Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
lumbricus

Top 100 Waymark Reviewers

Recommended Posts

Thanks Groundspeak for the updated stats!

 

Rank - Username - Waymarks Reviewed

 

01 - silverquill - 63,060

02 - saopaulo1 - 42,062

03 - lumbricus - 36,379

04 - BruceS - 23,993

05 - Math Teacher - 22,888

06 - bluesnote - 20,171

07 - Outspoken1 - 15,229

08 - Dorcadion Team - 15,154

09 - Marine Biologist - 10,909

10 - TheBeanTeam - 10,732

11 - Team Farkle 7 - 10,123

12 - PTCRAZY - 9,680

13 - Ernmark - 7,971

14 - condor1 - 7,892

15 - Dragontree - 7,842

16 - Max Cacher - 7,547

17 - The Blue Quasar - 7,389

18 - fi67 - 6,822

19 - GEO*Trailblazer 1 - 6,517

20 - tiki-4 - 6,072

21 - thebeav69 - 6,055

22 - Jake39 - 5,939

23 - Mark1962 - 5,857

24 - Bernd das Brot Team - 5,395

25 - iconions - 4,945

26 - Lord Elwood - 4,679

27 - deano1943 - 4,635

28 - Brentorboxer - 4,623

29 - YoSam. - 4,540

30 - Team Sieni - 4,540

31 - Black Dog Trackers - 4,409

32 - QuesterMark - 4,339

33 - bootron - 4,216

34 - veritas vita - 4,117

35 - monkeys4ever - 3,927

36 - huggy_d1 - 3,926

37 - Jeremy - 3,876

38 - wildwoodke - 3,845

39 - ChapterhouseInc - 3,644

40 - Thorny1 - 3,633

41 - Norfolk12 - 3,528

42 - Firefrog69 - 3,500

43 - Tuena - 3,412

44 - sfwife - 3,376

45 - ucdvicky - 3,307

46 - RakeInTheCache - 3,307

47 - razalas - 3,274

48 - frivlas - 3,263

49 - scrambler390 - 3,226

50 - cache_test_dummies - 3,220

51 - MountainWoods - 3,045

52 - Lat34North - 3,002

53 - GT.US - 2,977

54 - the federation - 2,852

55 - Blue Man - 2,804

56 - macleod1 - 2,766

57 - DougK - 2,698

58 - GA Cacher - 2,695

59 - Rayman - 2,555

60 - Tharandter - 2,544

61 - bill&ben - 2,515

62 - Marky - 2,444

63 - Aladdin - 2,370

64 - The Leprechauns - 2,329

65 - MikeGolfJ3 - 2,286

66 - BK-Hunters - 2,266

67 - chstress53 - 2,262

68 - dreamhummie - 2,223

69 - woolsox - 2,221

70 - Pawsitraction - 2,218

71 - NCDaywalker - 2,194

72 - Faithwalker & DaMama - 2,139

73 - Bryan - 2,123

74 - Team Min Dawg - 2,110

75 - Zork V - 1,894

76 - Biquidou - 1,881

77 - Windsocker - 1,853

78 - papermanone & catlover - 1,832

79 - J.A.R.S. - 1,798

80 - MNSearchers - 1,773

81 - Hikenutty - 1,767

82 - Atlanta Highland Bagpiper - 1,764

83 - Team GPSaxophone - 1,741

84 - puczmeloun - 1,723

85 - OpinioNate - 1,706

86 - The_Draglings - 1,696

87 - lenron - 1,688

88 - CM-14 - 1,656

89 - muddawber - 1,631

90 - Crystal Sound - 1,623

91 - haggaeus - 1,607

92 - South Surrey Scavengers - 1,590

93 - harleydavidsonandy - 1,581

94 - Raine - 1,576

95 - Selmice - 1,571

96 - Tante.Hossi - 1,551

97 - Arogant - 1,522

98 - StagsRoar - 1,515

99 - clayj - 1,506

100 - kbarhow - 1,506

Share this post


Link to post

Peinliche Selbsdarstellungsnummer.

Fail

Share this post


Link to post

Peinliche Selbsdarstellungsnummer.

Fail

Um nur Minuten später von einem durch keinerlei Sachkenntnis getrübten Beitrag um Klassen übertroffen zu werden.

 

Wir geben uns neidlos geschlagen. Das ist die wahre Meisterschaft der Peinlichkeit, da können wir noch lange üben. :ph34r:

 

@lumbricus: Thanks a lot! Great!

Share this post


Link to post

Oh what great reviewers we have, and yet my WM's stagnate in their categories even after contacting the group leader!

 

What a joke! :mad:

 

Waymarking may be about the numbers too the core members here, but the few of us that don't care about numbers and create few WM's are greatly effected by our WM's being ignored by these great reviewers!

 

Think about the rest of us that only have a few hundred WM's. All I'm asking is that my WM's be reviewed. When I contacted the leader and ask why, I get no response. This should not be. :(

This should not be. But I still resist to believe that anyone ignores submissions. The numbers above are all-time stats, they do not tell you if an officer has been active in the recent years.

 

And I know the problem of non-responisve officers, even active ones. My guess is that many of them have some filter rules for the emails from Waymarking.com because of all those notifications. They don't even see you email at all. Try to contact them over their geocaching profile! In my experience the response rate is much higher then.

Share this post


Link to post

It worked. Your waymark got reviewed.

 

Those reviewers must work extremely hard. I review waymarks everyday yet I have still not earned my way on to that list.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh what great reviewers we have, and yet my WM's stagnate in their categories even after contacting the group leader!

 

What a joke! :mad:

 

Waymarking may be about the numbers too the core members here, but the few of us that don't care about numbers and create few WM's are greatly effected by our WM's being ignored by these great reviewers!

 

Think about the rest of us that only have a few hundred WM's. All I'm asking is that my WM's be reviewed. When I contacted the leader and ask why, I get no response. This should not be. :(

This should not be. But I still resist to believe that anyone ignores submissions. The numbers above are all-time stats, they do not tell you if an officer has been active in the recent years.

 

And I know the problem of non-responisve officers, even active ones. My guess is that many of them have some filter rules for the emails from Waymarking.com because of all those notifications. They don't even see you email at all. Try to contact them over their geocaching profile! In my experience the response rate is much higher then.

I know of one reviewer - Geo*Trailblazer*1 who passed away a few years ago - he was a great waymarker and geocacher and will be missed.

 

I will tell you that I do not filter my emails, although I do have a separate account just for Waymarking/geocaching. I respond to any direct emails I get as soon as I can - I cannot get on personal email at work. As far as the rest of the first quote - no matter how I respond, it's going to start a crapstorm. So, I will just say that I really try to make a decision on a waymark in 48 hours and leave it at that.

Share this post


Link to post

It's pretty quiet on the Waymarking forums in recent days. Maybe it's time for a crapstorm. Just sayin'.

Share this post


Link to post

...@lumbricus: Thanks a lot! Great!

You're most welcome.

 

...I will tell you that I do not filter my emails, although I do have a separate account just for Waymarking/geocaching. I respond to any direct emails I get as soon as I can - I cannot get on personal email at work... So, I will just say that I really try to make a decision on a waymark in 48 hours and leave it at that.

Very commendable.

Share this post


Link to post

It worked. Your waymark got reviewed.

 

Those reviewers must work extremely hard. I review waymarks everyday yet I have still not earned my way on to that list.

 

Yes it did. Two out of three of them anyway. Truthfully, I would have never put up with having to contact a volunteer geocache reviewer and ask them to take a look at my geocache listings I submit for publish. This is why I submit very few Waymarks, it is just too fustrating to do the work and submit, then wait, then contact officers and ask them to take a look.

 

We need auto publish after a time limit. Maybe Bryan can show us some love and help those of us left enjoy Waymarking.

 

"Auto Publish" won't work. Just like the original Locationless caches, When the cache owner became inactive, any phony thing got posted because the person knew the owner would not delete it, even if it was a phony photo and location.

 

What would work better is to put pressure on the responsible parties, the reviewing Officers. If an Officer goes for 6 months without reviewing at least one Waymark submitted to his group, he automatically gets demoted. This would result in all Officers in a Group keeping an eye on each other, and if one of them got demoted, fresh blood would have to be brought in and promoted. Exceptions could be made for those Categories with very few submissions.

 

We as Waymark Creators also have to look at ourselves. Are we providing all the required and all the optional information that we can find? Or are we submitting minimum information to speed up our Waymark production, and ignoring optional information that is easily accessible. I have to review Waymarks submitted that has one sentence in the Quick Description, and a copy/paste of the same sentence in the Detailed Description, and no optional information at all. The optional "Parking location" is left blank, but he had to park to get the photo. The optional "phone number" is blank, but it's on the sign in the photo, almost too small to read. The optional "Web site" is also on the sign in the picture, but is way to small to read.

Yes, he provided all required information to get the Waymark approved. But I'm not impressed. I'll pass on approving it and maybe one of my fellow officers will approve it. In 3 or 4 days, I'll check it again. If it hasn't been approved, I'll approve it, and send a note that he could have done better by easily providing more information. The next Waymark he submits in the same Category, looks just as sparse as the previous. Does anyone read notes in the email on approved Waymarks? Does anyone care about quality? Or is it all about the numbers.

Share this post


Link to post

In a way, you are preaching to the choir. I am also appalled at the number of officers I've seen in categories that simply walked away from the hobby with no thought for those that were left behind. Yes, some of those could be folks who passed away (like GEO*Trailblazer 1). But when I'm ticked at waiting for weeks for a waymark to be reviewed, I usually do a little more digging, and find that the officers are still around doing geocaching or keeping their personal websites (or pages) current, or whatever.

 

Common decency (guess it's not so common any more) would tell me that if I ever got bored with Waymarking, since it is not just a personal thing like fishing or bird watching or something that would only affect me if I quit it, then I ought to do something for the community, like ask that others take my place as an officer.

 

As far as I'm concerned (harsh or no harsh) anyone that isn't dead but no longer helps out with Waymarking is just plain rude, for having walked away from a community hobby and leaving everyone else in the community in a lurch.

Edited by MountainWoods

Share this post


Link to post

The three of you are correct.

 

Waymarkers (creators and reviewers) must stop chasing the numbers. Quantity and quality do not mix.

 

When you give-up on Waymarking, that's okay. Take a break or say farewell but please let the category know you're leaving.

Edited by elyob

Share this post


Link to post

My humble opinion: From my point of view the majority of the officers do a great job. I'm officer in just one category (for several reasons that are of no interest in this discussion) and many times when I read that a new waymark has been posted I go to the waymark and another officer has already decided to approve or decline it. Also, the vast majority of the waymarks that I post are decided within a few days. In other words, I have the highest respect for the reviewers who spend so much time to review thousands of waymarks and I wouldn't think that I have the right to complain about them, unless I review roughly as many waymarks as they do.

 

Besides, the problem is, that officers leave the hobby without telling anybody, right? Does it make sense to complain about that in the forums, where they certainly will not read?

Share this post


Link to post
But when I'm ticked at waiting for weeks for a waymark to be reviewed, I usually do a little more digging, and find that the officers are still around doing geocaching or keeping their personal websites (or pages) current, or whatever.

 

There are some officers who are still around and need reminding that the Waymarking community could still benefit from their assistance.

Share this post


Link to post

Number 3 Waymarker in the World give yourself a pat on the back, you actually are a very good reviewer. I know that you love this site, and I love it too. I want it to work for me just as it does for you.

 

Thank You for that, MP. Feels good to get a kind word like that now and again. :)

 

Keith

Edited by BK-Hunters

Share this post


Link to post

Do we have any updated statistics? I can't recall or find any for last year.

 

Also is it possible to list stats for declines?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I guess if you were to ask the Wayfrog he might be able to fill us in, provided new statistics are available.

Keith

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/27/2019 at 5:18 PM, BK-Hunters said:

I guess if you were to ask the Wayfrog he might be able to fill us in, provided new statistics are available.

Keith

Done.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...