Jump to content

Why doesn't CO have publishing control?


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

I think cache owners should be able to publish their own caches, after reviewer approval. Who hasn't experienced a reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

What if a CO wants to publish his cache in the middle of the night for an interesting FTF race? Or what if a CO wants to publish his cache at 5:30 pm to give more people a chance for the FTF?

I know you can just communicate with the reviewer to get caches published at preferred times. But why not make it easier and once the reviewer approves the cache, the CO can just choose to publish it whenever he/she wants?

Just an idea. Thanks so much to all the reviewers out there - I know you're freely giving your time for the love of the game.

Edited by Sapper 1-6
Link to comment

I think cache owners should be able to publish their own caches, after review approval. Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning? Takes all the fun out of it.

What if a CO wants to publish his cache in the middle of the night for an interesting FTF race? Or what if a CO wants to publish his cache at 5:30 pm to give more people a chance for the FTF?

I know you can just communicate with the reviewer to get caches published at preferred times. But why not make it easier and once the reviewer approves the cache, the CO can just choose to publish it whenever he/she wants?

 

Well thanks a lot for recognizing the work reviewers do for you so you can enjoy the game. :mad:

Link to comment

If you cannot raise your discussion topic respectfully, don't post.

 

That said:

 

If you give your reviewer advance notice, they are ordinarily happy to accommodate requests to publish caches at specific dates and times. The more caches in the "batch," the more advance notice. (The guidelines say ten days for "large numbers" but many reviewers frequently bend that, especially for cooperative cache owners.) Right now I have more than a dozen caches "on hold" waiting for their publication times.

 

If you want to start an FTF race in the middle of the night, your cache better not be in a cemetery, a park or anyplace else closed at night. I won't publish caches in such locations except in daylight hours. That means lots of caches often get published at once in the early morning.

 

In my opinion, a primary reason why owners are not permitted to publish their own caches after passing review is because of the risk that changes will be made to the text or coordinates. A practical reason is that the entire workings of the website are built around publication by the Community Volunteer Reviewers.

 

Today I published 18 caches including an Easter-themed trail. I left logs on twenty other caches. Just another "lazy" day. I smiled when I thought of the caches I published today, being found by families on a sunny Easter Sunday.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

...But why not make it easier and once the reviewer approves the cache, the CO can just choose to publish it whenever he/she wants?

 

You might have an interesting point here. It is not one I would support but...

 

Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

 

...this is NOT the way to present the idea if you want to be taken seriously. You haven't been around long enough to understand just how hard it can be to be a reviewer.

 

Lazy? :o What do you know about how they do their jobs?

 

Takes all the fun out of it.

 

You are thinking mainly about what you want to have happen rather than looking at the bigger picture and trying to understand how things work.

Link to comment

The OP wasn't polite, but sifting through his comments there is a possibly useful point about blocks of caches published simulataneously. Spreading out the publication times can serve a purpose sometimes.

 

On the other hand, the reviewers have lives and can't spend 16 hours a day catering to special requests.

 

It's too bad the reviewers don't have a "deferred publication" option. Then the reviewer could spend an hour on Saturday morning doing his/her work, but select various publication times for different caches. This way one lucky FTF hound doesn't grab 5 FTFS between 9:30 & 10.

Link to comment

Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

I fail to see how publishing 30 caches on a Sunday morning when a VOLUNTEER Reviewer could be sleeping in or spending time with the kids or in church or training dogs or hiking or biking or even caching deserves to be called "lazy."

 

This Reviewer lazily checked his queues three times on Easter Sunday in between family and other activities.

 

The FTF race isn't officially recognized as part of the game by Groundspeak. Reviewers remain neutral when publishing caches based on their free time to review and publish. It's not their role to mess with the FTF race. Allowing individual cachers to publish their own caches to mess with the FTF race would open things up to all sorts of abuse and cachers getting angry with each other as one cacher "games" another by publishing when s/he knows certain people are at work or otherwise indisposed.

 

I would answer the rest of your questions, but I'm feeling lazy...

Edited by Greatland Reviewer
Link to comment

Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

I fail to see how publishing 30 caches on a Sunday morning when a VOLUNTEER Reviewer could be sleeping in or spending time with the kids or in church or training dogs or hiking or biking or even caching deserves to be called "lazy."

 

I would answer the rest of your questions, but I'm feeling lazy...

See post 7. The OP thinks it makes it more interesting for the community if the whole block of caches isn't published at the same time. He has a point. Now spreading out publication times would require the reviewer to return to the computer throughout the day. That's an unfair request. No reviewer should have to think about this unpaid work all day. The OP rudely calls this lazy - we'll give the benefit of the doubt that he didn't think it through.

 

My solution is for the internal software to enable the reviewer to assign various delayed publication times in the morning and be done with work and also satisfy special requests and avoid the bulk publication problem.

Link to comment

Sapper 1-6:

 

I think you owe the Reviewers an apology!

 

I am hoping that you calling the Reviewer lazy was just an unfortunate choice of words on your part: and if you really feel that way, I suggest you get off your lazy behind, and become a volunteer for anything, and work hard hours without pay and for the benefit of others.

 

This is just my opinion but your message was lost in the arrogance of your grammar. In today’s language this was an epic fail!.

 

Colorado Bear

Jay

W0GBS

Volunteer

Link to comment

Yup. Lazy reviewers. If you call them doing something that happens to be their job, instead of someone else doing it lazy. And don't you say the cache is in place and ready to be found when you submit the cache? If it's not ready to be found why say it is?

 

Quick question; did you try ASKING your reviewer to change to time it gets published?

Link to comment
I think cache owners should be able to publish their own caches, after review approval.

 

As everyone has already jumped on the OP for the way this notion was presented, I'll speak to the actual idea. Seems doable, Jeremy once responded to such a request as possible.

 

I expect it would take a good week to 10 days of lead time from the day of reviewer okay, and likely not result in caches being published as fast as simply asking the reviewer for a particular day. It would have assorted unexpected consequences from the CO side. Listing would have to be locked, for instance. No fiddling about with it...

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

The OP certainly suggests an interesting idea (albeit not very well), but I don't think Groundspeak should spend any time or resources trying to further enable the FTF race.

 

I think the reviewer comment about people attempting to game the system or publish caches after dark in places only open during the day are excellent points.

Link to comment

Every Volunteer who reviews one cache, moderates one hour, or translates one paragraph is giving freely to the game for which they care. They also all have some measure of paying careers, family lives, and a desire to geocache. Calling someone lazy for spending their holiday morning publishing caches so we can all play is unfair. The standard for a first review is within seven days of submission. Most reviewers are doing volunteer work daily with very few days off. Many of us deliver first reviews within three days of submission if not the day after submission. We do this while balancing the remainder of our lives.

Link to comment

I think the "laziness" aspect of the OP's post has been addressed adequately, so I'll just stick to addressing the Community Controlled Publication idea.

 

The process for submitting EC's was updated several years ago, but it used to be the case that Listings were submitted on the GSA website, Reviewed by a single Reviewer, and when approved, the Reviewer would copy/paste the material submitted, to geocaching.com, through the usual process we are all familiar with. Since the Listing was still under the Reviewer's account, they would have to send an Adoption Request to the CO that submitted the Listing on the GSA site, in order to transfer the Listing back to their account. Kind of a crazy process.

 

It astonishes me how many of these Listings I find out there, that were never picked up by the CO, after passing Review on the GSA site. So right off, if history is any indicator, I suspect you'd see a lot more of these languishing Listings that people forget about, and never get Published. In the end, the EC Reviewer ended up Archiving these orphaned Listings, and I suspect the same fate would befall such Listings in which Publication is relied upon by the CO.

Link to comment
Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning? Takes all the fun out of it.

A 6 month old cacher stating a reviewer is lazy who spent Easter morning publishing 30 caches. I wonder how long it took the volunteer to review and publish those 30 submission for the community to find after Easter lunch? Not to mention the time they took to review the submissions that didn't pass the review.

 

I like to find those geocaches that have not been found in months, I guess that's why I lead my territory with FTF's. I collect FTF's for; the hour, day, week, month, quarter, and at times for the year.

Link to comment

OP here. Calling reviewers lazy was definitely a poor word choice. I legitimately am very grateful for all reviewers who give their time freely for the game we love.

I still stick by the main point of my post that I think it would be neat to give COs control of publishing their caches after reviewer approval. The reviewer could determine if the cache is worthy of CO publishing (not in a cemetery, etc).

And to the point that Groundspeak shouldn't encourage the FTF race, why not? In my limited opinion (I have only be caching for a few months), it seems that geocaching offers something for everybody. Some cachers love puzzle caches, some love multis, some love caches that bring you to beautiful natural settings, some love urban caches. What if an avid hiking cacher said that urban caches, or even just LPCs, should not be allowed bc he didn't like that aspect of caching? The reason geocaching is so awesome is bc it offers something for everyone! It seems to me that FTF races, whether Groundspeak wanted this to be the case or not, have become a HUGE part of the game. My suggestion is just one simple suggestion on how to allow those who appreciate this aspect of the game to make it even more enjoyable.

Thanks again to every reviewer out there- without you the game would be Munzee (totally different and in my opinion, dumbed down). Once again it wasn't and isn't my intent to discredit reviewers for their hard work; rather, I'm trying to make their lives easier by adding a new optional CO publishing feature.

Link to comment

"Hey guys, my new caches are at *Coordinates* Let me know when you want to get the FTF... " :rolleyes:

 

That would be no different than today. You forgot the important part... telling your friend WHEN you're going to hit the publish button so that they can be on site when it happens.

Link to comment

"Hey guys, my new caches are at *Coordinates* Let me know when you want to get the FTF... " :rolleyes:

 

That would be no different than today. You forgot the important part... telling your friend WHEN you're going to hit the publish button so that they can be on site when it happens.

 

"Use your cell phone, give me a call when you're on site, I'll publish the cache... "

 

Then the cache can be found -and logged- after Publication.

Link to comment

"Hey guys, my new caches are at *Coordinates* Let me know when you want to get the FTF... " :rolleyes:

 

That would be no different than today. You forgot the important part... telling your friend WHEN you're going to hit the publish button so that they can be on site when it happens.

Agreed that there is no point in having the CO decide publication time. General requests and the block publication problem can be dealt with (as I mentioned before) by enabling the reviewer a deferred publication option (reviewer approves the block of caches in "one sitting," but assigns different publication times and the GS computer does the rest while reviewer relaxes with family).

Link to comment

If anything, I would make a tool for the reviewer to cause a cache to be published at a particular time, like putting it into a scheduler. The cache owner could request a particular date and time of publish if possible (which they can already do today). This would just make it easier for the reviewer to make it happen on that schedule if it is reasonable to do so. I think allowing a cache owner to publish their own cache would lead to abuse of the system, such as friend caches and inappropriate release times.

Link to comment

I also dislike this idea.

 

For what would be useful that a CO could choose when publish? As it was said, only for a FTF race. And it probably would be used for evil, publishing in the moment when a friend could easily made the FTF. Given that such FTF race is not an official part of geocaching (and in my opinions it is very harmful) there is not need to CO to control exactly when a his/her cache is published.

Link to comment
Allowing individual cachers to publish their own caches to mess with the FTF race would open things up to all sorts of abuse and cachers getting angry with each other as one cacher "games" another by publishing when s/he knows certain people are at work or otherwise indisposed.

I believe it.

We became pm just so my other 2/3rds could get notifications.

Night-shifters at the time (out early morning), we received mails from folks saying that a local "ftf master" griped about us ("those @%&*$% noobs...) at events and keep up the good work. :laughing:

That was tame, and he even eventually had just as much fun competing with CJ.

- I could see were it could get ugly if left to us.

Link to comment

There is already a very easy way to spread out publication of new caches so that more people have a chance for the FTF. Don't submit them all at once. I am working on a series of Interstate highway exit caches and have been placing them 2-4 at a time, but waiting until one has been found before submitting another. Most of them have still been FTF by the same family--who don't mind turning around in a restaurant parking lot if the notification happens to come in just as they are about to go to dinner.

Link to comment

This approach works very well. If your local Reviewer publishes predictably once each day, submit your caches on different days. If your local Reviewer publishes predictably twice per day, split your submissions between times of the day. If you local Reviewer publishes randomly, submit your caches over a time period to scratch your itch for control of when your caches get published.

 

If you have caches you want published at a specific time to coincide with an event or other special occasion, let your local Reviewer know ahead of time (several days) and there is a reasonable chance your request can be honored.

 

If your local Reviewer posts a Reviewer Note requesting a change or asking a question, respond to it promptly. Many publishing delays are caused by the Cache Owner.

Edited by Greatland Reviewer
Link to comment
For what would be useful that a CO could choose when publish? As it was said, only for a FTF race.
As has been mentioned, it can be desirable to publish a cache when the location can be legally accessed, to avoid encouraging the FTF crowd to trespass.

 

There are also occasionally in-theme reasons to time the publication of a cache. For example, a pi-themed cache could have been posted on 3/14/15 at 9:26:53.

 

Personally, I think scheduled publication could be useful. Sure, it would be abused by some of the FTF crowd, but putting it under the control of the volunteer reviewers would keep that under control. And if the CO changed anything in the cache description, then the scheduled publication would be unscheduled.

Link to comment

Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

 

Well since you asked. I have never experienced this. Nor have I seen any thing else that would indicate my reviewer is anything but a hard working volunteer.

 

Same here. Never had a problem, and have had several different volunteers review my listings. B)

Link to comment
Who hasn't experienced the lazy reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

 

Strike out the "lazy" part and I can concur with that. Nothing lazy about publishing 30 caches on a Sunday morning.

 

:lol:

 

Seriously, though... I really think the OP has been piled on more than enough for the "lazy" statement, which he also has edited out of his OP and apologized for.

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

Too me it would be a scary thought if they didn't have some control of publishing. There would be so many more violations and caches too close together you wouldn't know which ones they were. Though sometimes I don't always agree with them, I think they do the best job they can with what little information they are given by COs. Plus they do have lives too.

Link to comment

Too me it would be a scary thought if they didn't have some control of publishing. There would be so many more violations and caches too close together you wouldn't know which ones they were. Though sometimes I don't always agree with them, I think they do the best job they can with what little information they are given by COs. Plus they do have lives too.

 

Well, the OP wasn't looking for total control. They just wanted to be able to push the "publish" button after the cache submission was approved by a reviewer. So, the cache would still have to meet all the guidelines, but the CO could decide when it was published rather than rely on a reviewers personal timetable.

 

For those who are worried about some CO using this as a way to ensure FTF's for their friends or publishing caches when it would inconvenient for cachers they don't like, my opinion is "so what". Let them play their silly games. They already do.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

 

This a variation of my suggestion. I suggested that the cache not automatically be published immediately in every case right after the reviewer clicks "approve." I like the random element and the possibility for parameters to be entered as well, as you suggested.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

I think that it sounds like a very reasonable suggestion (especially with the restrictions clause, which would be necessary in some cases) but I'm afraid that I have long given up trying to suggest features. Still, somebody at Groundspeak just may read your idea and have a lightbulb moment. You never know.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

 

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

 

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

 

How would that help FTFers? I see it more as a way to keep FTFers up all night watching their phones.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

 

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

 

And needlessly accuses reviewers of "bias."

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

 

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

 

And needlessly accuses reviewers of "bias."

 

Not really. Says "that COULD arise", not "that DOES arise". Its known as "avoiding all appearance of partiality"

Link to comment

Too me it would be a scary thought if they didn't have some control of publishing. There would be so many more violations and caches too close together you wouldn't know which ones they were. Though sometimes I don't always agree with them, I think they do the best job they can with what little information they are given by COs. Plus they do have lives too.

 

:blink:

 

Why are you talking about something different than the OP's suggestion?

 

Let's read the OP again:

 

 

I think cache owners should be able to publish their own caches, after reviewer approval.

 

Who hasn't experienced a reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

 

What if a CO wants to publish his cache in the middle of the night for an interesting FTF race? Or what if a CO wants to publish his cache at 5:30 pm to give more people a chance for the FTF?

 

I know you can just communicate with the reviewer to get caches published at preferred times.

 

But why not make it easier and once the reviewer approves the cache, the CO can just choose to publish it whenever he/she wants?

 

Just an idea. Thanks so much to all the reviewers out there - I know you're freely giving your time for the love of the game.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Let me throw a dumb idea about this.

In order to be fair for everyone (including all those involved in FTF races), what about a randomly publication system (after reviewer approval, of course)? I mean, when reviewer set a cache as Ok, it enters into a queue to me published at a ranndomly moment in the following ¿24-48? hours. You should be able to add some restrictions as "not to be published between 10PM-8AM", "no to be published on weekends", ... For those special caches that should be published in a give time (How we like to make this as complex as possible) there could be a flag to be published at that specific time (But i guess that should have a strong reason for that).

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise. It shouldn't be hard to implement it.

Too silly idea?

To be honest, yes, too silly. All the time and effort to develop this idea into a workable solution seems like an enormous waste of time and energy on the website, and seriously, we're talking about FTF, which Groundspeak has made abundantly clear they are not going to support.

 

Here's my alternative solution:

 

1. place your cache.

2. Write up your Listing page but leave it Disabled so that it doesn't get sent to the Review Queue and get Published at an *inappropriate* time.

3. Post the coordinates on your local group, org or whatever page, so that locals that want to play your game are welcome to do so.

4. After the FTF gets posted on the local group site, go ahead and submit your Listing for Publication "whenever".

 

There, you have total control of the process now. No need to thank me.

Link to comment

If anything, I would make a tool for the reviewer to cause a cache to be published at a particular time, like putting it into a scheduler. The cache owner could request a particular date and time of publish if possible (which they can already do today). This would just make it easier for the reviewer to make it happen on that schedule if it is reasonable to do so.

 

I would appreciate such a scheduler for reviewers as then it would be possible to publish all those caches where the owner prefers a publishing time in the morning (to avoid FTF hunts at night)

in the morning and not in the late afternoon or evening when the reviewers around here publish more caches. It's not reasonable to require reviewers to do the majority of their work at times not suitable for them. The current system whicb boils down to so much manual work for reviewers discourages the request of special publishing times except for special cases (birthday, event etc). It feels better to not to create extra work to a human being and such things can be easily be done by machines.

Link to comment

I think cache owners should be able to publish their own caches, after reviewer approval. Who hasn't experienced a reviewer who publishes 30 new caches on a Sunday morning?

What if a CO wants to publish his cache in the middle of the night for an interesting FTF race? Or what if a CO wants to publish his cache at 5:30 pm to give more people a chance for the FTF?

I know you can just communicate with the reviewer to get caches published at preferred times. But why not make it easier and once the reviewer approves the cache, the CO can just choose to publish it whenever he/she wants?

Just an idea. Thanks so much to all the reviewers out there - I know you're freely giving your time for the love of the game.

 

My opinion is, whilst this is a reasonable suggestion, it would require some software development and it also makes the process more complex, adding a new state (cache approved but not yet published by owner). How long can a cache stay in such a state?

 

I.e it costs something to do this, it adds complexity, and I don't think is needed.

Link to comment

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise.

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

And needlessly accuses reviewers of "bias."

Based on context, I'm fairly certain "anpefi" was using "bias" in its statistical sense. Many reviewers publish caches in ways that systematically differ from a random distribution across the full 24 hours. In the case of our reviewer, they publish a disproportionate number of caches between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. That might or might not be a bad thing, but it is a bias.

Link to comment

In that way most cache publication should be kind of unpredictable avoiding the bias that human factor could arise.

Does a great job of introducing lots of programming and complexity for the benefit of FTFs.

And needlessly accuses reviewers of "bias."

Based on context, I'm fairly certain "anpefi" was using "bias" in its statistical sense. Many reviewers publish caches in ways that systematically differ from a random distribution across the full 24 hours. In the case of our reviewer, they publish a disproportionate number of caches between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. That might or might not be a bad thing, but it is a bias.

 

That's a nice way to see it, but given that the entire thread started with a complaint about lazy reviewers and is predicated on improving the system for the benefit of people who play a side game, I'm less inclined to be so charitably pedantic with my own interpretation.

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...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...