Jump to content

Belgium Historical Markers


Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, fi67 said:

As far as I know (I never tried it myself) the email to all group members function does not work, never has.

I also think this restrictions were not a good idea. It does not serve any purpose than making things more complicated than necessary. Cross-postings have never been an objection by the community.

Maybe we should be more nitpick on details and fine print in future peer reviews. It is not enough that the big picture looks great, it's the details that the create problems and frustrations.

So when I get these emails:

Hello from Waymarking.com!

A member from the The Waymarking Core group has sent your group a message.

NW_history_buff says:

We officers have just sent the Former Brothels category to Peer Review. We've tweaked the category details over the past few months to hopefully make it a worthy category addition to the Waymarking community. Although we admit the subject matter of the category may be 'less than virtuous' in its mission, we also appreciate the historical aspects of the 'oldest profession in the world' and feel it satisfies the main criteria for inclusion: Global/Prevalent/Interesting and Informative/Not redundant.... We hope you will all agree and we hope you vote 'yea'.... Thank you!

Happy Waymarking!
The Groundspeak Team

 

Does that mean that NW_history_buff sent an individual email to every person in the group? Just curious.

 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

So when I get these emails:

Hello from Waymarking.com!

A member from the The Waymarking Core group has sent your group a message.

NW_history_buff says:

We officers have just sent the Former Brothels category to Peer Review. We've tweaked the category details over the past few months to hopefully make it a worthy category addition to the Waymarking community. Although we admit the subject matter of the category may be 'less than virtuous' in its mission, we also appreciate the historical aspects of the 'oldest profession in the world' and feel it satisfies the main criteria for inclusion: Global/Prevalent/Interesting and Informative/Not redundant.... We hope you will all agree and we hope you vote 'yea'.... Thank you!

Happy Waymarking!
The Groundspeak Team

 

Does that mean that NW_history_buff sent an individual email to every person in the group? Just curious.

 

All members of the Waymarking Core group are officers, there are no regular members.

And as far as I know the reason for this was the email problem. Emails to the officers do work, it is just the emails to all members that fail.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Benchmark Blasterz said:

From what I saw of the investigation: 9 officers and members participated, and the vote was 7-2 to REMOVE RESTRICTIONS. Was this the final total?

Still a little patience the vote ends at 18h00 Central European Time (CET) :ph34r:
I just sent the Mail back to the active members to remind them of the deadline:rolleyes:

Link to comment

It's done, the votes are over, and unfortunately I have to bow:(
75% vote to remove the restrictions, so I will delete them
Now, give me time to warn those who posted WMs and because of restrictions have been refused that they can resubmit them
Only then I delete the restriction

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Michaelfiles said:

It's done, the votes are over, and unfortunately I have to bow:(
75% vote to remove the restrictions, so I will delete them
Now, give me time to warn those who posted WMs and because of restrictions have been refused that they can resubmit them
Only then I delete the restriction

 

You can reevaluate the waymark, they do not need to resubmit it, except if they deleted it

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Michaelfiles said:

It's done, the votes are over, and unfortunately I have to bow:(
75% vote to remove the restrictions, so I will delete them
[...]

Very good! Did you really think, the restrictions would have a chance in the poll? All Yea votes were from members that are not very active in the community or totally inexperienced.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
9 hours ago, fi67 said:

Very good! Did you really think, the restrictions would have a chance in the poll? All Yea votes were from members that are not very active in the community or totally inexperienced.

I do not know, but Yves and I we may have a vision of the game a little different than some
We are not one of those who absolutely want to create WMs in the maximun category, but if that's what the majority wants then I bow

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Michaelfiles said:

I do not know, but Yves and I we may have a vision of the game a little different than some
We are not one of those who absolutely want to create WMs in the maximun category, but if that's what the majority wants then I bow

Once again, you did not understand and fight against an idea that does not exist.

It is not about the numbers. Nobody thinks about that. Too many waymarks for the same location is a bit of a mess, that is true, but no real problem. At least your proposed solution creates a bigger problem than the one you want to solve.

An ideal category would be totally defined by the title. Easy to understand for officers and all other users. Restrictions in the fine print make it more difficult, nobody can keep all special rules for over 1100 categories in mind, it leads to more denials, false approvals and a messy and unclear general situation.

Worse than that, your specific restriction ideas weaken your category. A category for national historic monuments that contains sites of regional and national significance, but excludes the most important ones, the ones that are seen as important for the whole world. Really? When I visit Belgium as a tourist interested in history, I expect to find these sites in the category, not just the "smaller" ones.

Restrictions are only appropriate in one special situation: when a new category would cover an established older category completely. We have some of those, some explicitly created as catch-all categories around a group of related categories like the Religious Buildings Multifarious.

  • Upvote 4
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...