Keystone Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I think that perhaps the guidelines could have been worded better, it seems the approver is having as much difficulty understanding what it means, as well as the others. At the very least, the approvers should have all met in their online lounge and discussed what it all means over a few virtual beers. A lack of consistency in interpreting the guidelines is not something new around here though. A careful read of the prior posts would tell you this: 1. The reviewer said he checked with the rest of the group already. We advised him to tell the OP about his appeal rights. 2. The consistency of the group's action is illustrated in my first post to this thread, where I mentioned how an identical cache in my review territory was handled in the same way. If someone can point to a "coords are for the front of the library" cache that's been published since November, and there may very well be one, then that would be evidence of inconsistency. Quote Link to comment
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.