Jump to content

any problems with approvals the past few days?


lostinjersey
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Three-day holiday weekend with good weather. You maybe expected the admins to stay home watching their computers? icon_confused.gif I ranged far and wide and picked up dozens of cache finds, saw some great new areas. I think NJAdmin was seeing new places also. Please be patient, we will be caught up soon, I've spent 8 hours last night and today and am just about there.

 

Don't make me stop this car!

Link to comment

I too was away for the long weekend. The approvers came back to over 1000 new cache submissions! I also had over 100 approval related emails. To make matters worse, GC.com went down last night when I was chipping away at the backlog. One of Gwho's has been approved, the other 2 are waiting for more info.

 

--------------------

bad_boy_a.gif Personal slave of The Frog. bad_boy_a.gif

Link to comment

Is NJADMIN the only approver for the upstate NY area?...as well as the other areas he must cover!

I can imagine how swamped that could make them but I was wondering if those of us that have submitted caches for approval have another recourse when this happens? ....I mean is there another process or person that can be requested to intervene when the primary submitter is too overloaded to provide timely approvals.

What brings this up for me is that I submitted a cache on Oct 11th and here it is 6 days later and still no word about the status of my cache.

I truly am sympathetic to the amazing amount of work that an approver must face but perhaps some of these approval regions need to be narrowed a bit to better serve the GC community.

Regards,

Eltee1

Link to comment

I too submitted my first cache hide on 10/11 and have heard nothing yet. I see that I'm just being a bit impatient.

 

I guess I'm feeling like someone will hide one close to where mine is sitting now and I won't be approved.

 

Ok, I'll go chill now

Link to comment

eltee1 and gunx, you've both submitted multicaches, which take much longer for the approver to review. I know that when things get busy in my approval territory, I will do the easier caches first and tackle the more time-consuming ones later. It's human nature to try and inconvenience as few people as possible.

 

eltee1, to answer your question, yes we do back each other up. I often back up NJAdmin for approvals in New York for areas from Syracuse to the west. That's because I grew up in western NY and have hiked or camped or driven all around it. I also have several dozen cache finds in that region. Unfortunately I know nothing about "downstate."

 

gunx, to respond to your concern, don't worry... if someone else by chance hid a cache nearby the one that you have pending, the approvers follow a first-come, first-served policy. If your submission has a lower number it would be the one to be approved if there were no other issues with it.

 

I do regret the delay and thank you both for your patience.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Keystone Approver:

eltee1 and gunx, you've both submitted multicaches, which take much longer for the approver to review. I know that when things get busy in my approval territory, I will do the easier caches first and tackle the more time-consuming ones later. It's human nature to try and inconvenience as few people as possible.

 

eltee1, to answer your question, yes we do back each other up. I often back up NJAdmin for approvals in New York for areas from Syracuse to the west. That's because I grew up in western NY and have hiked or camped or driven all around it. I also have several dozen cache finds in that region. Unfortunately I know nothing about "downstate."

 

gunx, to respond to your concern, don't worry... if someone else by chance hid a cache nearby the one that you have pending, the approvers follow a first-come, first-served policy. If your submission has a lower number it would be the one to be approved if there were no other issues with it.

 

I do regret the delay and thank you both for your patience.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"


 

Ok, just curious. What would happen if I submitted a multicache during a backlog and someone else hid a traditional the next day, within .1 of the final stage of my multi. The approver comes back from a long weekend and starts with the "easy caches" and approves the traditional, then the next day or so gets to my multi, which was submitted before the traditional, but is now located within .1 mile of an approved cache?

 

(I added the bold to the quoted text)

 

Not holding back icon_biggrin.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by IV_Warrior:

Ok, just curious. What would happen if I submitted a multicache during a backlog and someone else hid a traditional the next day, within .1 of the final stage of my multi. The approver comes back from a long weekend and starts with the "easy caches" and approves the traditional, then the next day or so gets to my multi, which was submitted before the traditional, but is now located within .1 mile of an approved cache?

 

(I added the _bold_ to the quoted text)

 

Not holding back icon_biggrin.gif


The approvers get an enhanced cache search page. We check every cache for other nearby caches, during which time your earlier submitted multi would show nearby, as would any other caches that had been archived or never approved. Seeing a nearby unapproved cache, we would of course check to see which cache was submitted 1st. The rare instance where this might still become a problem is for a multicache spread out over several miles. Even then, don't forget, there is somewhat more bend in the .1 cache density rule for intermediate and final locations.

 

--------------------

bad_boy_a.gif Personal slave of The Frog. bad_boy_a.gif

Link to comment

Approvals are taking longer than normal on LI as well. Sometimes NJ can get them done within 24 hour, sometimes in takes 4 or 5 days. I've just learned to be patient and he gets the job done. I do have one request for GC.com though. I would like to see the 'NEW' symbol stay on the caches a few days longer to accommodate longer approval times. I've had a couple of caches come out without the 'NEW' symbol because of the length of time it took to get approved. Also at some point will you take NYGO up on their offer to become the approver for NY? It seems that the density of caches will continue to increase. I don't have a problem with it taking 3 or 4 days but NJ, or Keystone, do you foresee it getting more difficult for you to take on so much work. And I've said it before, Thank you for doing such a thankless job.

 

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Because now I am Lost.

Link to comment

[icon_smile.gif]I am not realy sure what the big deal is, people complaining about 2,4 or even 5 Days wait, I think that the approvers have spoiled us a lot in the past. I am still waiting on a easy muly that I set out on the 12th and whilst I would like to see it approved rather yesterday than today, I had one cache that I set out days after the multy already approved 2 days ago, that however was a Regular cache.

In any way, the only thing I would like to see is as a previous poster mentioned put the NEW flag on from the time of approval for 7 days and not backdated.

Other than that, Thanks to all the approvers for their work. I hope to everyones benefit that there will be more people addet soon so that there will be less workload.[icon_smile.gif]

 

So Long Eagleflyby

Link to comment

Couldn't you just edit the "date placed" to coincide with the date that your cache is actually approved and is available to finders on the website? Sometimes I do that automatically when an approval takes awhile, as when waiting for a state park permit. If for some reason the date field is not editable by the owner, then I'd be glad to edit it for an owner upon request.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

Link to comment

Yep... the "date placed" field does two things for you:

1. Gives the "NEW!" label for one week next to your cache in a search results list.

2. Ensures that your cache is listed in the Thursday notification e-mail of new caches.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Keystone Approver:

Couldn't you just edit the "date placed" to coincide with the date that your cache is actually approved and is available to finders on the website?


 

Sure; who cares about accuracy?

 

I am, however, shocked that an approver would suggest that someone knowingly falsifies cache information.

 

quote:
the "date placed" field does two things for you:

1. Gives the "NEW!" label for one week next to your cache in a search results list.

2. Ensures that your cache is listed in the Thursday notification e-mail of new caches.


 

Now that you have published this information, it won't be long before some individuals take advantage of this "feature" in order to have the "new" flag always appear on their caches, and so that their caches always appear on the weekly "new cache" e-mail notifications.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by eagleflyby:

Relax Bassoonpilot I know you would do it so much better.


 

You're right. Rather than recommending a work-around that is ripe for abuse and therefore unacceptable, I would identify the problem to the person responsible for the deficient code, and request that they fix it.

 

Having one person fix deficient code seems far more practical than asking everyone (and tempting/challenging a few) to falsify the date on which they hid their caches.

 

The easiest solution would appear to be having the date a cache received approval keyed to the "new" flag and e-mail notification.

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on October 21, 2003 at 05:04 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

 

Rather than recommending a work-around that is ripe for abuse and therefore unacceptable, I would identify the problem to the person responsible for the deficient code, and request that they fix it.


 

#1: i agree with you in principle (amazing!) having it keyed to the date it's approved makes sense and avoid potential abuse, but that brings me to #2: which is...

 

is this really an issue? I mean yeah I thought of the same thing (someone could abuse it over & over) but first off, that'd be real obvious, and second, whats the fricking point? it gains some added attention? woowee. big deal. besides as I said, it would be clear to everyone what was happening. Well clear to most folks anyway.

 

So yeah you're right but I just don't think it's that big an issue. All that said, it probably should be on Jeremy's to do list, however, since there are a multitude of suggestions that are likely on his "to do list" I doubt it will get done soon.

 

is it me or have i sounded real repetitive in this post? Oh well.

Link to comment

Trust me, I'd quickly spot any abusive "date bumping" as I review the list of newest caches daily. A polite note to the eager geocacher who bumps their cache to the top of the list ought to take care of it. Hasn't been a problem, although plenty of folks have taken advantage of the ability to change the date *once* on a new cache, and also very occasionally upon a re-hide, re-placement, etc.

 

The ability to change the date hidden can be useful for the reasons identified in my earlier post.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by J&MBella:

.....

Also at some point will you take NYGO up on their offer to become the approver for NY? It seems that the density of caches will continue to increase. Thank you for doing such a thankless job.

.....


 

I'm still really curious what the thinking is behind limiting the amount of approvers so much. I really think as a minimum that each state should have their own approver if not more. I'd even support an approver per county!

Less workload for approvers means more personal service and faster approvals.

I really haven't heard what the argument is against more approvers????

Thanks and regards,

Eltee1

Link to comment

Things certainly seem slower than in the past but maybe it's due to the solar storm.

 

NJ_Admin has been busy. She's not been responding to emails or submitted caches for the last few days but I'm sure that she's busy with shoe shopping and once the sales end - she'll be back online! icon_wink.gif

 

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Take everything you like seriously, except yourselves. - Rudyard Kipling (1865 - 1936)

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by eltee1:

I really haven't heard what the argument is against more approvers????


 

I think that perhaps, with the approver guidelines being so vaporous, they don't want to bring too many people into the mix. Without written, official, point-to-able guidelines to follow, with an approver per county things could get even more controversial and messy than they already are.

Link to comment

eltee1,

 

I add new approvers to areas on an 'as needed' basis. Right now we are on the tailend of the peak season for geocaching in most areas of the US. Yes, I know people geocache in the snow, but not as many people do so things are slowing down.

 

I do try to avoid adding them too quickly, to ensure as much consistancy as possible. They are added slowly so they have time to ask questions get replies, learn the ropes so they are all consistant with the general approval process.

 

cute.gif hydee cute.gif

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

Link to comment

I guess NJadmin is trying to pick her Halloween costume for next week. I bet it’s something like Queen Elizabeth or Britney Spears.

 

Maybe there’s an admin from another part of the county who’s so bored that they also read the NorthEast forum that could jump in and help out.

 

_________________________________________________________________________

Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own.

Sydney J. Harris

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by HartClimbs:

Bump to solicit a witty comment from NJ_Admin.

 

Hopefully she's around these days......and off the bottle.

 


Too busy archiving.... I mean approving all your caches to be witty. <hic> Sorry.

 

--------------------

bad_boy_a.gif Personal slave of The Frog. bad_boy_a.gif

Link to comment

WoW! Hey NJ, I just realized I've been refering to you as 'he'. Sorry. icon_confused.gif The 1440 minutes have lapsed on all my posts so I can't go back and change it. I would if I could. Feel free to take extra long approving my next cache. icon_wink.gif

 

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Because now I am Lost.

Link to comment

The confusion is understandable, at least until the process is completed. The other approvers have taken to referring to NJAdmin as "s/he" until that last operation takes place. But we won't tell whether it's an addition operation or a subtraction operation.

 

|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|x*x-x|

Keystone Approver, Geocaching.com Admin

"Eschewing Entropy and Ensuring Enthalpy in the Groundspeak Forums"

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 0
×
×
  • Create New...