Jump to content

One Star Terrain = Wheelchair Accessible by Default?


JeepinOregon
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

A reviewer won't publish a [particular?] person's caches if they have One Star for Terrain and No attribute suggesting that it is Wheelchair Accessible. In other words, she must have One Star and a "Yes" for W'chair access, or, at least 1.5 Stars if it's not W'chair accessible (but of course, no attribute is required either way if she labels it 1.5+ Terrain Stars).

He explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. I have a few One Star Terrains for which I do not use the W'chair attribute and I have never been asked to do so from this same, or other, reviewers.

This is consistent with this reviewer and particular hider--but isolated to this issue, if you will--and I will further add that this reviewer is always pleasant and hard working - especially for a volunteer!

When this reviewer needs to hold-back on publishing a cache so the Hider can first fix something on the cache page, he does well by always quoting the rule(s) as well as providing a link to the GC.com page that explains it - in these cases, though, he does not.

So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...? I'm just curious.

 

EDIT: As I've already stated, this is just a curiosity question [motivated from the lack of consistency between reviewer and hider(s)]. This is not an ethical question about whether one should or should not include the attribute in general...

Edited by JeepinCalifornia
Link to comment

I for one always, always, appreciate it when a cacher puts whether it is wheelchair accessible on a cache page whether it is required or not. Being a wheelchair user myself, that is the first thing I look for when a new cache is published. If it does not have that attribute then it is one of the backburner caches I will do when I have Chip with me and even then I have to research the cache very carefully before deciding to do it since he is diabetic with health problems too. To anyone publishing a cache please have the attribute on the cache page whether it is crossed out or not to give us "handi-cachers" a heads up on what it will be like before we head out to get it. I appreciate anyone who takes cachers like us into consideration.

Link to comment

A reviewer won't publish a [particular?] person's caches if they have One Star for Terrain and No attribute suggesting that it is Wheelchair Accessible. In other words, she must have One Star and a "Yes" for W'chair access, or, at least 1.5 Stars if it's not W'chair accessible (but of course, no attribute is required either way if she labels it 1.5+ Terrain Stars).

He explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. I have a few One Star Terrains for which I do not use the W'chair attribute and I have never been asked to do so from this same, or other, reviewers.

This is consistent with this reviewer and particular hider--but isolated to this issue, if you will--and I will further add that this reviewer is always pleasant and hard working - especially for a volunteer!

When this reviewer needs to hold-back on publishing a cache so the Hider can first fix something on the cache page, he does well by always quoting the rule(s) as well as providing a link to the GC.com page that explains it - in these cases, though, he does not.

So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...?

 

I this REALLY worth the fight?

Link to comment

I have several Wheelchair caches...

 

This one has 1 Star because the park is made for Handicapped people and is paved with only a short distance to the cache.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...39-ce3e2ac0d764

 

This one is 1 1/2 stars because even though it is smooth, you have to wheel yourself several hundred feet and up a very small incline (still on a smooth surface)....so the extra 1/2 star lets them know.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7a-287776ef0b35

 

Also, you can out a Handicapped Icon at the top that connectes to a web site and let people rate it....see the 2 sites.

Edited by Drooling_Mongoloid
Link to comment

Nochipra - thank you for reading the post and offering your constructive comments. I already add the attribute to any of my caches that are W'chair accessible.

 

(sigh) Stir the pot much, Cotati?

 

It's just a simple question in which I was pleasant, only asking for a simple answer...

Edited by JeepinCalifornia
Link to comment

A reviewer won't publish a [particular?] person's caches if they have One Star for Terrain and No attribute suggesting that it is Wheelchair Accessible. In other words, she must have One Star and a "Yes" for W'chair access, or, at least 1.5 Stars if it's not W'chair accessible (but of course, no attribute is required either way if she labels it 1.5+ Terrain Stars).

He explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. I have a few One Star Terrains for which I do not use the W'chair attribute and I have never been asked to do so from this same, or other, reviewers.

This is consistent with this reviewer and particular hider--but isolated to this issue, if you will--and I will further add that this reviewer is always pleasant and hard working - especially for a volunteer!

When this reviewer needs to hold-back on publishing a cache so the Hider can first fix something on the cache page, he does well by always quoting the rule(s) as well as providing a link to the GC.com page that explains it - in these cases, though, he does not.

So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...?

 

I this REALLY worth the fight?

I would gladly do it to make it easier for those gals/guys to search for caches that they can do. A lot of people do not understand the 1 star terrain rating, so this reinforces it.
Link to comment

Nochipra - thank you for reading the post and offering your constructive comments. I already add the attribute to any of my caches that are W'chair accessible.

 

(sigh) Stir the pot much, Cotati?

 

It's just a simple question in which I was pleasant, only asking for a simple answer...

 

(sigh) Since you already are doing the right thing, it will be perfectly fine to keep doing that.

Link to comment

Also, you can put a Handicapped Icon at the top that connects to a web site and let people rate it....see the 2 sites.

 

Now that's cool! Thanks!

 

That is cool, I've been to that site before and it is really nice to see that you can rate the caches. I wish they would have it so you can find local caches that have been rated by putting in a zip code though instead of having to put in each cache GC number? If and when we hide any caches I will use their site too but right now I think I'm going to try and host some Meet and Greet events to do our part in the future. We cohosted a Podcacher WWFM recently and plan to hopefully do it again.

Link to comment

A reviewer won't publish a [particular?] person's caches if they have One Star for Terrain and No attribute suggesting that it is Wheelchair Accessible. In other words, she must have One Star and a "Yes" for W'chair access, or, at least 1.5 Stars if it's not W'chair accessible (but of course, no attribute is required either way if she labels it 1.5+ Terrain Stars).

He explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. I have a few One Star Terrains for which I do not use the W'chair attribute and I have never been asked to do so from this same, or other, reviewers.

This is consistent with this reviewer and particular hider--but isolated to this issue, if you will--and I will further add that this reviewer is always pleasant and hard working - especially for a volunteer!

When this reviewer needs to hold-back on publishing a cache so the Hider can first fix something on the cache page, he does well by always quoting the rule(s) as well as providing a link to the GC.com page that explains it - in these cases, though, he does not.

So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...? I'm just curious.

 

EDIT: As I've already stated, this is just a curiosity question [motivated from the lack of consistency between reviewer and hider(s)]. This is not an ethical question about whether one should or should not include the attribute in general...

 

Too many of us do only consider the Terrain Star Ratings from a Non-Wheelchair point of view. If you are not in a Wheelchair, and none of your friends or family are in a Wheelchair, you probably don't even think about it. I know I didn't until I was educated here in the Forums. I don't think your Reviewer's actions are covered by a guideline (we don't actually have any "rules"), but I also think your Reviewer is doing a great service for that segment of our community that most of us tend to forget.

 

I once proposed including the option of 1/2 Star as one of the rating options. Even if the most clueless hiker could rate a cache as 1/2 Star, I think that would be useful information to the Wheelchair community, My suggestion died quickly, without any indication that anyone else thought it was a good idea.

Link to comment

Your friend is likely misinterpreting the reviewer's note. Accurate terrain ratings are not covered in the listing guidelines, so publication of a cache cannot be held up over a difference between one star terrain and 1.5 star terrain.

 

Rather, many reviewers -- being experienced geocachers -- leave an advisory note that encourages the cache owner to double-check the terrain rating. I use the following form letter any time a cache is rated one star for terrain, but the "wheelchair accessible" attribute is not selected:

 

Your new cache submission will be published momentarily, but I would ask you to please double-check to make sure the terrain is rated properly. If you used the cache rating system link ( http://www.clayjar.com/gcrs/ ) when you submitted the cache, you will note that a 1 star terrain cache should be wheelchair accessible. If that's the case, great! (Please consider using the handicapped accessible "cache attribute" to let people know this.) If it's not wheelchair accessible, then the terrain should be at least 1.5 stars. For more information, please see this article: http://www.todayscacher.com/2004/sep/outdoors.asp#disable

 

Thanks,

Keystone

Geocaching.com Volunteer Cache Reviewer

 

After posting this advisory note, I then publish the cache if there are no other issues. If there is a separate issue, then I modify the first sentence of this note before placing the cache on hold. It's still just advisory, however.

Link to comment

...

So is this a "rule" I for which I cannot find documentation, or is there something that I've missed along the way...? I'm just curious.

 

EDIT: As I've already stated, this is just a curiosity question [motivated from the lack of consistency between reviewer and hider(s)]. This is not an ethical question about whether one should or should not include the attribute in general...

 

There is no rule that requies a Wheelchiar attributre on a cache with a 1 Terrain rating. The 1 rating implies that it's wheelchair accessable and the Attributes may be spent on other things of note..

 

As Keystone notes reviewers can inquire if the cache really is wheelchair accessable.

Link to comment

[The reviewer] explains that unless she wants to put a ["Yes"] Wheelchair attribute, she must bump up the terrain to at least 1.5 Stars. I have no problem with this idea either way, but I thought the Terrain Star Ratings were considered from a Non-Wheelchair point of view--the majority--and hence, the [Wheelchair] Attribute(s) is to aid in further detailing the cache area. [...]

Have you read through the clayjar site that helps cachers rate their cache?

 

Choices while calculating the rating:

What is the terrain elevation like?

Basically flat

Only slight elevation changes. Easy to do in a wheelchair, stroller, bike, etc.

 

When the rating is calculated

Terrain rating: 1

* Handicapped accessible. (Terrain is likely to be paved, is relatively flat, and less than a 1/2 mile hike is required.)

 

Reading those parts, I really think the clayjar system does consider the cache for it's potential to be accessible via a wheelchair. And since it's the system recommended on the cache submission page, I interpret the rating of a 1 difficulty to mean the cache should be accessible via wheelchair. Most of the folks in my area operate on that same notion because of the wording from the clayjar rating system. We add the icon to 1-star caches that really are accesible to most cachers to let people know we thought it through carefully, rather than just taking whatever rating showed up. While it may not be an official "rule" it is a way to acheive some consistency.

 

I love the way Keystone's advisory note reads. I'd even go so far as to say that it wouldn't be a bad idea to have all reviewers ask cache owners to do the same.

 

If I got that note, I'd look at my cache from that new perspective, and say "Oh yes, my new cache is wheelchair accessible! I'll add the icon so folks will know I really thought this through" or "Oh, no, my cache really wouldn't be very easy to get to in a wheelchair. I'd better raise the rating to 1.5"

Link to comment

sounds like a fair thing to me.

 

a 1 or 1.5 makes little difference to most of us, but if you had a wheelchair, and kept running into non-accessible caches which were rated at 1, it'd probably be enough of a problem to make you stop caching.

 

I would imagine most of us wouldn't even consider this without being told or reminded by a reviewer. I'd hope everyone would understand and keep it in mind so the game stays fun for everybody. :)

Link to comment

I love the way Keystone's advisory note reads. I'd even go so far as to say that it wouldn't be a bad idea to have all reviewers ask cache owners to do the same.

 

If I got that note, I'd look at my cache from that new perspective, and say "Oh yes, my new cache is wheelchair accessible! I'll add the icon so folks will know I really thought this through" or "Oh, no, my cache really wouldn't be very easy to get to in a wheelchair. I'd better raise the rating to 1.5"

Thank you for your kind words about my form note. I can't take full credit for it, as we usually develop these templates through discussion among the reviewer group. I recall borrowing some of my text from other examples. Other reviewers have different templates which are equally helpful. I would guess that more than half of the volunteer cache reviewers use some version of the advisory note.

 

Your "If I got that note..." reaction is exactly what we are looking for -- just think about the issue if you had not already done so. It's easily fixed post-publication.

Link to comment

sounds like a fair thing to me.

 

a 1 or 1.5 makes little difference to most of us, but if you had a wheelchair, and kept running into non-accessible caches which were rated at 1, it'd probably be enough of a problem to make you stop caching.

 

I would imagine most of us wouldn't even consider this without being told or reminded by a reviewer. I'd hope everyone would understand and keep it in mind so the game stays fun for everybody. :)

 

Thank you, you are absolutely right about that. There have been times when I've seen a cache with a wheelchair symbol and come to find out that it really is not because of a 1 step curb and no ramp like on a median in a parking lot where they plant trees but you have to step up on the little grassy area to get to it. These are not wheelchair accessible although they may be considered handicapped accessible since someone who uses crutches could possibly get to it. There is a big difference in "handicapped" accessible and "wheelchair" accessible.

Link to comment

The Clayjar system is not perfect, and was written before the wheelchair accessible debate grew so big. There is one line in there that probably confuses a lot of first time users. Under "What is the trail like?" the final line says:

How is the the most difficult part of the cache? If the cache is within a few feet of a trail, don't worry about the last few feet.
So a level, paved trail leading to a rocky culvert (with a fake rock) would - according to that line - be rated a 1, but would not be wheelchair accessible.

 

So if 1* terrain is too be officially "wheelchair accessible" the system needs a little rewriting. As Nochipra pointed out there is a difference between "handicapped" & "wheelchair" accessible.

Link to comment

And then again, there is the same question that a cache that IS accessible to one wheelchair 'user' (for want of a better word), may NOT be accessible to another wheelchair user. Take into account all the different types of disabilities that people who need to use a wheelchair might have.

 

There is a particualr cache of ours that I really struggled with this question about - the path is flat (but gravelled not paved) there are no curbs, ramps, steps or anything like that to encounter, and it is amplely wide enough for alot of wheelchairs to get through --- however it is over hung by alot of vegetation - nothing that can't be brushed aside through.

 

One guy we knew who used a wheelchair would most likely do it (if he lived in our town now) and not be bothered about the gravel and the plants brushing pass his face - but he's a young reasonably fit guy with full use of his upper body, and on the other hand, another local friend would most likely not even consider it - as she is middle aged and more fragile and does not have such good upper body strength/control.

 

So in the same way that those of us who use legs to get around may have different interpretations of something like a 'significant hike' (for me personally for example - a walk that takes 2 hours or more and is at least somewhat over rough terrain and/or with an altitude increase and for others it will be somethign far more or far less!!!!), those who use wheels to get around likely have different interpretations of what 'wheelchair accessible' is.

 

Just another thought on the subject.

 

Annie

Link to comment

Your friend is likely misinterpreting the reviewer's note. Accurate terrain ratings are not covered in the listing guidelines, so publication of a cache cannot be held up over a difference between one star terrain and 1.5 star terrain.

 

Rather, many reviewers -- being experienced geocachers -- leave an advisory note that encourages the cache owner to double-check the terrain rating. I use the following form letter any time a cache is rated one star for terrain, but the "wheelchair accessible" attribute is not selected:

 

Your new cache submission will be published momentarily, but I would ask you to please double-check to make sure the terrain is rated properly. If you used the cache rating system link ( http://www.clayjar.com/gcrs/ ) when you submitted the cache, you will note that a 1 star terrain cache should be wheelchair accessible. If that's the case, great! (Please consider using the handicapped accessible "cache attribute" to let people know this.) If it's not wheelchair accessible, then the terrain should be at least 1.5 stars. For more information, please see this article: http://www.todayscacher.com/2004/sep/outdoors.asp#disable

 

Thanks,

Keystone

Geocaching.com Volunteer Cache Reviewer

 

After posting this advisory note, I then publish the cache if there are no other issues. If there is a separate issue, then I modify the first sentence of this note before placing the cache on hold. It's still just advisory, however.

 

Our reviewer will not publish our caches if we list it a one star without the handicap attribute.

Link to comment

All any cacher can really do is describe the area to the best of their ability in their published cache and it is really up to the individual disabled or not to decide if they want to do it? I know for me I actually study the cache pages before deciding to go after them by checking the google earth pics, the description, star ratings, attributes, etc since I don't really have the luxery of being able to do most "typical" hiking type caches. That is really all that disabled cachers ask is that you describe it to the best of your ability and if they/I attempt it and find it too difficult then we usually will avoid it.

Link to comment

Keystone, whoever was filling in for Reviewer Jones a week or so ago did exactly that. I posted a terrain 1 cache but didn't check the wheelchair attribute. My listing was held up. I got a note on Friday to up the rating or include the wheelchair thingy, which I did immediately, and my cache didn't get published until Monday.

Link to comment

Here in my area there are lots of cache owners who misunderstand "wheelchair accessible". They think their cache is wheelchair accessible if you can reach the cache location by wheelchair, and they rate it with one star terrain. And then you sit in your wheelchair, maybe you can even see the cache, but you can't reach it because it sits on top of a sign, in a tree, etc., and even I (1.65 m "tall") can't reach it without help :unsure: We have a newsgroup here, and I tried to point at that problem, but with very little success... "I don't care about those guidelines..." or "There are enough other caches for you to find" or "What do you want, you can go there with a wheelchair!" were the answers I got, and I got a few new "friends". I guess most of them didn't understand that I wasn't mostly talking about me (although I get frustrated if I can't log a 1*T cache), but about the very few people who are caching from a wheelchair, and who are going alone and have nobody with them who will pick up the cache from the tree for them. We even have a new one star terrain cache here which has the wheelchair symbol, but the hint says "at 1.85 m" I doubt that it is a real wheelchair cache... :blink:

In my opinion there are very few real one star terrain caches around here. I guess I will have to make a bookmark list one day for wheelchair caches in my area.

Link to comment
Our reviewer will not publish our caches if we list it a one star without the handicap attribute.
Your reviewer is wrong.

 

Well, he's not alone, becuase my reviewer WILL NOT publish a one star without the the handicap attribute.

 

Since all of my caches involve traveling across unpaved ground, I can't post below a 1.5 . Becuase the worst case scenario could involve a rut, animal burrow, and/or mud I can't allow myself to label any of my current caches as handicap accessible.

 

SD

Edited by scuba dude
Link to comment

The Clayjar system is not perfect, and was written before the wheelchair accessible debate grew so big. There is one line in there that probably confuses a lot of first time users. Under "What is the trail like?" the final line says:

How is the the most difficult part of the cache? If the cache is within a few feet of a trail, don't worry about the last few feet.
So a level, paved trail leading to a rocky culvert (with a fake rock) would - according to that line - be rated a 1, but would not be wheelchair accessible.

 

So if 1* terrain is too be officially "wheelchair accessible" the system needs a little rewriting. As Nochipra pointed out there is a difference between "handicapped" & "wheelchair" accessible.

Even Handicaching.com has trouble with the route in and the actual final hunting zone and that system has far more information that's useful.

Link to comment
Our reviewer will not publish our caches if we list it a one star without the handicap attribute.
Your reviewer is wrong.

 

Well, he's not alone, becuase my reviewer WILL NOT publish a one star without the the handicap attribute.

 

Since all of my caches involve traveling across unpaved ground, I can't post below a 1.5 . Becuase the worst case scenario could involve a rut, animal burrow, and/or mud I can't allow myself to label any of my current caches as handicap accessible.

 

SD

Unpaved does not mean "Not wheelchair accessible".

 

A hard packed dirt path could be fare more chair friendly than concrete pavers or bricks in a pathway.

 

If someone can go around a hole...it's fine. (Unless it rains and becomes muck...)

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

Much as I have stated in related threads in the past, I feel that any cache bearing a Terrain rating of 1 should be implicitly assumed to be wheelchair accessible, and I would support Groundspeak or reviewer efforts to make such an assumption a de facto rule. And, if a cache bearing a Terrain rating of 1.5 or 2.0 might also be considered to be accessible to some wheelchair users, then I would suggest using the appropriate icon and adding a brief note to that effect on the cache listing page.

Link to comment
Our reviewer will not publish our caches if we list it a one star without the handicap attribute.
Your reviewer is wrong.

 

Well, he's not alone, becuase my reviewer WILL NOT publish a one star without the the handicap attribute.

 

Since all of my caches involve traveling across unpaved ground, I can't post below a 1.5 . Becuase the worst case scenario could involve a rut, animal burrow, and/or mud I can't allow myself to label any of my current caches as handicap accessible.

 

SD

Unpaved does not mean "Not wheelchair accessible".

 

A hard packed dirt path could be fare more chair friendly than concrete pavers or bricks in a pathway.

 

If someone can go around a hole...it's fine. (Unless it rains and becomes muck...)

 

That's my point exactly. Heavy rains and grass can hide deep, wet mud. I've had to respond to motorized wheelchairs stuck in soft ground, I can't imagine being stuck in mud. None of my caches are currently accessible to arms reach from a wheelchair either, so that's another reason to not mark the attribute.

 

However, those aspects aside, my local reviewer informed me on my very first cache, that it COULD NOT be a 1 terrain without the attribute. This seems to be against GC.com rules. I wouldn't care if it WAS a rule. It would make sense. Just make sure it's in writing for newbies to see before posting thier first cache and getting frustrated by the reviewer.

 

SD

Edited by scuba dude
Link to comment

There is a big difference in "handicapped" accessible and "wheelchair" accessible.

 

I really think that the reveiwer in question needs to learn to be more flexible. I can see asking for some clarification, but not holding up publication for it. It would be easy to have a terrain 1 cache that a handicaped person with a walker or crutches could get that a person in a wheelchair could not get to.

 

If I placed a cache at the end of a short, paved sidewalk hanging 6 feet off the ground on a lamp post my grandmother would be avle to reach it with her walker, but a person in a wheelchair could not. In my opionion this is the whole difference between a terrain 1 and flagging the wheelchair attribute.

 

AK

Link to comment

It has been my experience that Reviewers (rightfully) have wide latitude and flexibility but still enforce the Guidelines pretty much as written.

 

However, Reviewers are cachers too, and do try to help the game when and where possible.

 

This is a case where some evidently believe that a uniform wheelchair terrain rating of 1 would help the game but do not have real guideline support to enforce that.

 

Each Reviewer will have likes and dislikes (believe me, they often have to hold their nose and hit 'publish') that ultimately affect how they approach their job, and it is sometimes difficult not to let these personal preferences interfere with the guidelines, especially as they are written to be somewhat interpretive.

 

As has been pointed out above by a very authoritative source, under the Guidelines a listing cannot be held up over the accessibility rating.

 

I personally think that it should be, and as evidenced by this thread some Reviewers believe that as well, but to my knowledge at this time if your listing is denied due to a 1-terrain not being wheelchair accessible or not having the wheelchair attribute an appeal to Groundspeak will get it published.

 

I have found Groundspeak's Reviewer management to be extremely fair when judging such appeals, and both the cacher and the Reviewer learn something whenever Groundspeak make a appealed case ruling.

 

Actually I think that ALL appeals and their resolution should be published, so we all know better how TPTB want the Guidelines interpreted!

 

The 1-terrain accessible rating is a suggestion and a recommendation, not a requirement.

 

That said, it doesn't hurt us one bit to voluntarily accept that recommendation as our everyday listing practice.

 

As Team Cotati so tactfully mentioned, this issue does not affect the majority of geocachers. I have found a few thousand caches in over two dozen states, attended many events, and don't think that I have met ten people in wheelchairs, so we are asking the entire community to adopt a practice that benefits but a few.

 

Still, if, like myself, you are one of those few it is a huge issue!

 

As to the questions "What is accessible?" and "What does a 1-terrain rating mean?" it's a tough judgment call... but I think that most of us can look at terrain and placement and ask ourselves "Could I get that cache from a wheelchair without standing up?".

 

If you believe that you could, rate it a 1, if there's any question in your mind, please rate it a 1.5.

Link to comment

...Actually I think that ALL appeals and their resolution should be published, so we all know better how TPTB want the Guidelines interpreted!...

 

Agreed. If you know your appeal is going to be published, you as an owner would be less likely to mix abuse in the appeal. Plus we all get to learn the nuances that create the appeals and how they play out so we better understand the guidelines.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...