Jump to content

My Blacklist of Categories


Torgut

Recommended Posts

Years later, a new category added: Equestrian Statues. Declined on account of the picture not being good enough. Why not good enough? Because the statue is in a small park surrounded by trees and there is no space to take a picture from a better distance. So, better not having a statue waymarked  than having it with the best possible photo. Not counting with the disrespect to the waymarker who has the effort of creating it. 

So the picture can be seen, here is the link: 

https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm12A4R_Manuel_Dorrego_Buenos_Aires_Argentina

 

 

After months, a new category was added to my blacklist. This happens when there are officers who don't follow their own categories rules, declining Waymarks which follow them. It was Hostels, as reported here: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=315104&view=findpost&p=5327393&hl=hostels&fromsearch=1

 

Now the case is more serious because it's collective. In the categories Converted Fountain I submitted the following WM:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMPH5K_The_Fish_Porto_Portugal

Now, obviously this fountain was not converted for a different purpose and because of that I double checked the category rules, which say:

 

Description:

Any fountain that once featured running water but is now permanently out of service or converted to another use.

 

Expanded Description:

Any outdoor or indoor fountain that previously had running water but no longer does. If the fountain now has another use, please describe it.

 

As it says there, being "now permanently out of service" is enough. It's the case with my WM. To make things clearer, "If the fountain now has another use, please describe it." If there is an "If" then it's not mandatory that the fountain has now another use.

 

And this are the answer in the poll:

 

[nay] Is it just turned off. Not too converted. [nay] I am sorry, but the fountain has not been converted to anything, it just doesn't work anymore. [nay] Sorry, but this one is just not working and not converted into another use like being a great location for flowers, etc.

 

Do these officers know how to read English or did they bother to read their own category rules? Either way, I already got one in these category and for me is enough. Fortunately I have enough years of Waymarking to prevent me from being globally upset with the game. But it's always disturbing to see that these attitudes - one of the main reasons why Waymarking never got on the right track to success - are still around. Specially when a couple of the most experienced Waymarkers are involved.

Edited by Torgut
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

These are quite a bunch, I just had forgotten how they work... it's basically based on their mood... like "Err... I don't think so". Another set of great ambassadors *NOT* of the game.

 

Grand Openings

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMPG87_Porto_de_Abrigo_da_Culatra_Faro_Portugal

 

Initial vote call comment:Is it okay? Vote comments: [nay] Just add a Paragraph about who inaugurated in the long description. [nay] It's missing some information about who inaugurated in the description and more information about the harbor would be appreciated. Thank you.

Link to comment

I have just one category that I ignore -- so far.

 

It is a category that was made to fill the gap left by an even earlier category based on the material used for something. The new category allowed waymarks of things that had the same information, but without the material requirement.

 

At least that's how it was initially presented.

 

I had two waymarks accepted, and then declined. Now it turns out that they were declined for legitimate reasons -- they could not prove that the information they presented was correct. So why do I ignore the category?

 

Because the decline message went beyond the good reason for denying the waymark and stated something to the effect: besides, this is not of the proper building material expected for this category. In fact, the description of the category during its peer review had not made such a distinction and, indeed, was one of the main reasons that the category was started (to my understanding). But after it had passed peer review the category had been changed to be restricted with respect to material! Which does not make sense to me.

 

So I don't bother with that category. I don't like bait and switch types of games. I may have seen more examples of things that might have made the category description during the time it was in peer review, and maybe even examples of things that might still be allowed into the category. But I don't want to mess with it. Just write off the category. There are plenty of other good categories!

Link to comment

These are quite a bunch, I just had forgotten how they work... it's basically based on their mood... like "Err... I don't think so". Another set of great ambassadors *NOT* of the game.

 

Grand Openings

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMPG87_Porto_de_Abrigo_da_Culatra_Faro_Portugal

 

Initial vote call comment:Is it okay? Vote comments: [nay] Just add a Paragraph about who inaugurated in the long description. [nay] It's missing some information about who inaugurated in the description and more information about the harbor would be appreciated. Thank you.

I don't see a problem with their comments. You did fail to provide any information about the person doing the inauguration as required by the category description. If I were an officer in that category, I'd probably say the same thing they did.

Link to comment

These are quite a bunch, I just had forgotten how they work... it's basically based on their mood... like "Err... I don't think so". Another set of great ambassadors *NOT* of the game.

 

Grand Openings

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMPG87_Porto_de_Abrigo_da_Culatra_Faro_Portugal

 

Initial vote call comment:Is it okay? Vote comments: [nay] Just add a Paragraph about who inaugurated in the long description. [nay] It's missing some information about who inaugurated in the description and more information about the harbor would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

I am an officer in that category and I called the vote. It was not based on my mood.

You can read the category requirements

http://www.Waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=c20834f3-2fde-4be2-9358-7e4f0a678426&exp=True

They were not met and the group members agreed. Sorry that you feel we are "great ambassadors *NOT* of the game". Maybe we should find another way to volunteer our time then.

Link to comment

Ah... it has been sometime....

 

Now, I vaguely remember the troubles with Gates of Distinction category. And now...

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WM11FG7_Seventy_Year_Old_Door_Temple_of_Heaven_Beijing_China

 

Declined with the following note: "Not applicable", followed by a thumbs down emoticon.

 

Honestly, I see no reason for not "being applicable", but more than that, I see no reason for someone to decline without a proper explanation. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Torgut said:

Honestly, I see no reason for not "being applicable", but more than that, I see no reason for someone to decline without a proper explanation. 

 

I can see some reasoning behind "not applicable", but they should definitely explain it to you. 

Just guessing .. story of those door is quite interesting and unique,  worth to visit, however I would not describe them as "appealing to the eye and make you want to stop and take a picture". 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Rikitan said:

 

I can see some reasoning behind "not applicable", but they should definitely explain it to you. 

Just guessing .. story of those door is quite interesting and unique,  worth to visit, however I would not describe them as "appealing to the eye and make you want to stop and take a picture". 


I agree with you but that throw us all into the dangerous spiral of subjectivity. Still, an explanation should be presented. And it's not the first time I have troubles with this category.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

I've had similar experiences in another category. The answer was something like "Just because it is called a xxxxxx memorial, doesn't mean that it is a xxxxxx memorial" and when I asked the officer per private note for an explanation, the answer was .... nothing. :-( Fortunately, I have waymarks in that category already and from now on I pass on taking photos for that category, writing a description in local language plus English, just to have another waymark declined for reasons that only the officer (if at all) understands. :-(

Edited by PISA-caching
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Torgut said:

Ah... it has been sometime....

 

Now, I vaguely remember the troubles with Gates of Distinction category. And now...

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WM11FG7_Seventy_Year_Old_Door_Temple_of_Heaven_Beijing_China

 

Declined with the following note: "Not applicable", followed by a thumbs down emoticon.

 

Honestly, I see no reason for not "being applicable", but more than that, I see no reason for someone to decline without a proper explanation. 

 

It looks like a door, not a gate. Try recategorizing to "Doorways of the World".

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

We have another one....

 

Declined WM:

https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WM11NQJ_Casa_dos_Pombos_Pigeons_So_Joo_dos_Angolares_So_Tom_e_Principe

 

Reason:

Initial vote call comment:This considered an Aviary or birdhouse? Casa=house Vote comments: [nay] Not. [nay] Needs photos of the signage or a website to prove this is an aviary.

 

Category submission conditions:

To successfully have your Aviary listed in this category you will need to provide at least one image of the aviary as well as the coordinates where it is located. Please acquire both of these with your own camera and GPS unit. Use of online resources should be limited to the short and long description fields, and only done with citation. Detailed descriptions of the aviary will enhance the enjoyment for others.

 

Question: 

Does any one reads in the submission conditions something like "Needs photos of the signage or a website to prove this is an aviary" ???

 

Getting tired of this kind of despotism, of conditions created on the fly just because. But then, what can I do besides send the category to my blacklist and wish them bon voyage..... although in this case I will keep looking as I never created a WM in the category.

 

Edited by Torgut
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Alfouine said:

The right category for a birdhouse with pigeons is Dovecotes category, and i will approve it, it is a great great find :antenna:

 

I had it deep in my mind that such a category existed, but still, all I wrote is pertinent. There is no exclusion rule in Aviaries for pigeons and neither this was considered the issue. The issue was something created on the fly, as opposed to something existent in the category's rules.

Link to comment

I may have to add Religious Buildings Multifarious to my list. I have a waymark that was sent to vote. The category guidelines say to have the full church name in the name field. I put it in there. The church sign and web site clearly show that the church name includes "of Oklahoma". The reviewing officer (no name listed) wanted me to remove "of Oklahoma" from the name. But then it wouldn't have the full name! What is it? Use the full name or not. What is there to vote on? Waymark Code: WM11NQ5

Link to comment

OK, now I'm really confused. It got approved and the email of the approval says " Your waymark was voted on by the category managers, here is the list of comments by the various members: Initial vote call comment:I have asked, twice, to have "of Oklahoma" removed from the waymark name, in keeping with the naming tradition of the category. The submitter argues that the full name of the church includes "of Oklahoma". I would like a group decision on this case. Vote comments: [nay] Listing the location of the church in its name is not in keeping with the standard naming practice in this category. "

so, only 1 vote, it's a nay, and it still gets approved?

 

And people wonder why Waymarking doesn't have thousands of players.

Link to comment

Update to add another category to my blacklist although I am aware that problems seem to gravitate around a specific officer, so it's a temporary entry. Hopefully.

 

Today I submitted a waymark to the category Little Free Pantry

 

It came declined with this brilliant, helpful and constructive note:

 

"Does not meet required criteria."

 

And additionally:

 

This waymark has been locked by the category group and can no longer be edited.

 

 

 

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...
×
×
  • Create New...