Jump to content

Closed posts


Recommended Posts

:) Seems like there is not much that can be done about this matter so a mail to contact@geocaching.com would not go amiss from certain members, you know who you all are......

Some of you can prob remember the last time US based mod stepped in on the uk forum!!!!! :)

 

Would that involve very nearly loosing two volunteer reviewers and people getting forum bans by any chance :)

Link to comment

Thank you to you, Lactodorum, Eckington and Deceangi, for helping Groundspeak moderate this forum. I personally very much apprecaite it --- as do the other lackeys here at the Groundspeak HQ. This appreciation is evident also among the people in the community you serve.

Groundspeak does not want to take a stand for or against any of the topics that fall under the "solicitation" or "agenda" guideline. Charitable donations are a form of social agenda. We also do not want reviewers or forum moderators to have to take a stand in such cases. This has always been Groundspeak's wish. Nothing new.

 

We have taken a stand for geocaching as an engaging hobby that takes you outdoors. It's meant to be a fun and light activity - about using GPS to search for hidden containers. These forums are supposed to be about that.

 

Give us a bit of time, everyone, to sort through it. Please put away your pitchforks as there is no need for it.

:)

OK?

Link to comment

The two threads were closed as they were soliciting for charitable purposes. I checked the meaning of the word in an American Dictionary.

 

solicits - To petition persistently; importune: solicited the neighbors for donations.

 

Whilst fully accepting that I'd be asking friends and colleagues to sponsor me as part of this activity - as far as I can see no cacher was soliciting in either thread for donations.

 

So now we can't even mention we're doing a charitable sponsored event - A group of Cachers are mad enough to attempt a 3 mile run/walk/waddle through loads of mud/water etc - and we can't even talk about it....

Link to comment
My concern is why the us mods intervened when it could have been sorted by one of our uk mods???????? Perhaps someone could answer that?????
Miss Jenn is a Groundspeak employee and has a legitimate role in ensuring Groundspeak's policies and guidelines are adhered to. The same applies to Michael who has removed some other similar threads from this forum.
Link to comment
That is a quite patronising post in my opinion MissJenn
I apologize if that came off as patronizing. Not my intention at all.

On the contrary, actually.

 

Apology accepted. The written word can be a blunt instrument, most of us here have fallen foul of that :)

 

Now, about the hypocrisy?

Link to comment
My concern is why the us mods intervened when it could have been sorted by one of our uk mods???????? Perhaps someone could answer that?????
Miss Jenn is a Groundspeak employee and has a legitimate role in ensuring Groundspeak's policies and guidelines are adhered to. The same applies to Michael who has removed some other similar threads from this forum.

 

It still does not answer the question though does it? Also it would be nice to get an answer from Groundspeak us about this!!!

Link to comment

Bloomin 'eck... usually we can't get anyone in Groundspeak or the US for that matter to come in here and listen to OUR feelings about caching, the forums or anything else for that matter...

 

Now we're overrun.... hmmmmmmm...

 

If only more GS bods would come in here when it mattered, instead of over us watching 7 or 8 Devonians running through mud!!

Link to comment

..."they are a commercial organisation so if push comes to shove we can withold our premium memberships fees.

 

Yes they are - and to which end they can tell us what they will allow on their computers. Whether we like it or not... The best analogy I can think of is... 'If you don't like Tesco.... don't shop at Tesco.'

 

I'd suggest that we just wait and see what how things pan out.

Link to comment

Would people stop posting messages that could be construed as being charity related for the moment. Although these have been allowed here for a long time it seems there is now a problem. I am trying to get to the bottom of it right now.

 

Thanks, Lactodorum.

 

Would it not be prudent to give the UK Mods time to sort this out BEFORE we reach for our 'Pitchforks'....

 

MISSJenn...I didnt find your febble attempt at humour very amusing,and find your manner rather impolite.Dont think youve started a fan club. :ph34r:

Edited by third-degree-witch
Link to comment

..."they are a commercial organisation so if push comes to shove we can withold our premium memberships fees.

 

Yes they are - and to which end they can tell us what they will allow on their computers. Whether we like it or not... The best analogy I can think of is... 'If you don't like Tesco.... don't shop at Tesco.'

 

I'd suggest that we just wait and see what how things pan out.

 

as to your tesco idea sometimes this happens

 

 

asda tesco

Link to comment

I would imagine the closure of the threads mentioning a charity by Groundspeak has confused a few people.

 

Over the last few months, Groundspeak have been putting more enforcement into the already existing Guidelines on Commercial caches, and caches that solicit.

I believe this has been discussed at length within the private reviewers forum, and it is the website volunteers who have been asked to enforce the guidelines more rigidly.

 

Our reviewers are famously very accommodating, which is possibly why this has only just reared it's head in the UK forum; but over in the US-centric parts of the Groundspeak forums, quite a fuss has been made over the last few weeks.

 

Here's some light reading :ph34r:

-------------------

Event not initially published due to link to commercial website http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=190245

 

Another example http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=190625

 

And more http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=191208

 

Caches that have an agenda http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=189866

-------------------

 

Whilst it may be very therapeutic to debate the issues amoungst ourselves, we might have to accept it's Groundspeak's website, and they are unlikely to make exceptions for the UK for these particular issues.

 

I should add that it is in no way the fault of Lacto, Ecky or Deci that these enforcements haven't been communicated to us all sooner - there does appear to have been widespread confusion all round.

Link to comment

I would imagine the closure of the threads mentioning a charity by Groundspeak has confused a few people.

 

Over the last few months, Groundspeak have been putting more enforcement into the already existing Guidelines on Commercial caches, and caches that solicit.

I believe this has been discussed at length within the private reviewers forum, and it is the website volunteers who have been asked to enforce the guidelines more rigidly.

 

Our reviewers are famously very accommodating, which is possibly why this has only just reared it's head in the UK forum; but over in the US-centric parts of the Groundspeak forums, quite a fuss has been made over the last few weeks.

 

Here's some light reading :ph34r:

-------------------

Event not initially published due to link to commercial website http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=190245

 

Another example http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=190625

 

And more http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=191208

 

Caches that have an agenda http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=189866

-------------------

 

Whilst it may be very therapeutic to debate the issues amoungst ourselves, we might have to accept it's Groundspeak's website, and they are unlikely to make exceptions for the UK for these particular issues.

 

I should add that it is in no way the fault of Lacto, Ecky or Deci that these enforcements haven't been communicated to us all sooner - there does appear to have been widespread confusion all round.

 

I think Groundspeak need to remember that,without us they wouldnt have a site..plus...as a paying member i expect a level of service...old fashioined i know,but hey,there u go

Link to comment

Instead of "chill" and other unhelpful comments, can one of OUR reviewers please tell us what is happening, in simple to understand language?

 

I know what's happening, but there's lots who have no idea what's going on, and if there are newbies around, it hardly makes for a welcomming environment...

 

<and breathe>

Link to comment

Am I the only one who agrees with Groundspeak ?

 

(should I run for cover now)

No you are not alone. I am still not sure what this is all about but think we should let our reviewers represent our views rather than stir the pot ourselves.

 

But how can they represent our views when we can't make them known cos not everybody knows what's going on!

Link to comment

 

About what was done or how it was done?

 

Both.

 

What was done: threads closed which breach GS rules - fine.

 

How it was done: a non-UK person did it - fine, they work for/represent GS and have the necessary permissions to do that.

 

It MAY be that our mods feel their toes were stepped on, but they can deal with that without us going off half-cocked.

Link to comment

Am I the only one who agrees with Groundspeak ?

 

(should I run for cover now)

No you are not alone. I am still not sure what this is all about but think we should let our reviewers represent our views rather than stir the pot ourselves.

 

But how can they represent our views when we can't make them known cos not everybody knows what's going on!

 

Hazel, and others, please understand that certain discussions must take place in private. Any outcome will be made known in due course so please let things run their course.

 

I would also urge anyone contemplating adding to this discussion to think logically and do not resort to cheap insults (no I'm not pointing any fingers yet so don't read anything in to that which isn't there).

 

I'll leave the thread running to allow for rational debate but I will not hesitate to close it myself or request another moderator, from elsewhere if necessary, to do so if it degenerates.

 

Many thanks, Lactodorum

Link to comment

So, we can see that Lacto is on the case, so I suggest we let him get on with it.

 

Why not take the thread off topic and post our support for the UK/Ireland reviewers and mods. I am sure we would all like to say that you are all (puts on high heels and big hair)

 

Simply the best

Better than all the rest

 

:ph34r:

Link to comment

 

What was done: threads closed which breach GS rules - fine.

 

How it was done: a non-UK person did it - fine, they work for/represent GS and have the necessary permissions to do that.

 

It MAY be that our mods feel their toes were stepped on, but they can deal with that without us going off half-cocked.

 

While I didn't initially see the 2 posts as solicitations for charity they did have a charity component, as GC has a rule covering this I don't disagree with what was done. The only way such a rule can work is to apply it consistently in every case.

 

As for it being done by a lackey, I think that's preferable to having our regular mods do it, after all the lackey doesn't have to 'live here' afterwards so it doesn't matter if people have the hump with her.

Link to comment

Why do these forums have so much drama?

 

I get the impression certain people making something out of the smallest problems and creating them into huge issues.

 

I don't claim to know the history, background or issues on these forums but to me MissJenn has atleast come on here and tried to explain her side/views in a polite manner. For that she has got s*** from people who should know better.

 

Let them sort it out and report back to you like they say. Jumping down peoples throats only makes it worse.

Link to comment

Why do these forums have so much drama?

 

I get the impression certain people making something out of the smallest problems and creating them into huge issues.

 

I don't claim to know the history, background or issues on these forums but to me MissJenn has atleast come on here and tried to explain her side/views in a polite manner. For that she has got s*** from people who should know better.

 

Let them sort it out and report back to you like they say. Jumping down peoples throats only makes it worse.

 

Like you say, you probably don't know the history so please don't make assumptions.

 

I am sure most people are more than happy for this to be sorted out privately and look forward to a satisfactory conclusion.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...