Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
DieCacherGirls

Marathon events worldwide

80 posts in this topic

I agree with Benchmark Blasterz. I think we all understand the concept of Limited Availability categories, we just don't all agree they are a good idea for Waymarking. There are valid concerns about waymarks that can only be visited one day out of the year.

 

Ok, then it was me who misunderstood the concept of peer review. I was under the impression that it should be an objective evaluation of the category, regardless of personal likes or dislikes. IIRC, I read something like "Please keep in mind, we aren't looking for your personal opinion of the category here" somewhere.

 

As I understand now, peer review is rather like a popularity poll that will only let those categories pass that get a "like it" from the vast majority of waymarkers, while less popular topics are a stillborn child right from the start, no matter how well they might be worked out. Of course this is frustrating for those who fruitlessly put a lot of effort into their proposal, but actually I think it's not at all a bad thing. With way beyond 1.000 categories, the systems gets increasingly complex and there sure is some common sense in restricting any new additions to the most popular ones. But I'm getting off topic, these are general thoughts that have little to do with the particular category discussed here.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I hope the discussions continue.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

As I understand now, peer review is rather like a popularity poll that will only let those categories pass that get a "like it" from the vast majority of waymarkers, while less popular topics are a stillborn child right from the start,

 

The forum is a great place to suggest a better way to decide which categories should/shouldn't be part of Waymarking. If you have some ideas to improve the process, by all means start a new thread and make suggestions. Changes are made thru forum discussions. Go for it!

0

Share this post


Link to post

Category failed. :sad:

I'm curious about the process. Is it a 50% +1 vote that decides? Is it more complicated? Considering all the comments about impermanent waymarks, is there any hope in trying again?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Category failed. :sad:

 

Well that's a bummer. I was looking forward to posting and visiting in this category. Were there any non-public comments that would add anything new to the discussion? Probably not.

 

Sorry the category didn't pass. I was hoping it would.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Category failed. :sad:

I'm curious about the process. Is it a 50% +1 vote that decides? Is it more complicated? Considering all the comments about impermanent waymarks, is there any hope in trying again?

 

It is a vote of 67% to pass. The vote excludes abstains thus it is 2/3rd of those who vote yay or nay.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I should have called on caching friends to stack the votes. :unsure:

0

Share this post


Link to post

When I see that happen it automatically get a Nay vote from me even if I like the category.

0

Share this post


Link to post

When I see that happen it automatically get a Nay vote from me even if I like the category.

 

You are not the only one, BruceS -- I have seen that comment several times in peer review, where experienced waymarkers check the WM stats and profiles of voters and call out vote-rigging by buddies.

 

Marathon category owners: don't be bitter! Please recognize that waymarks that can only be visited during a few hours on one day a year have legitimate issues for the WM community -- and I say that as someone who can easily WM the Rock and Roll Dallas half marathon and the San Antonio marathon. So for me, I can fill in the box on the grid, but what about those who wanted to visit? R&R Dallas started at 0730 and was over by noon. A short window of opportunity to visit.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Dear Waymarkers,

 

we are very disappointed that our category proposal has failed. The reason for our frustration is much less the 'failed' decision but rather the following facts:

 

1. Before we proposed our category we checked if there is a suitable category group available on the Waymarking platform. And there is such a category group which is called "Limited Availability". Wouldn't have been a suitable category group available we never would have proposed our category. Therefore we really don't understand all the 'deny' comments which are dealing with the limited availability character of our category.

 

2. As already mentioned it is always good and valuable to get feedback from experts also during the peer review phase. But unfortunately a lot of 'deny' comments were only subjective arguments and not related to the four objective review criteria.

 

3. The peer review as it is performed now is more like a 'Like' and 'Dislike' voting as it is in Facebook. That's not what we have expected from a peer review.

 

What did we learn?

 

1. Do not spend a lot of time and passion in preparing a category proposal because the review result is more based on luck and not on well elaborated category proposals.

 

2. Do not expect to have a peer review which is really focusing on the four objective review criteria.

 

3. Categories like McDonald's Restaurants are more interesting than categories which are focusing on sports and nature. But ok, that is how it is.

 

We hope that there would be a better way to decide which categories should/shouldn't be part of the Waymarking platform in the future.

 

Wa want to say a big Thank You especially to all those supporting us during this review process by mail and in this forum.

 

Happy Easter,

 

the Cacher Girls Britta and Renate

Edited by DieCacherGirls
0

Share this post


Link to post

3. Categories like McDonald's Restaurants are more interesting than categories which are focusing on sports and nature. But ok, that is how it is.

 

I can tell you that this particular statement couldn't be more wrong. I know you're upset, but if McDonald's was submitted as a category today, it wouldn't stand a chance of passing. People's opinions of certain categories have changed over time and it appears that many people's opinion of Limited Availability categories has also changed.

0

Share this post


Link to post

... People's opinions of certain categories have changed over time and it appears that many people's opinion of Limited Availability categories has also changed.

 

If many people's opinion of Limited Availability categories has changend, wouldn't it make more sense not to allow submitting new proposals of them. The procedure could be similar as known from the Grandfathered Cache types. This would be better in any case instead of raising hope to have a chance to add a new category in this group.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I can understand your disappointment in having your category denied. Limited availability categories have never been hugely popular as seen by the few categories in that grouping, most dating to the early days of Waymarking of 2006 and 2007. If you try to visit or create waymarks in that grouping you will understand the frustration that many have with these types of categories. That said, if there was one that I thought might have a chance was yours as it was well written and the number of events is well established.

 

We don't grandfather any type/group of categories as these groups are only for organization purposes. When most of these limited availability categories were created there was not a Limited Availability group, when 4 or 5 of this type of category were created it was decided to group them together under a heading Limited Availability.

 

Coming from a running family I will still attend a few marathons a year, I let them run and I Waymark what the city has to offer.

0

Share this post


Link to post

3. Categories like McDonald's Restaurants are more interesting than categories which are focusing on sports and nature. But ok, that is how it is.

 

I can tell you that this particular statement couldn't be more wrong. I know you're upset, but if McDonald's was submitted as a category today, it wouldn't stand a chance of passing.

 

... People's opinions of certain categories have changed over time and it appears that many people's opinion of Limited Availability categories has also changed.

 

If many people's opinion of Limited Availability categories has changend, wouldn't it make more sense not to allow submitting new proposals of them. The procedure could be similar as known from the Grandfathered Cache types. This would be better in any case instead of raising hope to have a chance to add a new category in this group.

 

Die Cacher Girls & Marathon category officers:

 

It is clear that you are enthusiastic about WM -- so enthusiastic that you wanted to create a WM category for one of your other loves: running. This is a GOOD THING!! :)

 

It is also clear that you put a LOT of time into writing your category, and vetting it in the forum. Again, this is a GOOD THING!! :)

 

You submitted your proposal to Peer Review and it got voted down. We know you feel like that is a BAD THING :( , but the community has spoken, and that is a GOOD THING. :)

 

An active and involved community means WM will continue to grow and change -- ANOTHER GOOD THING! :)

 

It looks to us like you have been so enthusiastic about creating and presenting your category that you missed that the culture of WM and of waymarkers has changed over the years. This is a very understandable miss for newbies (and we count ourselves in that category still.)

 

You saw that there are several categories for things like Fairs and Holiday displays that can only be visited a few times a year. And therefore you came to a very logical conclusion that your category would fit in perfectly with those other Limited Availability Categories, and would most likely be approved. So you got busy and created a category.

 

BUT, what you missed was that the WM community has evolved and moved on from the days when Limited Availability categories were acceptable to the community.

 

The WM community has also moved on from accepting WM categories of every fast-food chain in operation anywhere -- every McDonald's, Pizza Hut, Domino's, Sonic, Arby's KFC etc etc etc fast food place ad infinitum and ad nauseum has a category.

 

As other WMers more experienced than I have pointed out, if you try getting a ubiquitous Fast Food chain category passed today, it's not gonna happen -- and that's a GOOD THING too (in our view). :) Try to get a ubiquitous Fast Food chain category passed in 2007, and it'd probably be approved by an overwhelming margin.

 

Our sense is that Church denominations are getting there -- the trend on that is evolving, but we are starting to see comments in peer review that putting every denomination in its own category is like putting every Fast Food place in its own category. At some point, the community will say, "enough."

 

We alsohave the impression that the community has said "enough" on Limited Availability and Fast Food categories. They said that in Peer Review on your excellently written and well-thought out category proposal, and they have said it here on the forums about Fast Food.

 

To base assumptions about where a growing, evolving community is on snapshots of its past ALONE ignores the effects of change - and change is a constant. WM has changed -- and we think for the better.

 

The WM category grid is a SNAPSHOT of where WM had been and is becoming through time. As you move through the grid, you see the change in what categories the WM community has decided are acceptable. From high to low on the grid, you can see this shift. Then: McDonald's. Now: Time Balls. We have moved as a hobby from the WM the common and ubiquitous to having to search out the truly special -- again, that's a GOOD THING! :)

 

If you look at my country's past, and make assumptions about it now BASED SOLELY ON HISTORICAL SNAPSHOTS, you could come to the eminently logical conclusion that in the US it is acceptable to deny humans the right to vote based on the color of their skin or the number of X chromosomes they have. But if you look at where the country is TODAY -- what forces of change are operating here TODAY -- you have a (hopefully) better view of us. This country has shifted dramatically in 100 years -- and even in the last 2-3 years on some important personal freedom issues -- which is ALSO a GOOD thing :)

 

Similarly -- if you look at where WM WAS at the start, Limited Availability and Fast-food categories were OK. That's proved on the grid.

 

If you look at where WM IS NOW (and where it is going) -- Limited Availability and Fast-food categories are NOT OK. That's proved in the comments your category got in Peer Review. This sense of where the community is now is slowly shaping the new look of the grid.

 

But we also agree with BruceS about keeping the old categories and not shutting them down. Submissions are and should be still accepted there -- this is the judgement of the community. But the community has had enough of some of those old category types, and so we predict that fewer and fewer WMs will be added there in the coming months and years.

 

Accept that WM is changing and becoming a global scavenger hunt for the very cool, truly historic, or extremely interesting or artistic things around us, that anyone can seek out and visit any time. ENJOY this evolving world of Waymarking, and keep having fun! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

And, as we encouraged you before: Don't be bitter! :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for that encouragement.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for that encouragement.

 

It really was meant in the spirit of friendliness and respect for your efforts on the Marathon category. :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

@Benchmark, I agree with your comments. Not every category is approved, usually for valid reasons. That is the nature of democracy. I did not vote in the Marathon vote, busy busy busy boy. I can suggest that the people involved take a look at the comments made, think about a re-write and a re-submit—or not.

 

The nature of Waymarking has changed, and I believe for the better. New categories must be bear a measure of uniqueness (or as you put it: "very cool, truly historic, or extremely interesting or artistic things"). This, to me, is good.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Dear Benchmark Blasterz,

 

this is not about being miffed or about democracy lessons. The running idea is gone and we are fine with.

 

Again - this is about the mechanisms of peer review in general. Currently peer review is an open like/disklike voting loosly coupled to some criteria, but mainly subjective. If there are important criteria e.g. "category concept is old fashioned" or "Waymarking community does not support this concept" please write them down. The more accurate your rules are the more transparency new waymarkers will have. "Hidden rules" are not helpful at all.

 

You - the official Waymarking community - may take this as a chance to discuss the peer review rules again (and maybe renew or write down in more detail).

 

Regards, Britta

0

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I just missed this vote/discussion. I attended a road race earlier this month, which claims to be the oldest road race in North America (http://www.aroundthebayroadrace.com/). I thought it would be a excellent waymark but couldn't find a category to put it in. I thought that for sure a category for annual running events would be okay since there are already categories for other annual events.

I'm new to Waymarking, and the fact that every lame McDonalds location and even auto wreckers can be waymarked but something more interesting such as this historic road race can't be helps me understand why 99.5% of geocachers can't be bothered with Waymarking (okay, I made up that figure but I'm sure it must be close).

Hope it can be revamped and resubmitted, I think it's a worth-while category. and I can say that for less than 20% of the currently available categories. That of course is just my personal opinion.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Bon Echo's comments confirmed why we tried. However, the Waymarking community has spoken. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post

Dear Benchmark Blasterz,

 

this is not about being miffed or about democracy lessons. The running idea is gone and we are fine with.

 

Again - this is about the mechanisms of peer review in general. Currently peer review is an open like/disklike voting loosly coupled to some criteria, but mainly subjective. If there are important criteria e.g. "category concept is old fashioned" or "Waymarking community does not support this concept" please write them down. The more accurate your rules are the more transparency new waymarkers will have. "Hidden rules" are not helpful at all.

 

You - the official Waymarking community - may take this as a chance to discuss the peer review rules again (and maybe renew or write down in more detail).

 

Regards, Britta

 

You are part of the Waymarking Community, so go to the forum thread titled "peer review" and make suggestions for improvement to the peer review process.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Dear Benchmark Blasterz,

 

this is not about being miffed or about democracy lessons. The running idea is gone and we are fine with.

 

Again - this is about the mechanisms of peer review in general. Currently peer review is an open like/disklike voting loosly coupled to some criteria, but mainly subjective. If there are important criteria e.g. "category concept is old fashioned" or "Waymarking community does not support this concept" please write them down. The more accurate your rules are the more transparency new waymarkers will have. "Hidden rules" are not helpful at all.

 

You - the official Waymarking community - may take this as a chance to discuss the peer review rules again (and maybe renew or write down in more detail).

 

Regards, Britta

 

You are part of the Waymarking Community, so go to the forum thread titled "peer review" and make suggestions for improvement to the peer review process.

 

Agree 100% -- let's have the discussion :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

OK, we posted our suggestions for improving the peer review process in the other thread.

 

Regards, Britta for the CacherGirls

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

By the way many review comments mentioned the limited availability as a reason for denial. But this kind of categories (e.g. fairs, festivals and shows etc.) is already established and was not invented by us.

 

We also read that we should have discussed the idea in the forum before putting it to peer review. If you look at the start of this thread the discussion started alreday in January and we adopted all suggestions we got. We put the whole category draft text into the forum.

 

 

DieCacherGirls,

During the forum discussion it WAS pointed out that not everyone approves of "limited availability categories", so those comments in peer review shouldn't have been a surprise.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

By the way many review comments mentioned the limited availability as a reason for denial. But this kind of categories (e.g. fairs, festivals and shows etc.) is already established and was not invented by us.

 

We also read that we should have discussed the idea in the forum before putting it to peer review. If you look at the start of this thread the discussion started alreday in January and we adopted all suggestions we got. We put the whole category draft text into the forum.

 

 

DieCacherGirls,

During the forum discussion it WAS pointed out that not everyone approves of "limited availability categories", so those comments in peer review shouldn't have been a surprise.

 

It's true that there were vague hints in that direction, but I don't recall it was ever pointed out to be a serious problem.

And BTW: I wasn't surprised by the comments. What did surprise me was that they were accompanied by a Nay rather than Abstain. But that was when I, just like the creators of the category, still misunderstood the general concept, and of course I'm wiser now.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

By the way many review comments mentioned the limited availability as a reason for denial. But this kind of categories (e.g. fairs, festivals and shows etc.) is already established and was not invented by us.

 

We also read that we should have discussed the idea in the forum before putting it to peer review. If you look at the start of this thread the discussion started alreday in January and we adopted all suggestions we got. We put the whole category draft text into the forum.

 

 

DieCacherGirls,

During the forum discussion it WAS pointed out that not everyone approves of "limited availability categories", so those comments in peer review shouldn't have been a surprise.

 

It's true that there were vague hints in that direction, but I don't recall it was ever pointed out to be a serious problem.

And BTW: I wasn't surprised by the comments. What did surprise me was that they were accompanied by a Nay rather than Abstain. But that was when I, just like the creators of the category, still misunderstood the general concept, and of course I'm wiser now.

Some have voted Nay, some abstained; some regulars even expressed their reservations regarding 'limited availability' and still voted Yea.

 

The simple truth is, nobody could know what the result was going to be. There is no formal agreement on what is a good category type. It is still allowed to propose a national chain store category, we can predict that this could easily hit the 90% Nay mark and try to convince the officers to give up a hopeless try. But this one was not foreseeable, because none of them was on vote for a long time; I cannot remember any in the last years. There were simply no data available to to make an educated guess.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Ditto what fi67 said. If we KNEW that a limited availability category like yours was going to fail, we would have told you. As you can tell from the forum discussion, many of those who participated (including me) thought the category would pass.

You can never predict who will show up to vote in peer review and many of them have never participated in forum discussions.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Ditto what fi67 said. If we KNEW that a limited availability category like yours was going to fail, we would have told you. As you can tell from the forum discussion, many of those who participated (including me) thought the category would pass.

You can never predict who will show up to vote in peer review and many of them have never participated in forum discussions.

 

Yes, I understand that. I think that (and of course the reply by fi67) is a well-written conclusion.

0

Share this post


Link to post

WHAT???????!?!?!?!?!?!? Can you imagine if this category had come to fruition and a waymarker was at the finish line at the Boston Marathon when the bomb exploded????!?!?!?!? SAD!!!!!!! Reports of people missing limbs is on the news!!!!! WOW. This world is SICK.

 

All thoughts and prayers for those victims of this act of terror.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3