Abuse from other members

[+Manville Possum]

Really, Waymarking is tough to use without name calling other members.

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Rock Chalk
Screenshot contained profane language

[+Manville Possum]

When I WM'd the Surgoinsville Police Department I thought I understood the category and it was quite simple. I was shocked by the reviewers comments and name calling, and did nothing to provoke this.

If I made mistakes, those could be worked on. I added links to the PD and 3 photos. Did I do something wrong or did the reviewer just use this opportunity to insult me?

 

It's not right. I have feelings too. 

[+elyob]

I wish we were identified in all of our communication in Waymarking.  Some of this abuse might be reduced...maybe.

[+elyob]

I do wonder if curmudgeons are over represented in this community of ours.

[+Manville Possum]

7 minutes ago, elyob said:

I wish we were identified in all of our communication in Waymarking.  Some of this abuse might be reduced...maybe.

 

It's killing Waymarking. Just like any other problematic cache type.

[Bon Echo]

Maybe the name of the submitter should be withheld while a waymark is being reviewed? for a less biased approach?

FWIW I agree that the waymark is a bit skimpy on info, but it appears to be all there is aside from going into the police station and start asking questions - probably not a good idea. What you listed seems to be all there is to be found online. Hard to ask for more than that.

[Bon Echo]

(now my turn to play the jerk)

from your visit:

" *Note the reflection of my Montero in the window as proof of visit. "

Manvile, are you doing those drive-by waymarks again?

Edited November 1, 2017 by Bon Echo

[+Manville Possum]

18 minutes ago, Bon Echo said:

(now my turn to play the jerk)

from your visit:

" *Note the reflection of my Montero in the window as proof of visit. "

Manvile, are you doing those drive-by waymarks again?

 

Yes, especially on my visit photos.

Really, they are just proof of visit photos for my collection here.

[vulture1957]

On 11/1/2017 at 7:06 AM, Manville Possum said:

Really, Waymarking is tough to use without name calling other members.

 

I'd rather get the waymark denied than get this message

Edited November 2, 2017 by Rock Chalk
Screenshot contained profane language

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

2 hours ago, vulture1957 said:

I'd rather get the waymark denied than get this message

Me too -   

[+fi67]

There are two sides of this problem, but only one is really relevant.

First, your waymark is not one of the greatest, and you know that. It only covers the bare minimum, but they did not ask for more and the category description is exactly as cheap.

On the other hand, the quality of new waymarks has seen a rapid increase recently, both in content and presentation. I sometimes do feel that it is not fair to the ones, who spend so much time on research and write-up, when I accept the minimalist contributions just the same. And sometimes I, too, cannot resist to add a comment about it in the approval note. Or in the denial note, and I do sign my denials.

BUT (and this is all that counts): There are adequate and respectful ways to do this. What you received is not acceptable.

 

[+Manville Possum]

2 hours ago, fi67 said:

There are two sides of this problem, but only one is really relevant.

First, your waymark is not one of the greatest, and you know that. It only covers the bare minimum, but they did not ask for more and the category description is exactly as cheap.

On the other hand, the quality of new waymarks has seen a rapid increase recently, both in content and presentation. I sometimes do feel that it is not fair to the ones, who spend so much time on research and write-up, when I accept the minimalist contributions just the same. And sometimes I, too, cannot resist to add a comment about it in the approval note. Or in the denial note, and I do sign my denials.

BUT (and this is all that counts): There are adequate and respectful ways to do this. What you received is not acceptable.

 

 

If you read the posting requirements, I not only met them, but I exceeded them. I'm not an artist with HTML code like many here and that should not matter.

What should really matter is that I'm a GS customer that is trying to use one of their services to play Waymarking. Those were not old vacation photos, I visited Surgoinsville to take pictures of the air navigation structures for the new category and saw that PD and thought it was interesting.

I'm tired of playing this game by first looking at category leaders and officers that I know well to avoid. Trust me, I would have avoided that category altogether if I had not enjoyed taking those photos of that PD and wanted them listed as a WM.

 

 

[+Manville Possum]

Really a good question, why is there no customer service here from Groundspeak? Complaints to them go ignored unlike their geocaching service.

Have they totally pulled out and left? 

[+Mudfrog]

I've never done Waymarking, the thread title simply caught my eye. It's funny that the reviewer/publisher/whatever you call him, stated that he "grew up". It's very obvious this isn't the case.

[wayfrog]

Groundspeak is aware of the situation. I've locked the thread.

[Rock Chalk]

The screenshots in this thread contain language that violates forum guidelines, so they’ve been removed.

To address the comment about Groundspeak customer service -- if you feel another user has behaved inappropriately, emailing our Help Center is the only way to ensure that someone will know of the situation. Our community managers cannot monitor every forum thread.

Thanks.