Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
NW_history_buff

Dedicated Trees Category: Too Limited!

4 posts in this topic

Folks,

 

It came to my attention recently while submitting a number of Dedicated Trees waymarks that this category ONLY allows dedicated trees to individuals. Trees dedicated to a group of people or to a historic event are not allowed. I asked myself why? I sent an e-mail message to the leader of the category and said:

 

I've noticed that the category 'Dedicated Trees' doesn't allow dedications to a group of people or an event. I was curious as to why this restriction and if the category might change the rules to allow these? Personally, I feel that only allowing trees dedicated to specific people severely limits the category and misses out on potential locations that could make great contributions to the Waymarking community.

 

Think about it!

 

What are your thoughts, everyone? If the leader replies back saying 'NO, I'm keeping it the way it is', does that mean we need to create a separate category to include dedicated trees to include what the current category does not allow? Hmm... I don't think so.

 

This brings up another issue entirely and that is the Waymarking community could be in jeopardy of being too redundant and superfluous with added categories where they are not needed. I have run into issues in the past where the category leaders and officers aren't willing to budge on 'expanding their horizons' to allow a better variety of waymarks. For example, the Look-Out Towers category does not allow lookouts that are physically inaccessible to the public (off limits due to structural issues, historical integrity, damage control, etc.). I created a Fire-Lookouts group a couple of years ago to combat this restriction and tried to create a category devoted to Fire Lookouts (current and former) and it was denied (I was new to the community then and didn't submit it to this forum first). I've also run across another category recently where waymarks are restricted to a war event or group and NOT to an individual.

 

The point I want to bring here is this: Category leaders and officers should be willing to accept proposals from other waymarkers to expand their current category guidelines to include new variables. If they don't agree with a category proposal to change/add to their guidelines, then a vote or proposal should be made in this forum to allow the entire Waymarking body to post their votes, comments or suggestions, much like how Peer Review works. Then, the category leader/officers should be willing to accept the majority vote to either include new variables or leave it the way it is. By doing this, the potential for redundant categories is eliminated and in addition, the categories could see a whole new crop of legitimate waymarks come their way.

 

Thoughts? Or am I just blowing a lot of hot air?

0

Share this post


Link to post

When this category was presented there would have been discussion on the forum when matters you raise could or would have been discussed. I've seen changes made following suggestions in the forum. If a proposal gets through Peer Review successfully then we abide by the requirements. By all means write to the category leader as you have but accept the answer one way or the other.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

The point I want to bring here is this: Category leaders and officers should be willing to accept proposals from other waymarkers to expand their current category guidelines to include new variables. If they don't agree with a category proposal to change/add to their guidelines, then a vote or proposal should be made in this forum to allow the entire Waymarking body to post their votes, comments or suggestions, much like how Peer Review works. Then, the category leader/officers should be willing to accept the majority vote to either include new variables or leave it the way it is. By doing this, the potential for redundant categories is eliminated and in addition, the categories could see a whole new crop of legitimate waymarks come their way.

 

Thoughts? Or am I just blowing a lot of hot air?

 

Interesting thoughts, and I certainly sympathize with you to a point. Not all categories are ever discussed in the forums before being submitted to peer review. Sometimes the category management team, AKA officers, will modify a category based on comments made in peer review. Many people will vote and comment in peer review who never post in the forums.

 

Yes, there are some categories that I think would be better if they were changed. This ideas can be shared in the forum or via private message. As long as the discussion is civil and respectful, I think this is healthy. I have made changes to categories I lead based on each of these types of feedback, or we have made them as a management team. And, I have seen other categories modified in this way.

 

So, yes, I do think we should be open to suggestions and ideas. I do, however, think that anything like a second peer review, or other process by which a category leader/team should be forced to make a change would really not be productive and would run counter to the spirit of Waymarking. I suppose that one could also argue that obstinately refusing to adopt changes that seem desired by the majority also goes against the best Waymarking spirit and practice, I think the option of overriding the choices of the individual or small group would be even more deleterious. So, as much as I would like to change some categories, and grit my teeth, I respect the right to set the requirements as the management deems fit.

 

In a case such as dedicated trees, I think your approach of making a suggestion to the team leader is good. But, he may not see it your way, and that's his privilege. I suppose we could have another category for trees dedicated to groups, events, or other occasions other than a single individual. This approach has worked in other case when a category has been too restrictive and the management did not want to broaden the scope of the category.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Some news about this topic? Did leader respond with YES or NO? May we (more waymarkers) send message to him or could we try to made new dedicated trees category? Because I were thinking about this problem too.

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 1