Any News ? ?

June 19, 2008

Apologies for using a sock puppet account for this question

Its now sometime since our esteemed and erstwhile team of reviewers fractured to leave just Dave in the saddle assisted by a motely (and helpful) crew across the pond.

I think this period of quiet and calm has been useful but the UK needs more than 'one man and his dog' so to speak. Dave is placed under considerable pressure to add to the others he is already under. I know that GC.COM are aware, sympathetic and everything else - but - I think NOW, in the height of summer and geo-find time is probably a good time for Seattle, Dave and others to tell us what is happening and the expected time frames.

So Dave - what are the plans for the next half of the year?

3.8k · June 19, 2008

It's a pity that you have felt the need to use a sock puppet account to ask this very genuine and worthwhile question.

Do we have any news on what is happening? There is the worry that the amount of work that Dave is putting in on his own may mean that he also throws the towel in?

1.3k · June 19, 2008

It does seem odd that there have been no apparent developments - I know of one well known cacher who has put his hand up for the job and yet he hasn't been approached, so far as I know. I would have thought that volunteers would be in very short supply and therefore any such offers would be snapped up.

1.6k · June 19, 2008

No worries at the moment of me throwing the towel in now packing it and travelling to exotic places is more on the cards [and before anyone worries, that's crossing the border and heading for Harrogate with a double border crossing later on in the year to Scotland ]

I'm just waiting on a final decision on one victim candidate , the plan being that as those who are conned asked to join the UK Reviewer Team come on board, they will be involved in the discussions on the next victim candidate. I felt and Groundspeak agreed that this is important as part of a Team Building process, as we will be working very closely with each other.

The plan being to con recruit 3 new Reviewers to cover the work load that Dave and Peter used to do, to avoid a quick burnout due to the high workload. Currently we're running at around 1,200-1,400 new caches every month [figures obtained from G:UK].

Only once final approval for a new victim candidate is given will the person be approached and asked to join the team. And at No time will the names of those on the short list be revealed . You're all going to have to be patient and wait and see . Even then it will be up to each new Reviewer to decide if they reveal their true identities . Hopefully all will follow the tradition shown by previous UK Reviewers/Approvers and reveal who they are

1.3k · June 19, 2008

Thanks for the update Dave. I just can't understand why on earth it takes so long.

1.3k · June 19, 2008

That's committees for you

June 19, 2008

Thanks for the update Dave. I just can't understand why on earth it takes so long.

Faulty thumbscrews?

1.3k · June 19, 2008

Thanks for the update Dave. I just can't understand why on earth it takes so long.

Let's hope they say yes then

June 22, 2008

It sounds a little bit like the Wheeltappers and Shunters Social Club! :angry:

June 26, 2008

Anyone know if Dave is away?

Sent him an email on Monday and had no response as yet?

I suspect he's either away or snowed under

1.6k · June 26, 2008

Anyone know if Dave is away?

Sent him an email on Monday and had no response as yet?

I suspect he's either away or snowed under

Sorry mate you've not been ignored emails are at the bottom of the priority list at the moment. I only pop into the forum for a break from the queue :lol: There is a back log going back to late Sunday/early Monday . Which as the weather is chucking it down means I can't get out to put up some new fencing . So I'll be working through that back log latter on today after I've cleared out the queue

I had a very early night last night [too much sugar knocked me for 6, and now I'm suffering a sugar hangover ] and had less than a page full in the queue. This morning there was 3 pages

Oh and you'll looking at sometime after the Mega before you get a new UK Reviewer

June 26, 2008

Sorry mate you've not been ignored emails are at the bottom of the priority list at the moment. I only pop into the forum for a break from the queue There is a back log going back to late Sunday/early Monday . Which as the weather is chucking it down means I can't get out to put up some new fencing . So I'll be working through that back log latter on today after I've cleared out the queue

Oh and you'll looking at sometime after the Mega before you get a new UK Reviewer

Try and give us more than one - because three's a crowd and we think you need a crowd

Edited June 26, 2008 by kewfriend

1.3k · June 26, 2008

I know that the established cacher who has put their name firmly in the frame has not yet been contacted

1.3k · June 26, 2008

We could have had a General Election and a brand new government in less time than this is taking. :lol:

Keep up the good work Deci - I for one do not expect super duper quick review of new caches, not that I have submitted any lately.

1.2k · June 27, 2008

I know that the established cacher who has put their name firmly in the frame has not yet been contacted

I suspect they will have a long wait as Groundspeak does not accept people who nominate themselves. New reviewers have to be recommended by the existing reviewer team, usually by those already representing the area.

I remember long ago when I was a reviewer (Lactodorum for anyone who has been on Mars for the past few months!), Eckington and I agreed with Groundspeak that the UK needed a third reviewer and after some thought we came up with someone who "metamorphosed" into Deceangi

Later on a similar process took place and Croaghan appeared in Ireland.

I've seen the process from the inside many times and I know that it has been appreciated that a local reviewer knows who will best represent that difficult balancing act of enjoying the respect of the local community while upholding Groundspeak's ethos. The final say, of course, is Groundspeak's but the local reviewer's knowledge counts for a lot, or it certainly used to. I don't know the situation now.

What surprises me in this case is the length of time the process seems to be taking this time. Eckington and I resigned back in April and it's now nearly July. Nearly three months have passed and still Deceangi is carrying the majority of the workload on his own (with much appreciated assistance from Erik).

I wonder if Miss Jenn from Groundspeak could give us an indication of when we might see a new team in place and perhaps some word on why there has been such an unusual delay. If nothing else it might prevent the conspiracy theories starting.

1.7k · June 27, 2008

Keep up the good work Deci - I for one do not expect super duper quick review of new caches, not that I have submitted any lately.

He's doing a cracking job!

Our latest series was published the morning after we submitted them: less than 12 hours!

June 27, 2008

We could have had a General Election and a brand new government in less time than this is taking.

Yes but look at the poor quality government you end up with....

June 27, 2008

I think this period of quiet and calm has been useful but the UK needs more than 'one man and his dog' so to speak.

Woof, woof!

~erik~

3.8k · June 27, 2008

I know that the established cacher who has put their name firmly in the frame has not yet been contacted

I suspect they will have a long wait as Groundspeak does not accept people who nominate themselves.

If it's the person who I think it is, then that person only nominated himself after a request was put out by Deceangi. It is a pity if that person isn't considered, as I know he put his name forward in good faith to assist the process.

1.2k · June 27, 2008

We could have had a General Election and a brand new government in less time than this is taking.

Yes but look at the poor quality government you end up with....

All very true

But what a novel idea that would be here, Deceangi puts forward some candidates he feels he could work with and who he thinks would continue to represent both the UK caching community and Groundspeak's requirements and then an election is held.

I know it's not the way it happens but I'm just daydreaming.

Or maybe there's a basic dichotomy, maybe reflecting and accommodating the views of geocachers is now incompatible with the "official" role of a reviewer. I know it worked once, but maybe there's just to much pressure from elsewhere for it to work now.

Any members of the Monster Raving Looney party want to put their names forward?

June 27, 2008

Apologies - sock puppet again for obvious reasons

I suspect they will have a long wait as Groundspeak does not accept people who nominate themselves.
If it's the person who I think it is, then that person only nominated himself after a request was put out by Deceangi. It is a pity if that person isn't considered, as I know he put his name forward in good faith to assist the process.

It really doesnt matter who does the work. Any idea that Seattle have; that the name in the frame is always secret is a total fairy land fantasy. The issues are, as ever with a 'middle manager role', representing the business but having the confidence of the staff and punters. There are probably 50 cachers who could fit that role - but probably only a tenth of that who have the time / inclination to fulfil it. GC.COM may think the 'Masonic Approach' is clever - well it isnt - all it breeds is resentment (except amongst the masons) - .... who did I pass the Masonic Geocoin onto?

I have no idea who put themselves forward, but if the invitation to so do was a sly ploy to weed out those with ambitions of world domination; that does seem a bizarre way to run a business. But hey - its the USA - they do it their way. like my eco-color - US spelling!?

June 27, 2008

Or maybe there's a basic dichotomy, maybe reflecting and accommodating the views of geocachers is now incompatible with the "official" role of a reviewer. I know it worked once, but maybe there's just to much pressure from elsewhere for it to work now.

How strange that you should say that to-day Peter. An unrelated post in another forum set me thinking about the situation here.

I am afraid I foresee a long wait until a new UK reviewing team is in place. I cannot help remembering that one of my own issues with GSP was the policy making process.

I do not know how many reviewers there were/are world wide. I do not know how many of them only visited the offical reviewers' forum occasionally - as I did.

Rightly or wrongly my perception was that GSP policy was more and more being set, not by the reviewing community listening to cachers and actively seeking a way to move the game on, but by a core of 3 or 4 reviewers who had an increasingly fundamentalist desire to keep things in the past.

I know we got it wrong sometimes, and I know that the way we operated was not appreciated by all UK cachers but I still feel that the old "triumvirate" did the best we could to facilitate caching in the UK by the way we interprered the guidelines. I am d a m n sure Deci still does. I am equally sure that that same core of 3 or 4 reviewers will not agree with some of what is done.

As I say I will be very surprised if we get new UK reviewers in the near future - I hope GSP prove me totally incorrect.

June 27, 2008

Rightly or wrongly my perception was that GSP policy was more and more being set, not by the reviewing community listening to cachers and actively seeking a way to move the game on, but by a core of 3 or 4 reviewers who had an increasingly fundamentalist desire to keep things in the past.

Is it a church or is it a business or is it just a bit of fun? Well I for one want GSP to make a good motivational profit. I certainly dont want to pray at the altar of the great GeoGod in the Sky. Yep - I like fun!

1.2k · June 28, 2008

I know that the established cacher who has put their name firmly in the frame has not yet been contacted

I suspect they will have a long wait as Groundspeak does not accept people who nominate themselves.

If it's the person who I think it is, then that person only nominated himself after a request was put out by Deceangi. It is a pity if that person isn't considered, as I know he put his name forward in good faith to assist the process.

Even though I was part of the reviewing team I am playing absolutely no part in the selection process for the new person/people. I have no knowledge of who this person is nor do I wish to influence the process (some chance! ) as it is Deceangi who will have to work with him/her/them.

What concerns me is the inordinate delay which seems to be happening. I know the process and this is taking a lot longer than normal. It would appear that we'll not get any replacements until August some time at the earliest. This means that nearly 4 months will have passed without a decision being made. All this even though a "volunteer/victim" has been considered.

I'll repeat my request for some sort of official word on why things are taking an exceptionally long time. Other countries, and American states, get new reviewers within a few weeks at most, so why are we so different?

It would be a courtesy if nothing else for us to have a bit of communication from Groundspeak.

1.3k · June 28, 2008

Times have changed too, and the process of Groundspeak deliberating for someone, then weeks later, asking them, is asking for trouble!

In times gone by, you could probably have assumed that if someone was asked, they would have said YES. However, you could probably now assume that most people if asked would say NO. :laughing:

3.7k · June 28, 2008

Pure speculation, and probably wide of the mark, but perhaps we're having to wait for Project PhoenixTucson before a decision will be made. If it's such a radical change, maybe the way reviewers work is also going to change?

June 28, 2008

Or maybe there's a basic dichotomy, maybe reflecting and accommodating the views of geocachers is now incompatible with the "official" role of a reviewer. I know it worked once, but maybe there's just to much pressure from elsewhere for it to work now.

I agree, Peter. The Groundspeak reviewers for the UK have historically not only been reviewers but have also been seen as unelected but very much appreciated representatives of UK caching. The "grand old men" of UK caching, if you will . Groundspeak have made it increasingly obvious over the years that reviewers work for them first and the caching community not at all. Your attempts to marry the two were perhaps always going to end in problems, and I can't see the future being any different.

3.8k · June 28, 2008

I have no idea who put themselves forward, but if the invitation to so do was a sly ploy to weed out those with ambitions of world domination; that does seem a bizarre way to run a business. But hey - its the USA - they do it their way.

Although it does look that way, I genuinely do not believe that was the intentions of Deceangi's request. I just hope that it doesn't turn out to be the implications of what appeared to be an innocent request!

I have no knowledge of who this person is nor do I wish to influence the process (some chance! ) as it is Deceangi who will have to work with him/her/them.

I must say that I am speculating on who the person is, and this is purely by 2 posts that have been made, one of which is on this thread and the other not within this forum.

June 28, 2008

What concerns me is the inordinate delay which seems to be happening. I know the process and this is taking a lot longer than normal. It would appear that we'll not get any replacements until August some time at the earliest. This means that nearly 4 months will have passed without a decision being made. All this even though a "volunteer/victim" has been considered.

I'll repeat my request for some sort of official word on why things are taking an exceptionally long time. Other countries, and American states, get new reviewers within a few weeks at most, so why are we so different?

It would be a courtesy if nothing else for us to have a bit of communication from Groundspeak.

With all the past problems with us in the UK, perhaps we are being treated like scolded children :laughing: or perhaps it is just where we come in the pecking order nowadays

Communication from Groundspeak

oh dear that bit did tickle me, next you'll be wanting an invite to Jeremys BBQ

Perhaps i should keep them waiting as long for the next years subscription which is due for renewal

Wadders

British and proud of it, and I don't care where those in the great US of A put us in the pecking order

Edited June 29, 2008 by Wadders

June 29, 2008

(quote)What concerns me is the inordinate delay which seems to be happening. I know the process and this is taking a lot longer than normal. It would appear that we'll not get any replacements until August some time at the earliest. This means that nearly 4 months will have passed without a decision being made. All this even though a "volunteer/victim" has been considered.

I'll repeat my request for some sort of official word on why things are taking an exceptionally long time. Other countries, and American states, get new reviewers within a few weeks at most, so why are we so different?

It would be a courtesy if nothing else for us to have a bit of communication from Groundspeak.

With all the past problems with us in the UK, perhaps we are being treated like scolded children or perhaps it is just where we come in the pecking order nowadays

Communication from Groundspeak :mad: :anicute:

oh dear that bit did tickle me, next you'll be wanting an invite to Jeremys BBQ :mad:

Perhaps i should keep them waiting as long for the next years subscription which is due for renewal :mad:

Wadders

British and proud of it, and I don't care where those in the great US of A put us in the pecking order :mad:

Well thats you and me that wont get asked <_<

Bob

June 29, 2008

As the one who started this thread - forgive me for intruding again.

So far the view from the US seems to be utterly functional: we have a motely crew (no insult Dave) drawn from across the planet who can deal with the Uk. The forums are mostly trouble makers anyway and as long as the caches get out there, are found and there are no complaints - its a job well done. So there's no need to re-build a Uk team in a hurry and even if Dave threw the towel in we've shown actually a resident Uk reviewer is irrelevant.

Hmmmmm .... actually true in part but somehow a souless view. Lets hope that this is NOT the official view.

June 29, 2008

The forums are mostly trouble makers anyway and ..

Thanks a bunch.

June 29, 2008

The forums are mostly trouble makers anyway

Moi!

Edited June 29, 2008 by Jan and the Percey Boys

1.6k · June 29, 2008

As the one who started this thread - forgive me for intruding again.

So far the view from the US seems to be utterly functional: we have a motely crew (no insult Dave) drawn from across the planet who can deal with the Uk. The forums are mostly trouble makers anyway and as long as the caches get out there, are found and there are no complaints - its a job well done. So there's no need to re-build a Uk team in a hurry and even if Dave threw the towel in we've shown actually a resident Uk reviewer is irrelevant.

Hmmmmm .... actually true in part but somehow a souless view. Lets hope that this is NOT the official view.

Sorry But I'd totally disagree with the Bold part of the post. First off I find it insulting that the hard working Volunteers from around the world are referred to as Motely

Secondly I'd say this forum is pretty calm, with the odd blip now and then

Thirdly I'd suggest you do your homework about whose actually publishing most of the UK caches at the moment. I'm very greatful for the help Erik gives me.

Fourthly again I'd do your homework again about the need for UK based Reviewers. Several of the Landowner Agreements, have the reviewer contacting the Land manager not the cache owner. As the contact details are Private and confidential between the Reviewer and the Land Manager, this information is covered by the Data Protection Act. Meaning it would be a breach of the Act to transmit those details outside of the EU. This would effectively put those areas out of bounds, this would include the area covered by the Metropolitan Police Service. Fancy risking them requesting that the whole of the area covered by them be put out of bounds to caches?

Fifthly as your using a Sock Account how about revealing your true caching ID?

June 29, 2008

Oh dear ... Dave - you've made the old mistake of rising without reading. What was displayed was how the US thought processes might be working followed by

Lets hope that this is NOT the official view.

Doing the old 'gag' about hard work is irrelevant. The forums are indeed quiet, but if this thread reflects anything (and it may) it is simply because GC.COM have not been seen to show any inclination to restore equilibrium to the UK. Quoting the DPA to me is silly: I lecture in it, operate it, and know it backwards. You are simply wrong - as is nearly every shop assistant and telephone operative who screams the same cry. Some confidentiality agreements may be applicable - thats fine.

I am not going pander to US or other vindictiveness on any caches I submit, so it'll have to remain a sock puppet for the present, but doubtless the old US servers are doing IP scans at this very moment and feeding you back the answer to your question: issues of Data Protection??

You're a company man now and that is perfectly reasonable. The issue many of us have is with the direction of the company and then way it treats its punters, and those that gave their time freely. Two reviewers handed in their cards over this and four months on the 'motely crew' are nowhere nearer re-establishing a good and happy UK caching environment.

We all know Dave that you are a good man in difficult personal circumstances out on a limb in north Wales. I understand your defensiveness but getting back the UK vibrancy wont happen through GC.COMs current approach - but they may not care. Or do they?

1.3k · June 29, 2008

Eek!

Edited June 29, 2008 by PopUpPirate

1.2k · June 30, 2008

You're a company man now and that is perfectly reasonable.

While I agree with much (most?) of what you say, I have to pull you up over this statement. Dave is most definitely NOT a "company man". I'm sure he's trying his d.amndest to get a resolution to the current situation regarding UK caching. Having worked with him for several years I know his feelings and you are as wrong on this issue as it's possible to be.

Now the weekend is over let's hope my request for a statement from Groundspeak is acted upon.

June 30, 2008

Dave is most definitely NOT a "company man". I'm sure he's trying his d.amndest to get a resolution to the current situation regarding UK caching.

Nice accolade and hopefully we'll see a good outcome - though I probably share your skeptic's approach.

2.2k · June 30, 2008

You're a company man now and that is perfectly reasonable.

While I agree with much (most?) of what you say, I have to pull you up over this statement. Dave is most definitely NOT a "company man". I'm sure he's trying his d.amndest to get a resolution to the current situation regarding UK caching. Having worked with him for several years I know his feelings and you are as wrong on this issue as it's possible to be.

Now the weekend is over let's hope my request for a statement from Groundspeak is acted upon.

A Company man Dave! Think you have missed the mark by a country mile there.

I think you will find he is hanging around so that we still get as local service as he can manage.

Edited June 30, 2008 by mongoose39uk

June 30, 2008

Dave is most definitely NOT a "company man". I'm sure he's trying his d.amndest to get a resolution to the current situation regarding UK caching.
Nice accolade and hopefully we'll see a good outcome - though I probably share your skeptic's approach.

Well that comes as no surprise!!!!

interesting reading

no ISP scan just public domain information

Edited June 30, 2008 by Jan and the Percey Boys

3k · June 30, 2008

I am not going pander to US or other vindictiveness on any caches I submit, so it'll have to remain a sock puppet for the present, but doubtless the old US servers are doing IP scans at this very moment and feeding you back the answer to your question: issues of Data Protection??

How are they going to do that then - unless you're the sole user on a static IP?

7.2k · July 2, 2008

Bumping this topic after closing this duplication...

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=197752

July 3, 2008

Bumping this topic after closing this duplication...http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=197752

Puck must be weaving more magic than he intended when a US moderator elevates a posting started by a now banned sock puppet account. As a minor US lyricist once wrote "the times they are a-changin". So in the spirit of international cooperation and friendship (remember the old CCCP), I'll help MTN bump this again.

1.2k · July 3, 2008

I see my related thread has been closed. I would point out that it was started deliberately to keep it separate from this thread which was developing into a "what SHOULD happen" discussion and which seemed to be drifting around. I wanted a clear and separate place where Groundspeak could give even a brief comment on what has been an unusual delay in appointing a new volunteer.

I thought it best that an opportunity be presented for an official word in a "clean" thread unencumbered with other side discussions. I accept that as a Global moderator you can do as you see fit in any forum although I am disappointed that the opportunity for comment has been missed.

As a matter of interest, I note that you didn't see the need to close the other thread when you made your first posting. At the very least I guess it's gratifying to see that poor old Deci is getting help in moderating this forum and keeping us unruly rabble in check.

2.9k · July 3, 2008

Can we change the title of the thread please as it missleading the one opened by the hornet described it better.

1.2k · July 3, 2008

I'm just wondering if the umm "reduced staffing levels" are causing some caches to be approved with being checked as thoroughly as they were in the past?

I did a Multi Cache, which I know Eckington would have pulled up on in the past, and insisted that the waypoints were added as additional Waypoints rather than just in the Cache description.

Not complaining - I'm glad to have caches to find, but I think Deci could do with help sooner rather than later.

And I agree - can this thread be renamed to something more logical?

7.2k · July 3, 2008

I just changed it -- is that a better sub-title?

July 3, 2008

I did a Multi Cache, which I know Eckington would have pulled up on in the past, and insisted that the waypoints were added as additional Waypoints rather than just in the Cache description.

......Yup, but he were a right pernickety old so and so, weren't he

July 3, 2008

I did a Multi Cache, which I know Eckington would have pulled up on in the past, and insisted that the waypoints were added as additional Waypoints rather than just in the Cache description.

......Yup, but he were a right pernickety old so and so, weren't he

Don't I know it.. fancy a beer at Chollerford marra

July 3, 2008

I did a Multi Cache, which I know Eckington would have pulled up on in the past, and insisted that the waypoints were added as additional Waypoints rather than just in the Cache description.

......Yup, but he were a right pernickety old so and so, weren't he

Don't I know it.. fancy a beer at Chollerford marra

If your going to Chollerford.. Can we come to..Sit in the Hotel garden..Many happy memories..I'll be the one watching the river..

Any News ? ?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment