Censorship ??

[+Torgut]

I noticed a topic was blocked by a moderator and I expect the same to happen with this one. After arouond 20 years in Waymarking, many frustrations and disagreements, this brought me to the edge of going away from WM in a definite way. It's censorship and it comes well in line with the atitude which caused Ariberna to post about the subject. These matters are not to be discussed in private because they are of public interest! The atitude of the A officer is well known and notorious by his decisions of the kind "because I want", completely out of the rules of the categories. It's this kind of approach which mines Waymarking, pulling away new members who depart confused and frustrated. 

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Torgut, I love you, man - but this is Geocaching’s message board system, so of course they can decide what they will and will not allow to be posted on it. 
 

Plus - it’s not cool to publicly call out and castigate a reviewer for reviewing to category guidelines. Even on Reddit there is speech that is not allowed - and no brigading ditto. 

 

I’m an officer in Signs of History and I hate the 50-word limit for waymarkable signs, but it’s a requirement and as an officer my duty is to review to guidelines. 
 

I will also say that all officers in that category are doing their best to be fair and review to guidelines. This can be a tough category to review in, because a lot of times there’s really not enough history in the signs, and then it’s a judgement call.
 

I did not vote on this waymark but I would have voted no too since the proposed plaque started with “according to tradition” - which usually means it’s legend, not history. 

 

I’ll ask the officers if they want to do away with this 50-word requirement, but if they decide to keep it, that’s the decision and we have to live with it as waymarkers and review to it as officers. 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Benchmark Blasterz
Clarify comment

[+Ariberna]

Thanks Bench, you  are very nice.

But the problem becomes when the same reviewer in 3d approves things that he later denies me for not being "attached"; when he approves a News article on the same site by another person after mine was published a month before (and he doesn't publish one for me in NY for the same reason); or in Wikipedia a building has two entrances (historical building and library) and it does not admit it, and you see others such as the old school and building was published; or denied Semana Santa in Official Tourism because is every year but short time but Oktoberfest is published, etc, etc etc.
We can continue with a long etc.
And in the one you comment on Signs of History, a reviewer who begins with O (I think) did what she had to do, and if one doesn't get published, the other doesn't.
But it's not the same, the problem remains the same day after day. There are things that are for debate, voting, etc. and other rules that are "skipped" for some and not for others.
It is enough to see sometimes votes in which only he votes.

 

10,000 WM later, and with differences with very few officers, and good contact and trust with others, the problem is the same, even offending privately or threatening. That's not good.

 

I have more than 400 WM denied saved because in one moment will published some arbitrary there are around 370 of the same reviewer. But is same speak with a wall. 

And sorry, I don't want to do black list, because this reviewer is in thousands...

I will work again in WM.

[Becktracker]

I know you are trying to keep dignity or adher to the forum rules but in your hints it is very obvious about who you are talking about. 

 

I get the frustration of bouncing up on the same wall, but when I myself tried to post more according to the rules of the respective categories, I got more waymarks approved

[+Ariberna]

Anyway, I like to see that I'm not the only one who has that feeling. What I regret is that that person was not like that before. Maybe that I am a child and he does not for this ...   :-)

[+Ariberna]

@Torgut

No Retreat, No Surrender .

I am not going to give up and let this person go on a silver bridge. There are a lot of reviewers that are good.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Ariberna you are going to get this thread locked too.
 

Knock off criticizing category officers in the forums — It’s inappropriate and rude.
 

Take your beefs to private emails and, when you have said your piece, MOVE ON. 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+Ariberna]

Thanks Bench.

 

I do not criticize reviewers, only one is the problem. I have thanked the reviewers in more forums for their work. I didn't open this thread. Private messages are useless. It is only worth that someone sees the history of the WM in the category, Someone who has access to the comments sent and received.

[+Alfouine]

30 minutes ago, Ariberna said:

@Torgut

No Retreat, No Surrender .

I am not going to give up and let this person go on a silver bridge. There are a lot of reviewers that are good.

 

It will be really interesting that everybody knows you a little bit better

I will take an excellent example, i have declined a waymark in News article category because it does not meet this requirement "One location may have several articles written about it, but only one waymark per location will be accepted. Exceptions may be made if the articles are from different historical periods (25+ years)."

As you were not able to understand this requirement Max and 99 took time (they are more patient than me) to explain to you the issue.

And you gave up complaining about this waymark.

But this morning you saw that Saopaulo1 has validated all waymarks in this category, and currently i am not able to validate all my queue.

What have you done ? You have published again this waymark even if you understand this requirement because you do not care about any rules, at the beginning i thought it was because you did not understand well english but 10000 waymarks later, you always make same errors, same misunderstanding.

Try to grow up, i will always validate your waymarks because i do not want to add more work to Wayfrog, but try to be an adult and stop complaining, when it's NO it's NO !!

[+Ariberna]

Ok, you are the best!

 

https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm17Y1P_El_orgullo_palmillero_llega_al_Cine_Albniz_Mlaga_Andaluca_Espaa

 

https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm18321_Celos_humor_crimen_organizado_y_Semana_Santa_en_el_ciclo_El_espritu_de_la_colmena_Mlaga_Espaa

 

One month of difference, news of 2023. 

 

And for close this forum, but I will stop complaining when you was fair, legal and NOT arbitrary.

And the topic as you say "they are more patient than me" is clear, that you have enought patient.

"To be adult?" may be the problem, you  must be so so adult for patient and suport the role of review.

 

If we start to disrespect things don't go well.

 

Thanks.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Ariberna
one topic was deleted

[RuideAlmeida]

Going forward I suggest that you deal with your problems thru messages or email. Per guidelines the forum is not the place to argue like that.

[+HHL]

10 hours ago, Alfouine said:

Try to grow up

That's pretty rude, isn't it?

[+Max and 99]

I also find it frustrating when:

1. The officers enforce the rules differently for different people. I'm told something is not accepted and then a friend gets their waymark approved that's lacking the exact same thing. My friend is completely baffled about this and showed me several examples of approved waymarks that contradict what I was told. 

2. Officers make up their own rules. There's absolutely nothing in the category that says a certain thing is required but the officer says "I'm requiring it."

 

The approval of that second news article waymark seems contrary to the rules. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Max and 99

[+Alfouine]

3 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

I also find it frustrating when:

1. The officers enforce the rules differently for different people. I'm told something is not accepted and then a friend gets their waymark approved that's lacking the exact same thing. My friend is completely baffled about this and showed me several examples of approved waymarks that contradict what I was told. 

2. Officers make up their own rules. There's absolutely nothing in the category that says a certain thing is required but the officer says "I'm requiring it."

 

The approval of that second news article waymark seems contrary to the rules. 

 

I agree, i have made a mistake validating this second waymark, and i know why.

When i have reviewed the second waymark, photos were differents than the first default photo of the first waymark, so i did not realize that it was exactly the same location.

Should i reevaluate the second waymark and decline it ? 

 

But imagine that i review differently waymarks depending on who is the publisher, this is really rude !!!!

 

I spend a lot of time validating waymarks, and i can make mistakes

 

When someone, who might call the A submitter, publish more than 100 waymarks the same day, when i have 90 waymarks in my queue for reviewing, he might appreciate the 89 waymarks approved and the time we have spent to review them and not making a mess each time one of these waymarks has been declined

 

I appreciate waymarks with nice and relevant photos, i appreciate that the default photo match the category and i consider that logical things do no need requirement.

With the majority of waymarkers, it's not a problem to decline a waymark and ask few changes even if they are not requirement.

 

With few waymarkers, always the same,  it's a big deal, and it's always a big deal when you dare decline their waymarks and it's not only a problem with the A officer (I), all active officers have same problems and agressive replies from the same waymarkers. We all have the same list.

All active officers used to work together, we do not share always the same point of view, but we all share the same passion : Waymarking

 

23 hours ago, HHL said:

That's pretty rude, isn't it?

 

If you really want read something rude, i can copy/paste some replies that i receive when i decline a waymark.

[+Max and 99]

The good news....

With the update bootron recently made, accidental duplicate waymarks should be rare. It used to be that the system only checked for nearby waymarks the first time you entered coordinates. Now every time I edit anything on the page, even if it has nothing to do with the coordinates, I am prompted again with a list of nearby waymarks in that category. This can be a really helpful tool for anyone posting waymarks! So I bet accidental duplicates will happen a lot less often now.

[+Ariberna]

Well, accepting human errors, what is not normal is when certain bad answers are commented. I don't know about posting rude messages, I suppose that as reviewers you will have everything, but I think I have never insulted you, Alfouine, and even less because of a WM mark. Arbitrary is an act, not insulted. If you feel injuried, sorry for that.

With other reviewers I could have discrepancies at times at first, but not now.

 

According to you, Alfouine, I can be persistent, but the times that I have told you something about a duplicate route marking or denied when there was another, your attitude was not adequate.

According to Yo_Sam I always have something to refute, but I should have read better that WM by Torrijos in which he began by saying "I have a problem" I was only asking for your help. What Yo_Sam said doesn't seem bad to me, nor does he deny me basketball courts because I can't see the ground :-)

Cathegories same Monopoly, biosphere, etc admit some marks from some reviewers, and sorry, but news article before you review too and the example of barriers in one new and bull and other new are differents. Wkipedia WM's were a lot that has the same building but some entrances differents (example building and library for one mark). If you want change the rules maybe voted and changed some as you changed (and other partners of tourism) not admit restaurants and hotels and published the update is OK.

 At the begining for example I had problems with bluesnote for Monopoly, but the rules admit some WM from differents editions. The problem was solved months ago and now isnt the problem, because the reviewers of that cathegory respect the rules.

A lot of examples too, but was problems. Other problems same "relocated structures" I wont understand never, because I see that one portic of church or clock of building aren't approved because it is too small and easy to transport but statues with 1 m are aproved (but it isn't your cathegory, I think)

 

The thing about posting duplicates by mistake, I don't believe it. And if it were true when it was communicated to you, you would act accordingly. It is not the first time that a WM published a year ago has been denied after a few months because it "does not comply with the guidelines". Another point is if I send you 100 WM in one day, you don't have to review all of them either, and look at the creation date, they are from different days. I don't have time to create 100 in one day. And if you look, in those WM I have fewer errors than when I send you 5-10 in a day.

 

The problem could be that you have a lot of cathegories, may be. But you can review in few days if you want. Waymarking put 3 days but everyone know how is this game. Wayfrog won't review WM's because they have 3 days old.

If one reviewer denied me a WM for it isn't in the correct cathegory, bad photo, bad text, etc I can send twice with comment. But when one WM is denied for one problem and I saw that is published other with that problem it nakes me angry.

 

Now that it is seen that days have passed, this forum has another aspect, much better.

 

I always appreciate your work, reviewers, and I can to put in one forum all the names of very good, patient, and kind reviewers, who are an overwhelming majority.

WM without reviewers, markers and marks can't go on.

 

And sorry for the sermon

[+pmaupin]

It might be time to stop these bickering kids, it's like in a schoolyard.
We are adults, Waymarking is a game, and we play it with great pleasure, in order to discover places, monuments, shops, stories, ....., to the community.
None of us are immune to making mistakes (me and others), but it's part of the game, so let's continue with joy and good humor.

Happy Waymarking everyone.
Papy Phil

[+Ariberna]

Papy Phil ??

😂😂😂😂😂

[geoawareUSA9]

I think this thread has run its course.