? About The Cache Approvers

[CoyoteRed]

Questioning the integrity of reviewers in general is, to put it mildly, insulting.

 

Actually, I don't think anyone has questioned the integrity of "reviewers in general." What some think they are seeing is a couple of folks questioning the integrity fo reviewers in general when this is clearly not the case. Without putting words in RK's mouth, what I'm saying is "yes, there is room for a reviewer to be less-than-upstanding." This is in direct response to a moderator claiming that no reviewer can be seen as less than above reproach. That I find insulting. (Especially when other volunteers and admin mention that there is room for reviewers being human and fallible.)

 

Look, I like many of the reviewers I've come in contact with. I was sorely disapointed that I missed GWIII because there are a few folks I wanted to meet, and a few reviewers where among them. It was so close, but circumstances dictacted otherwise. But I recognize reviewers are people like the rest of us and don't become some sort of bastion of intergrity when anointed status by the persons on high.

 

In fact, I think there are a couple of reviewers or mods that could use a dose of humility.

[+JohnnyVegas]

My guess is that they would not take advantage of the information they have. What would be the fun in finding the cache it there is not challenge.

If they did take advantage of the information they have, I would not care, on of the appovers in my area sometimes spends most if his day approving caches. Seeing they are volunteers, they can use a break from time to time.