+Glenn Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 My suggestion is for a new review method in addition to the current one. As groups grow there will be more officers and I am sure this suggestion will work for those kinds of larger groups. Allow the group leader to set the number of officers it will take to approve a listing. For example if the group has ten officers and the group leader sets the approval number to three then any three of the ten officers will have to look at and approve a waymark before it will be listed in the catagory. This will allow catagories with very strict listing policies to have more than one person look over the waymark before it actually gets listed. This way if one officer happens to miss something hopefully one of the others will catch it before the waymark gets listed. Link to comment
+Black Dog Trackers Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I think this is a bit overblown and will probably result in a log jam. If few if any officers understand their category's concept, then either the category needs to be re-worked like the wi-fi apparently was recently, or the instructions need to be re-worded, or a new set of officers is needed. Waymarking categories should not be rocket science. The instructions should be clear. The concept of the category should be made clear. If a waymark submission has some small errors in wording or spelling, just let it go anyway. The main point of Waymarking is the coordinates, the information required, and the photos (if any) required, not eloquence. A review board plan is over-the-top, I think. Link to comment
+ChapterhouseInc Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 what wifi was reworked? and how were we supposed to notice this? i guess it might have been posted on that string, but how many people read the forums? yes, multiple approvals is overboard. some categories want lots of info (background), but sometimes this is not to be found by the poster. this should come out in the 'peer review process'--AKA visiting/logging waymarks. if i drive through an area and spot a 'mark' i get only what i need to post. i might try a google, but often i find nothing more than i knew from visiting the site--how do i know when the monument was placed and by whom. there is no existing database for this info. it is what we are trying to create.....so i post something, and {eventually} a local person will be more able to supply this info. a seperate issue: i have seen an increase in people logging/visiting my waymarks {in chattanooga at least}, mostly from vacationers. anyone else seeing this trend? and i dont think they really are looking FOR 'my marks', they are finding marks, and in submitting them see that it is already posted....this is the only way i have 'found' marks not owned by myself.... Link to comment
+The Blue Quasar Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 ChapterhouseInc Posted Yesterday, 04:01 PM what wifi was reworked? and how were we supposed to notice this? i guess it might have been posted on that string, but how many people read the forums? Why would you need to know that? If you are an Officer, then the Leader should have told you. If you are just interested in the Category, aren't you looking at it from time to time? But maybe a 'flashing banner' on the page would be a good idea... like "UPDATED!" that stays on for a week, similar to the NEW that happens on just placed caches. ChapterhouseInc Posted Yesterday, 04:01 PMyes, multiple approvals is overboard. It would seem that most Officers are capable of reviewing a Waymark on their own. I'd rather see that once an Officer approves it that it is locked, and only the Leader could override the decision (well, and Groundspeak staff too) ChapterhouseInc Posted Yesterday, 04:01 PMa seperate issue: i have seen an increase in people logging/visiting my waymarks {in chattanooga at least}, mostly from vacationers. anyone else seeing this trend? and i dont think they really are looking FOR 'my marks', they are finding marks, and in submitting them see that it is already posted....this is the only way i have 'found' marks not owned by myself.... Not yet... I didn't know people visited Waymarks... I'm kidding I suspect like OpinioNate has been saying, that the database is getting populated now. In the next year or so hopefully things will take off. And with the possible Waymarking 2.0 being developed that some of the 'finding' tools will be enhanced. There is a good foundation here... but I look forward to seeing the house getting built. But we all know how important the foundation is. The Blue Quasar Link to comment
+Glenn Posted June 22, 2006 Author Share Posted June 22, 2006 (edited) <snip> yes, multiple approvals is overboard. It would seem that most Officers are capable of reviewing a Waymark on their own. I'd rather see that once an Officer approves it that it is locked, and only the Leader could override the decision (well, and Groundspeak staff too) <snip> ChapterhouseInc, the change I'm proposing in the approval process isn't an improvement for the officers or leader but instead it is an improvement for the waymark listers. I really like Blue Quasar's idea. This method would definitely limit the approved, disapproved, approved yo-yoing when two or more officers can't see eye to eye or split hair some small point. Edit: had one to many /quote Edited June 22, 2006 by Glenn Link to comment
Aushiker Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 It would seem that most Officers are capable of reviewing a Waymark on their own. I'd rather see that once an Officer approves it that it is locked, and only the Leader could override the decision (well, and Groundspeak staff too) G'day That sounds reasonable to me and would save the issues as mentioned. After all the Leader should have the ultimate say on the category (excluding Groundspeak staff); isn't that why they are the leader? Regards Andrew Link to comment
Recommended Posts