Approving One's Own Waymarks...

[+NW_history_buff]

I recently noticed a category (Newsstands / Newsagencies) where the leader, saopaulo1, has been approving his own waymark submissions. I know from experience that this practice is HIGHLY discouraged in the Waymarking community. One good reason for this is there is no one else to police your submissions -- incorrect coordinates or misspellings might go unnoticed. Such was the case in one particular waymark from saopaulo1 where I caught major misspellings in the waymark title.

 

If you are an officer or leader of a category and have other inactive officers, the BEST way to keep from approving your own waymarks is to promote other active officers to assist in approvals. This will make the Waymarking experience more 'kosher'.

 

Just my two cents.

 

[+elyob]

While this is something I would never do, I suspect it happens plenty in some categories. Can any category officer promote a regular member?

[+iconions]

I always like to have a second set of eyes on my waymarks, especially since I don't type with the greatest of efficiency. (Funny, I'm usually really good catch OTHER people's typos, my own, not so much!)

Also, in the case that happened yesterday, I was able to get a lesson in HTML from the second officer, which I wouldn't have gotten if I had approved my own waymark. There are definite benefits to waiting to have someone else approve your waymarks.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

I recently noticed a category (Newsstands / Newsagencies) where (an officer --BMB) has been approving his own waymark submissions. I know from experience that this practice is HIGHLY discouraged in the Waymarking community. One good reason for this is there is no one else to police your submissions -- incorrect coordinates or misspellings might go unnoticed. Such was the case in one particular waymark from (the officer - BMB) where I caught major misspellings in the waymark title.

 

If you are an officer or leader of a category and have other inactive officers, the BEST way to keep from approving your own waymarks is to promote other active officers to assist in approvals. This will make the Waymarking experience more 'kosher'.

 

Just my two cents.

 

 

Did anyone reach out to the waymarker who is the subject of this post and ask if he needed any assistance before starting this thread naming and expressing disapproval of him? Maybe there is a reason for his action.

Edited March 30, 2017 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+MountainWoods]

Did anyone reach out to the waymarker who is the subject of this post and ask if he needed any assistance before starting this thread naming and expressing disapproval of him? Maybe there is a reason for his action.

Hear! Hear!

 

I agree with the premise that one should be discouraged from approving their own waymarks. But it definitely would have been better to talk to the person in question (they're not just a Waymark handle, ya' know) before posting it in the forums.

[+Manville Possum]

Did anyone reach out to the waymarker who is the subject of this post and ask if he needed any assistance before starting this thread naming and expressing disapproval of him? Maybe there is a reason for his action.

 

Waymarking has taken an ugly turn recently with these threads calling out other members. I was upset when the thread about me not approving a WM was posted.

 

It's common that we visit our own WM's, and I have no issues with a fellow Waymarker approving their own. Most likely it's because of inactive officers in the category.

[+Manville Possum]

Such was the case in one particular waymark from saopaulo1 where I caught major misspellings in the waymark title.

 

You can edit the WM.

[+BruceS]

I personally don't approve my own waymarks but there is no rule written or unwritten against approving your own waymarks. I do request officers in categories I lead not to approve their own waymarks as more of a best practice.

[+elyob]

If the waymarks in the yet-to-be-reviewed queue belong to me, what kind of assistance do I offer the one-officer category, aside from volunteering to be an officer in that category in order to review my own waymarks?

Edited March 30, 2017 by elyob

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

If the waymarks in the yet-to-be-reviewed queue belong to me, what kind of assistance do I offer the one-officer category, aside from volunteering to be an officer in that category in order to review my own waymarks?

 

Maybe the one officer gets the hint and reviews your waymarks, OR he refuses your offer, at which point you can escalate to Groundspeak that this category needs new blood.

[+Manville Possum]

Maybe the one officer gets the hint and reviews your waymarks, OR he refuses your offer, at which point you can escalate to Groundspeak that this category needs new blood.

 

Are we talking about Groundspeak hijacking stagnated categories and appointing new officers again? That still brings us back to reviewing our own WM's.

 

I still disagree with anyone other than the category leader appointing new officers.

 

Pretending that one can't review their own WM is not "kosher" when it is workable solution in a stagnated category.

[+ripraff]

I have never approved my own waymark. I appreciate corrections. I have trouble remembering all the bizarre little rules some categories have. I did have my first case of disputed waymark where I thought I wish I were an officer so I could approve it!

[+Manville Possum]

I have never approved my own waymark. I appreciate corrections. I have trouble remembering all the bizarre little rules some categories have. I did have my first case of disputed waymark where I thought I wish I were an officer so I could approve it!

 

Well, that would be more of abuse of the system than limping along on a broken chain of command where an active officer in the category could approve their own WM as opposed to contacting the site sdmin here to approve it. Even as broken as Waymarking is, it is still useable. Groundspeak will never put more into this site or Wherigo, and I enjoy both.

 

From The Waymarking.com FAQ (frequently asked questions)

Everything you've wanted to know about Waymarking.

 

"How does a Group settle disputes?

 

In some situations you will encounter issues that require an Officer vote. These situations include demoting an Officer, dismissing a Member, and agreeing upon a new category before sending it to Peer Review. All this dismissing and demoting may seem a bit dire, but we need to account for unruly Group Members and rogue Leaders accidentally invading the ranks. Probably most Groups will not ever have use for these tools, but they're there if you need them."

[+Manville Possum]

This will make the Waymarking experience more 'kosher'.

 

And you called the vote my WM

 

"Initial vote call comment:No sign or anything to prove what this sculpture is about. Can't prove that this is a firefighter memorial. Thoughts?"

 

Now I know why you need help approving your own WM's.

[+Torgut]

I did this a couple of times before, but it's not my standard policy and I see no problem that someone does it. Ultimately he is in charge, he has the credentials. If the submitted WM it's his or someone's else, doesn't sound relevant to me.

[+PISA-caching]

 

Waymarking has taken an ugly turn recently with these threads calling out other members. I was upset when the thread about me not approving a WM was posted.

 

It's common that we visit our own WM's, and I have no issues with a fellow Waymarker approving their own. Most likely it's because of inactive officers in the category.

 

I think part of the problem is, that there is no easy way to communicate with a group of officers. I wish there was a "Send message to the Group" button somewhere. Many times I sent messages to an officer and after a while even to the leader, and many times I didn't get any answer at all. If you say that "calling out other members" is ugly, then I say "ignoring other members" is ugly too. And just to avoid misunderstandings: I'm not saying that YOU were ignoring other members, but it was once a reason for me to ask a question in the forums with the result that I was "attacked" for doing that.

 

Another part of the Problem: We are all different people living in different cultures. In one culture you're supposed to talk about "A person/reviewer/waymarker" and describe what he/she did and in other cultures (like mine) it is common to be more specific. If you think (or know) that someone did something wrong, why not be specific?

[+PISA-caching]

I did this a couple of times before, but it's not my standard policy and I see no problem that someone does it. Ultimately he is in charge, he has the credentials. If the submitted WM it's his or someone's else, doesn't sound relevant to me.

 

I agree on that. Over the years I have often seen problems with waymarks, from typos and bad coordinates to exact copies of a waymark of the same user in the same category. But as far as I can remember they were all not reviewed by the owner. So, nobody is perfect and reviewing your own waymark isn't automatically producing bad quality waymarks.

 

PS: I would never review my own waymarks, because I know that 4 eyes are always better than 2.

[+Manville Possum]

 

I think part of the problem is, that there is no easy way to communicate with a group of officers. I wish there was a "Send message to the Group" button somewhere. Many times I sent messages to an officer and after a while even to the leader, and many times I didn't get any answer at all. If you say that "calling out other members" is ugly, then I say "ignoring other members" is ugly too. And just to avoid misunderstandings: I'm not saying that YOU were ignoring other members, but it was once a reason for me to ask a question in the forums with the result that I was "attacked" for doing that.

 

Another part of the Problem: We are all different people living in different cultures. In one culture you're supposed to talk about "A person/reviewer/waymarker" and describe what he/she did and in other cultures (like mine) it is common to be more specific. If you think (or know) that someone did something wrong, why not be specific?

 

Looks like I have made the ignore list with a few of my new WM's in review, and it's a real problem when a few of these people are officers in almost every category.

 

I had a firefighter memorial bench in front of a firehouse rejected because they "Can't prove that this is a firefighter memorial" and it is a bench with the fireman's name and membership information on it. Yes, they are just jerking me around.

 

What more proof should I need thath this is a

Firefighter Memorial? It's clearly engraved in the granite that it is a memorial to Doug Johnson, and the hat, boots, gloves, ladder, and fire plug in frount of a Firehouse,..... well you get the point.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Manville Possum

[+elyob]

It's published.

[+Manville Possum]

It's published.

 

Declined twice, got stuck in vote. I contacted the category leader for help. I needed that grid.

[+Manville Possum]

It would be nice if a reviewer would take a look at my WM so I can fill that grid.

 

Really, it gets tiresome creating WM's and watch them stagnate or having to contact the category leader or an active officer and ask them to take a look.

 

There should be a time limit, then auto approve the WM's to the category. This solution would fix the "approve my own WM" issue.

[+Manville Possum]

Five officers and thirty-six members yet my WM's are not being reviewed.

 

HERE IS 1 OF 3:

Train Caboose

 

I joined the group, if the leader or site admin will promote me I can review my own WM's.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Manville Possum