Officers and Responsibility

[+iconions]

Good morning all
I had the responsibility this morning of denying a waymark of a good friend.  It was one of those categories that doesn't allow for cross Waymarking as it was created as a "catch-all" for those items that do not fit anywhere else.  Come to find out, THIRTY, yes, 30 of these kinds of waymarks had been created by him and approved before I sent the denial this morning. Needless to say, he was PISSED.  I actually do not blame him - something should have been said maybe 30 waymarks ago?

Being an officer of a category doesn't mean a rubber stamp of approval.  Being an officer means that you will review this waymark to ensure that it meets the criterion established in the description.  This means you know the criterion for each, or check the criterion for those waymarks you do not review often.  I still remember some of my first encounters with BruceS as a reviewer - by the book, but fair.  That is what I hope that I am known for.  If I deny a waymark - I will tell you why per the category description and tell you how to fix it or WHERE to fix it if I can.   

I appreciate and thank everyone who takes on the responsibility of officership - it is a dirty, thankless job at best, and scenes like this morning are the worst.  Again, no blame or harassment of any parties is meant in the above - just an observation from the trenches on the other side of entering waymarks.

 

[+elyob]

Well put.  Did you consider making changes to the first thirty waymarks that were not denied?

[+Lynx Humble]

I have observed that too sometimes there are categories that accept everything and anything....

 

For example a sattelite oddity inside a building... make sense.

[+iconions]

2 hours ago, elyob said:

Well put.  Did you consider making changes to the first thirty waymarks that were not denied?

I did, but I do not feel I should go back into all of these.  No, the leader is aware of the situation and I believe that the officer that approved the 30  (it was one person) should go back and do the denials if they are going to be done...

[+pmaupin]

Can we know in which category this problem occurred?

[+iconions]

3 hours ago, pmaupin said:

Can we know in which category this problem occurred?

no, it isn't germane to my post.  It happened - I only bring it up to point out the great responsibility we take on as officers in categories.  We, as officers, are expected to be arbiters of those category description that many of us didn't write up.  We must be fair and not read more or less into those category descriptions.  We must be honest with our friends; fair with those we don't necessarily care for; and most of all, teach those who are trying this crazy hobby.  

This issue can happen in one of 1,116 different categories if we, as officers, are only concerned with how many waymarks we can approve and not with, does this waymark actually meet the requirements.  This is the jest of my original post.  Officership isn't a numbers game - it is a HUGE responsibility.

Again, I appreciate every one of you that take on the responsibility of an officer - Lord knows that I had to rely on many of you to take up my responsibilities while my mother recuperated from her car accident in January.  I am only now able to get back into my Waymarking since early May.   

[+T0SHEA]

14 hours ago, iconions said:

does this waymark actually meet the requirements.

 

Personally, I think any person who accepts the responsibility to be an officer has an obligation to adhere to the category guidelines. 

That said, sometimes categories are somewhat vague about what is and what is not allowed. In question are a few of the first categories created, though adequate perhaps at the time, some are in need of an update and spelling corrections. 

The problem I see with approving waymarks that do not meet the guidelines, they set a precedent for future waymarks and are used to justify a submission that also does not meet the guidelines. A slippery slope that may lead to the category becoming a dumping ground where anything goes. 

I often wonder "What's the Point!" to have guidelines if they are not being followed by the category officers. 

 

We are often called out for being too strict, so be it. I offer no apologies.  

 

We are fortunate to have very conscientious officers in the categories we lead.  

 

 

[+iconions]

3 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

 

Personally, I think any person who accepts the responsibility to be an officer has an obligation to adhere to the category guidelines. 

That said, sometimes categories are somewhat vague about what is and what is not allowed. In question are a few of the first categories created, though adequate perhaps at the time, some are in need of an update and spelling corrections. 

The problem I see with approving waymarks that do not meet the guidelines, they set a precedent for future waymarks and are used to justify a submission that also does not meet the guidelines. A slippery slope that may lead to the category becoming a dumping ground where anything goes. 

I often wonder "What's the Point!" to have guidelines if they are not being followed by the category officers. 

 

We are often called out for being too strict, so be it. I offer no apologies.  

 

We are fortunate to have very conscientious officers in the categories we lead.  

 

 

Exactly my point.  Thanks!  :)  :)  :)   Especially the last sentence!