not having to worry about seeing that same geocacher at an event cache two weekends later, when I am attending purely as a geocacher wanting to have fun.

Oh, absolutely!

We should definitely be able to have disagreements without making it personal. That's what I would call "being adults." I hope I didn't imply we should ever make that kind of thing personal!

When I am at events, I try not to "talk shop" with the reviewers there. We can maybe joke a little about things, but it's not appropriate at events (or out caching, or on the phone, etc.) to ask somebody to Be Official unless that's what they are there for.

It's in many ways the equivalent of cornering a doctor at a cocktail party and asking him to look at your nasty skin rash.

Despite my inclination to sometimes argue my points, um, er, emphatically online, I generally don't intend anything personally. Disagreements are part of life. If I couldn't be friends with people with whom I disagree on something, I expect I would be a very lonely person!

Also don't think for a moment that I don't appreciate the efforts the volunteer reviewers make on behalf of geocaching. Despite the fact that I would set the system up differently if I were king of the world, I am very grateful for their efforts and they do improve geocaching for all of us.

August 23, 2005

But isn't it natural that when people get together, work, hobby's, family, church, etc, come into conversation? Everything including the weather gets conversations going. Why wouldn't something like GC stay a topic when there is an event?

It's gonna happen. It's just natural.

August 23, 2005

HOWEVER, personal threats against a reviewer should not be tolerated on any level. Call it work place voilence. Zero tolerance.

4.8k · August 23, 2005

We should definitely be able to have disagreements without making it personal. That's what I would call "being adults." I hope I didn't imply we should ever make that kind of thing personal!

When I am at events, I try not to "talk shop" with the reviewers there. We can maybe joke a little about things, but it's not appropriate at events (or out caching, or on the phone, etc.) to ask somebody to Be Official unless that's what they are there for.

It's in many ways the equivalent of cornering a doctor at a cocktail party and asking him to look at your nasty skin rash.

Yeah. That is basically it for me. I agree.

People disagree a times, that is nomal, but one would hope they would not be threatening in correspondence and certainly not push an angry issue at events. Unfortunately a very few do that at times or just get overbearing. The doctor analogy is good. Here is a person who just left work and wants to go to a party to have fun and gets stuck with looking at medical issues right and left! The disagreements and hard questions can take place in the right time and place. Email, PM, or phone if the person is close enough to know the number, etc. The questions are fine too in moderation, just don't monopolize the reviewer's time with tons of stuff that could be covered in email. Or if you do, be nice and include some general caching talk! Let the events be fun for the reviewers because they usually attend in a cacher mode. Sure, there might be a question here and there, those are expected, and I bet they would happily answer those, but save the angsty things for email and such. That way things stay fun and professional for the reviewer, cacher, and onlookers at the event.

5.3k · August 23, 2005

People disagree a times, that is nomal, but one would hope they would not be threatening in correspondence...

How about very, very snide?

(FWIW, I think I have only done that once.)

7.2k · August 23, 2005

We should definitely be able to have disagreements without making it personal. That's what I would call "being adults." I hope I didn't imply we should ever make that kind of thing personal!

Really?

This from the person who called the reviewers "brainless". Despite that, I sent you an email on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 at 9:31 PM Eastern Time. I asked that we bury the hatchet and move on and end our personal disagreement.

I got *no* reply.

I look forward to your reply. Let me know if you need me to send it again. I still have my copy in my inbox. We used to be friends fizzy. I am also still more than willing to move on and bury the hatchet. That's what I would call "being adults."

4.8k · August 23, 2005

People disagree a times, that is nomal, but one would hope they would not be threatening in correspondence...

How about very, very snide?

(FWIW, I think I have only done that once.)

Being nice always tends to work better. I think that the "snide" things are better left internal. Let them go....... Politeness is usually most effective. But that is me and my nature. It has worked for me so far and kept me happy. Good manners and a happy nature are a virtue. They get results more oftten, and when they don't, the mind set of them still often leaves the people involved content instead of angsty. It works for me. But I know that others can have a more contentious nature. No real right or wrong there (unless it gets out of hand), but I figure that being polite, yet assertive where needed, but stilll nice and polite, is the best. Then the doors for communication stay open.

5.3k · August 23, 2005

I got *no* reply.

Sorry about that. Thanks for letting me know you hadn't gotten my reply. It inadvertently went to a bit-bucket!

P.S. I didn't call reviewers "brainless," but we don't need to revisit that again anyway.

Edited August 23, 2005 by fizzymagic

7.2k · August 23, 2005

Thank you fizzy. I have done the same regarding the bit-bucket too.

Your reply was very well written, both then and the note you added to it tonight. I look forward to moving on and working to renew our friendship once again. Thank you for taking the time tonight to resend your reply. It is very much appreciated.

3.8k · August 23, 2005

Awwww! I always love a story with a happy ending!

August 23, 2005

No one gets blackballed, and frankly I am insulted by your accusation.

If you list a cache that conforms to the geocaching.com guidelines, then it will be listed. If your posts in the forums follow the forum guidelines, then you are free to speak your peace.

Reviewers must review caches impersonally. If they don't, they will have to face Hydee.

I've had a couple of disagreements with mtn-man. But even with those disagreements, I'm pretty happy we have him as our area approver. Sure, having a local approver would be great, but on the other hand it wouldn't take much to do a worse.

And even with the disagreements, I know that without a doubt mtn-man takes his volunteering seriously and impartially. I've never felt like a cache I might post would be viewed negatively by him if it met all the criteria.

mtn-man, in all my dealings with him, has been fair and consistent.

7.3k · August 23, 2005

((()))

August 23, 2005

Well, this seems to have become the place to send warm fuzzies to your reviewer, so here goes. Thanks Keystone and Joy Division. Both have been good to work with and Joy Division is almost TOO fast. Over the weekend, I missed hooking up with a friend to pick up some TB's so he left them for me at a yet-to-be-approved cache, figuring I had a couple of days to get them. When I got home from picking them up, the other caches in the area had been approved. I fully expect the rest to be approved today. So efficient! and helpful! and patient with noob hiders!

Thanks!

2.1k · August 23, 2005

mtn-man, in all my dealings with him, has been fair and consistent.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...dpost&p=1660533

Or random and a total liar.

Your mileage may vary.

August 23, 2005

mtn-man, in all my dealings with him, has been fair and consistent.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...dpost&p=1660533

Or random and a total liar.

Your mileage may vary.

Man, just tell us what you think. Don't beat around the bush. Let it out. It'll make everyone feel better.

5.7k · August 23, 2005

Thank you fizzy. I have done the same regarding the bit-bucket too.

Your reply was very well written, both then and the note you added to it tonight. I look forward to moving on and working to renew our friendship once again. Thank you for taking the time tonight to resend your reply. It is very much appreciated.

That admin brick you threw at him finally knocked some sense into him. :mad: Either that, or he is now brainless... :mad:

--Marky

Edited August 23, 2005 by Marky

7.2k · August 23, 2005

That admin brick you threw at him finally knocked some sense into him. Either that, or he is now brainless...

I got a good laugh when I saw he had changed his avatar. :mad:

Even Reviewers Have A Life

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment