Danish Benchmark Peer Review

[+Tharandter]

I'm a bit confused about Danish Benchmarks Peer Review. Why does this category gets so many "yea" votes?

This topic already exists in 'European Historic Survey Stones, Monuments and Benchmarks' or am I wrong?

 

I can remember on 'Fire Lookouts', this category was denied for the same reason. So why accepting this one, I do not understand!

Do we need hundreds of these "Benchmark and Trigpoint" categories?

 

Sometimes it is look like a dice game whether a category passes through or not.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Tharandter

[+elyob]

Does the waymark category European Historic Survey Stones, Monuments and Benchmarks include modern benchmarks from the twenty-first and late twentieth century? At a glace, I see no modern examples.

[+Tharandter]

Hmm. I'm not sure but do we need a category for each country? That bores me!

Besides, the leader and some people which have voted in peer review did have a zero Waymark-statistic!

After this course such a category is pushed through out of nothing and afterwards nobody cares about it.

 

Many people invested a lot of time and trouble to write a really good category description that were rejected because of senseless things and such a quick and dirty writing like this passes through?! So sometimes the community is like a big mystery for me!

Edited January 11, 2013 by Tharandter

[+fi67]

I know this is confusing; this cannot be understood without a bit of history of Waymarking.

 

Long ago, before there were things like groups or peer review, some sectors within Waymarking started as local categories. Examples are historic markers or benchmarks/trigpoints.

 

Currently we have the global criterium as one of four explicit ones. This is going to prevent new arbitrarily limited categories. But for the type of category where we have a large amount of regional and national segments, the precedent is stronger.

 

Another point is the fact that national trigpoint categories have helped a lot to spread Waymarking. It is like a connection to the much larger geocaching community. The Czech Republic would never have become the fourth most active Waymarking nation without their local trigpoint category. Let's hope this is also going to work in Denmark (and South Africa).

 

Personally, I am not much inerested in those types of categories, but considered the before mentioned points, I am willing to give it a try.

[+Max and 99]

Remember.... you are only seeing votes/comments from waymarkers who CHOOSE to let others see their vote/comments. Anonymous votes/comments are not shown.

[+silverquill]

Hmm. I'm not sure but do we need a category for each country? That bores me!

Besides, the leader and some people which have voted in peer review did have a zero Waymark-statistic!

After this course such a category is pushed through out of nothing and afterwards nobody cares about it.

 

Many people invested a lot of time and trouble to write a really good category description that were rejected because of senseless things and such a quick and dirty writing like this passes through?! So sometimes the community is like a big mystery for me!

 

There are categories that bore me too! So what?

That's why we have 1055 categories. Choose what you like and leave the rest for those who enjoy them.

 

As someone else has pointed out, you need to understand the history of Waymarking.com U.S. Benchmarks was one of the earliest categories and it is now the second largest category that we have. Gradually categories were added for other countries--benchmarks, trig points, etc. At least 10 countries already have such categories. I think it is a reasonable focus.

 

Historic sites are in a similar situation. When Waymarking.com launched, Pennsylvania Historic Markers was one of the original categories. Eventually separate categories were added for each of the 50 U.S. states and for many countries. Again, this seems to be a logical approach in order to keep the focus clear.

 

Count the number of categories that are limited to one country or geographic region! I did that once, and I think it was close to 1/3.

 

Personally, I think that the "Global" criterion needs to be rewritten to reflect this reality. While truly global categories are great, there is also a legitimate place for regional categories. I think the intent of the "global" criterion is to eliminate ARBITRARILY limited categories, such as "French Art Museums," or really small, local categories such as, "New York City Subway Stations." Some categories are best when confined to a region either because of the large number, or because they are distinctive from one country or region to another. Benchmarks and trig points, or historic markers, seem to me to fall into that class.

 

In regard to peer review: Yes, there are a lot of people voting who are NOT active waymarkers. I DO view this as a problem, and I've posted about this issue before. ANYONE with a Groundspeak membership can vote. I've seen categories in peer review where a third of those voting had ZERO waymarks.

 

The writing on the Denmark category is poor, but that can be edited.

[+duejensen]

As leader of the group behind the Danish Benchmark category I will like to comment here.

 

First of all, I were not expecting that kind of responses. The situation completely was a surprise for me.

 

This is obviously my first experience in establishing a new category, and I were not aware of the steps and the pitfalls.

My idea was to make a quick and dirty sketch of the category, and so I did.

That was sent to officer review very quickly and we were too eager of getting the category running, to do a real internal review. We focused on getting the category up and running more than actually writing a good description.

My idea has been from the first draft to have the category accepted and through peer review, and then we can concentrate on writing a good description.

I now learn this isn't the right way to do it, but that was how it was done.

I still hope this category will pass peer review, and afterwards we will certainly do adjustments of the description, if technical possible prior to making it visible. It was never meant to be the final version.

 

A few comments on other issues:

 

The missing "global" aspect.

I was from start aware of this globality issue. However since several other regional subcategories of the benchmarklike waymarks already exist, we think the missing global aspect is acceptable. Such a local category could hopefully increase the awareness of Waymarking in Denmark, which is one of the reasons for creating this category.

 

Leader and officers have no experience.

Well, as to creation of new categories, that is correct. We have never tried this before.

I have been officer in the group Coin Operated Rides for Children for around two years, and have experiences In reviewing of waymarks. I suppose all persons doing a new category have made the first without having experiences. I have personally not been visiting or posting more than only very few waymarks. However as I posted my first waymark in 2007 I have been studying Waymarking in some years, though not much real practical experience. The number of waymarks in Denmark is not very high; the awareness of Waymarking in Denmark is very low, compared to number of active geocachers.

Anyway despite of the low statistics, I don't consider my self as a newbie.

 

Description is poorly written.

I agree, it was done more or less as a copy/translation of the description from the "German trigonometric points" category. My thought was, if the German description could be accepted, then our Danish description should be acceptable too.

 

A lot of votes from inactive

Correct, we have be advertising in different Danish geocaching groups. One of the rationales for this (and for the category itself) is to try to make Waymarking more visible and known in Denmark. Just the fact that we have asked danish geocachers to vote, have already given a bigger attention to Waymarking.

 

No discussion in Forum

I do not see any text telling that a discussion in Forum have I to be made before creating a new category. In this case again I see lots of parallel categories. E.g I was not expecting any problems.

 

Finally I will repeat the fact that I am fully aware that the description needs a lot of adjustments. It has from the beginning been my idea to improve it. If we pass the peer review, I intend to make adjustments before activation.

 

As the description need to be related to local/danish aspects we need Danes to be (major) part of the team, but I would appreciate if any of you experienced guys will join us in adjusting the description.

 

Hope this comments will bring some understanding to the situation.

[+duejensen]

Just a quick info.

The category did pass peer review, and is now active. Description has been improved as promised.

[+silverquill]

Congratulations!

 

Your explanations are well-taken.

 

I applaud your attempts to increase the awareness of Waymarking in your country. I think working on benchmarks is a great way to do this. As I've said, many countries have categories for their benchmarks, so it is a good addition to the Waymarking.com site.

 

We are sometimes just too quick with our criticism, and too slow to offer help and encourage.

 

I think we need to improve our instructions for new category creation, because there are obviously some gaps.

 

I wish you and your friends well, and look forward to more waymarks from Denmark!

[+elyob]

The benchmarks have already increased traffic to other waymark categories in Denmark.

[+Ianatlarge]

A bit late to the discussion, but... 1st, congrats on passing peer review. 2nd, I voted yay for your category, even though I was aware of a few issues, mentioned here. My thinking is, unless the category is woefully bad, give it a chance. If 1,001 waymarkers in the Kingdom of the Danes flood the category with tens of thousands of waymarks then success, but, if it proves unpopular it will fade away.

 

I do believe that at some time in the future we should look at the categories, and category divisions, and generally tidy things up.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

I'm a bit confused about Danish Benchmarks Peer Review. Why does this category gets so many "yea" votes?

This topic already exists in 'European Historic Survey Stones, Monuments and Benchmarks' or am I wrong?

 

I can remember on 'Fire Lookouts', this category was denied for the same reason. So why accepting this one, I do not understand!

Do we need hundreds of these "Benchmark and Trigpoint" categories?

 

Sometimes it is look like a dice game whether a category passes through or not.

 

What I have learned as a former elected official is that if you ask people to vote on a proposition, they will almost always vote YES, no matter the question. This is why bond election ballot items and proposed constitutional amendments are written the way they are, and why "Vote NO" campaigns are always so strident and vehement. There is a natural human social tendency to agree, and opponents of ballot measures know this.

 

That having been said, I voted for the Danish benchmarks category because -- that's how we got started in all this!! LOL

Edited January 18, 2013 by Benchmark Blasterz