Jump to content

WHO ARE THE ADMIN/APPROVERS?!? PART XVIII


Pantalaimon

Recommended Posts

I'm just re-starting this thread because I was obviously tricked by some collaboration of Jomarac5 and Hydee to close down my last continuation.

 

Just kidding, Hydee.

 

I'm interested to see where this thread will go. It's being started in case anyone has any more comments in respond to the last thread, found here. A thread that was snapped shut by the originator, even though people who disagreed with him might have had more to say.

 

Pan

 

Fact is that there is nothing out there you can't do,

Yeah, even Santa Claus believes in you...

Floyd of Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, from "Can You Picture That?"

Link to comment

Does "everyone" include representatives of geocaching.com?

 

Does "play nicely" include not contributing to the hijacking of a thread? (I'm referring to the last one with this title, not this one.)

 

Pan

 

Fact is that there is nothing out there you can't do,

Yeah, even Santa Claus believes in you...

Floyd of Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, from "Can You Picture That?"

Link to comment

I feel that re-stocking charges are unfair.

 

We know that many audies really don't know how to fit various aids.

 

Such audies will have more failures and thus, their need to charge re-stocking fees to exist. Also, the more failed sales as they receive such fees, the less such unqualified audies will be motivated to improve their abilities.

 

More competent audies will have more successful sales and their tendency is to not charge re-stocking fees.

 

For consumers to not ask up front the exact cost of their returning the aid, and if any, to not state dissatisfaction to this process, is a serious mistake.

 

This practice of not asking and keeping questionable aids due to this charge, has helped generate the near million good hearing aids lying around unused. (MarkTrak survey)

 

Without a re-stocking fee, audies would have to try harder to create a satisfactory sale. Isn't this what we want?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Snazz:

I feel that re-stocking charges are unfair.

 

We know that many audies really don't know how to fit various aids.

 

Such audies will have more failures and thus, their need to charge re-stocking fees to exist. Also, the more failed sales as they receive such fees, the less such unqualified audies will be motivated to improve their abilities.

 

More competent audies will have more successful sales and their tendency is to not charge re-stocking fees.

 

For consumers to not ask up front the exact cost of their returning the aid, and if any, to not state dissatisfaction to this process, is a serious mistake.

 

This practice of not asking and keeping questionable aids due to this charge, has helped generate the near million good hearing aids lying around unused. (MarkTrak survey)

 

Without a re-stocking fee, audies would have to try harder to create a satisfactory sale. Isn't this what we want?


 

Whats that you say, sonny????? cant hear ya

 

Lapaglia icon_cool.gif

Muga Muchu (forget yourself, focus)

Link to comment

Re: Original thread on this topic.

This-

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:

I voted no. I can see no rational reason why such an option should exist. This gives the topic starter far too much control over the conversation. Everybody in a thread, including the topic starter, always has the right to walk away from the conversation. If someone starts a discussion and others join in, the topic starter has the right to walk away, but why should he also be able to insist that everybody else “shut up”. If somebody started a topic and then shut the topic to myself and others who joined the discussion, I would be inclined to simply restart the topic on another thread, thus effectively defeating the topic starter's option to close it.

 

Opening a can of worms that you can’t close, should be a risk that every topic starter considers in advance.


Well put. I agree completely.

 

I voted no as well, despite the fact that I just exercised my right to close a thread (just because I could).

 

*****


and this-

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

quote:
Zuuk wrote:

I'm puzzled though. (And this may be me just not correctly identifying the underlying issue.) Where are all these topics that are being closed 'on a whim'? Or was this just a 'hypothetical' example?

 

No answer required if there isn't one.


There's always an answer. But there's not always an underlying issue.

 

Only a couple of examples were needed to see the great potential for this to be abused. That one of the examples happened to be your thread is of no consequence.

 

Why should threads be closed by the topic starter? So that someone who's not entirely pleased with the discussion can write their best 'last post' and then snap the topic shut at an opportune moment? There are so many compelling reasons for this NOT to be available that there is no argument for it that makes practical sense.

 

If you need more convincing Zuuk, reply to every part of Seneca's entire post instead of just a small select portion of it.

 

*****


were both in a thread started by this-

quote:
Originally posted by Corp Of Discovery:

Should the person who starts a thread be able to have it closed at will?

Please feel free to elaborate on your answers all you like.

 

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!


things that make you go hmmmmmm......

 

I can be sooo bad sometimes.

Flame on!

 

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

Link to comment

More than a dozen Admin/moderator/approvers are identified (at least by photo) in MORE ABOUT Groundspeak.

 

In many cases, the photos in this thread even include names. What are you people looking for...social security numbers?

 

If anyone has photos of others (and also photos and information about just regular or irregular geocachers) please add them to this collection.

 

I would love to see a photo of Jomarac5 posted there, too, just because I think people like to associate a face with an icon.

 

I do respect that some admin may not want to be identified, but I consider them fair game too. After all, this is a game, and if someone chooses to be admin, and if someone else knows who they are,...oh, well! icon_wink.gif

 

I intend to continue this thread as long as possible. If anyone has information and doesn't want to be associated with posting that info, please email me through Groundspeak. I will send you my email address and you can relay photos, links, etc. to me.

 

I will happily post them in my thread linked above.

 

bad_boy_a.gif

 

 

==============="If it feels good...do it"================

 

**(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it.")**

 

.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Pantalaimon:

Does "everyone" include representatives of geocaching.com?

 

Does "play nicely" include not contributing to the hijacking of a thread? (I'm referring to the last one with this title, not this one.)

 

Pan

 


 

So much for playing nicely.

 

I am one of the other cachers J5 mentioned that would have been in his original thread adding my support if not for the fact that it all happened in a short period of time relative to my schedule...

 

Unfortunately I too agree that in most issues I see they get swept under the rug, ignored or spammed to death by irrelevent posts. Not really worth the agrevation, I could put that energy into alternate listing services instead.

 

Keith

 

(And note my picture is in my profile...I could care less about hiding..anyone need my business card? home address? either way the problems with some of the cache approvers in Canada still exist.)

 

Bear & Ducky

Link to comment

So this is a continuation of the thread started by J5? Well I worked late and was unable to post in the previous topic because it was closed.

 

Now let's hope no one jumps in and attacks me on this one. Maybe just listen (or read in this case) and think about things first, including admins.

 

We have a big problem here in Canada. Let's go back a bit. A local cacher, let's call him Mr.Gigabyte, for arguments sake, is quite an active cacher. He gets the whole Canadian geocoin thing going, and yes, he places some very good caches.

 

But it seems no one likes the guy. Why not you may ask? Well I'm sure that's pretty obvious from his posts here in the past (Mr.GigaFakeAFind, etc.) I won't go into the details, you all know his past. Anyway, he became an approver. Good for him. But then everyone put 2 and 2 together and did not quite like his egotistical attitude, etc, etc. So he "gave up" as an approver and then suddenly Cache-Advance pops up. It's been confirmed in various ways that Cache-Advance is Mr.Gigabyte. If no one here likes the guy, why's he approving our caches? Why does he have to give up under the Mr.Gigabyte name and use the Cache-Advance name? Well because he knows no one likes him and he is forced to use an alias.

 

We've had caches getting approved and then logs in the log book before the cache is approved. Whenever a cache comes out that is not to his liking he WILL give his 2c on it. If he can't find it then he's quick to slam you on it.

 

I have not had contact with Mr.Gigabyte since April, when I spoke with him on the phone telling him that I do not want to have any further contact with him. He knows I do not appreciate his bullying way with local cachers. Other local cachers have also expressed their disapproval at Mr.G's ways here. Some people are even TOO afraid to go looking for his Vancouver Transit cache, because if they don't place it in time or it goes missing they'll suffer the wrath of Mr.Gigabyte.

 

So I hear from another cacher who heard from the Geocaching Admins that his (Mr.G's) caches have been going missing and that HE has told them (the GC.com Admins) that I'm the thief. Holy cow! I was really fuming mad when I found out about this, but did nothing about it. What can I do? As I have told other local cachers here, I have not stolen his caches, or ever anyone's caches. I have not told him that as I do not have any contact with him.

 

And I don't need anyone asking if I need "cheese with that?" Okay? I'm not whining, I'm just giving the facts as they are. Some local cachers are too afraid to voice their opinion. I'm not.

 

And no, I'm not looking for the job. I do not have time for that at all.

 

I'm voicing my opinion here. The admins and approvers read these forums. Whenever I've e-mailed contact@geocaching.com I have NEVER (or maybe once I did) received feedback from them. So what's the point of sending my feedback / concerns there? It vanishes into a big black hole. So here's my feedback you are asking for. Take it or leave it.

 

All flames to me will be ignored! People were asking J5 in the previous topic where his support was. Well I didn't have the opportunity to post in that topic, so here's my opinion of the matter, first hand.

 

I call on the GC.com Admins to investigate these issues. Send e-mails to all the local cachers here and find out their opinion. You'll see we are not speaking a load of BS.

 

That's all I have to say on the matter. Again, all flames will be ignored.

 

Thank you

 

Robert

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jomarac5:

In every organization that I have belonged, where someone is in a position of authority, there have been no clandestine overtones


 

This is not an “organization” we belong to. It is a private site that we use. If Geocaching.com wants me to continue to use the site, it must be accountable to me. If they want to achieve this, it follows that they should hold accountable the people whom they employ, including volunteers. This can be achieved just as effectively if the volunteer approvers are known to me only through a pseudonym. There is no purpose served in me knowing the approver’s actual identity. Having to disclose your identity to all players as a condition of becoming an approver would have the negative effect of reducing the pool of people who would willingly server as approvers.

 

If an approver acts inappropriately, then as far as I am concerned, Geocaching.com has acted inappropriately. If I bring it to their attention, and it is not dealt with, then I have an obvious option.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RobertM:

We have a big problem here in Canada. Let's go back a bit. A local cacher, let's call him Mr.Gigabyte, for arguments sake, is quite an active cacher. He gets the whole Canadian geocoin thing going, and yes, he places some very good caches.

 

But it seems no one likes the guy.


 

You are a way off base. I like Mr. Gigabyte. A lot. He has contributed more to Geocaching in British Columbia than any other cacher I can think of, and several times over most I can think of. After finding about four caches, I introduced myself to Mr.Gigabyte by e-mailing him and calling him an "Arrogant Condescending Know-it-all". Then I got to know him, and now I have nothing but respect for him, and the committment he has to Geocaching.

 

He is, however, one not to suffer fools lightly.

 

I cannot think of anybody who would be more qualified to be an approver than him.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

Link to comment

quote:
quote:

Originally posted by Jomarac5:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

seneca wrote:

Having to disclose your identity to all players as a condition of becoming an approver would have the negative effect of reducing the pool of people who would willingly server as approvers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I can't imagine how you could substantiate this statement.

 

*****


 

I believe that is the whole problem. you cant imagine anything that is not the way you want it.

 

I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony! I want a Pony!

 

Lapaglia icon_cool.gif

Muga Muchu (forget yourself, focus)

Link to comment

Alright, RobertM's post is more in line with what I think J5 should have posted here in the General forum in the first place. This gives a context for the issue at hand.

 

I still see negatives in forcing one username on admins+cachers. This case appears to be different, and since no resolution was able to be achieved in private (or at least in a forum a select few tend to read) then I think it is appropriate to ask RobertM's question here.

 

Without adequate context (for those of us not frequenting the Canada forums), the original post sounded like Type A ranting. Here we have a specific situation, one that I hope can get resolved for everyones sake.

 

Good luck everyone.

 

---------------------

It wasn't me.

Link to comment

For the record...

 

I think most people will agree that I'm one of the more outspoken when it comes to criticizing the gc.com folks when they (IMHO) do something wrong. This isn't one of those times.

 

I recognize that there's a problem with a cacher and/or approver up in Canada, but it really doesn't have much to do with whether or not they have a separate account for approvals, based on what I've read. It seems that the problem is with an individual, not the system in place on gc.com that allows admins to function in their administrative roles.

 

I've been in a similar position, except sort of backwards. I played a game on a BBS (that's Bulletin Board System for you young'uns out there icon_wink.gif) that I was also a sysop for. As a sysop, I (and the other sysops) had special "powers" within the game. We were constantly being accused of cheating, but in reality we couldn't have cared less about the things we were being accused of abusing. In the end, we had to create separate sysop accounts and had the accounts we used for gaming reduced to normal user accounts. Was it necessary? No, but it made people happy.

 

Two accounts for the admins? No problem here, for all the reasons mentioned already and then some. I do believe that J5 should have received more prompt and personal attention, though. Allegations against an approver are serious and the person making those allegations needs to be kept apprised of how it's being handled. Not only out of respect for the situation, but to keep explosions like this from happening in the forums.

 

So there you are - I agree with TPTB on this one. Mark your calendars - it doesn't happen often. icon_wink.gificon_biggrin.gif

 

--

perl -MMIME::Base64 -e "print decode_base64('SU1BR0VTIFJFTU9WRUQgQlkgT1ZFUkJFQVJJTkcgQURNSU5T')"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RobertM:

Let's hope it doesn't get swept under the rug by the GC.com Gods again. :-(


 

So we're all fair, we've only received two emails from you in the past. If we missed one, please let me know the tracking number and I'll see if it was missed. One was in May, which I responded within a few hours of you asking.

 

As far as I've looked within our extensive database of previous emails, we have received no complaints for Cache Advance and his/her reviewing exploits. If there are specific issues that still need responded to, please send an email to approvers@Groundspeak.com, as Heidi wrote above.

 

If you have a personal issue with Mr. Gigabyte (who I've met personally and find to be a great guy), perhaps you should work it out with him. I'm not sure how airing your own laundry in the forums is appropriate, or necessary.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

As far as I've looked within our extensive database of previous emails, we have received no complaints for Cache Advance and his/her reviewing exploits. If there are specific issues that still need responded to, please send an email to approvers@Groundspeak.com, as Heidi wrote above.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

quote:
Jeremy wrote:

As far as I've looked within our extensive database of previous emails, we have received no complaints for Cache Advance and his/her reviewing exploits.


This is not exclusively about the 'virtual' approver, Cache-Advance. It is about the person that is behind the name.

 

I've had discussions about this issue with Hydee on the telephone as I'm sure you've been told, I doubt that this is as new to you as you make it out to be. You've also seen previous threads that even included e-mail quotes regarding this issue -- but you swept it away then as you are attempting to do now.

 

We have a problem in our neighbourhood that involves a representative of this website -- are you going to do something about it or not? If so, what then?

 

*****

Link to comment

I just want to make it clear that I am *NOT* Mr. Gigabyte...but if someone wants to mail me Giga's actual account name, then I might parody his/her avatar...I need a new one.

 

I've had good wood for quite some time now.

 

(Man, I've been waiting to use that one...)

 

EDIT: Okay, got the link to his avatar...I was not smart enough to remove the punctuation myself evidently.... icon_smile.gif Thanks.

 

--

 

http://magazine.audubon.org/features0101/goodwood.html

Link to comment

For those interested (and those that aren't please ignore the message), I've sent an e-mail to contact@geocaching.com and approvers@geocaching.com. I was rather surprised at the very prompt response I got. I hope my follow up e-mail gets the same prompt response and that all my questions get answered. :-)

 

As has been mentioned by Jeremy and Hydee in this topic further up, if you have any issues or problems that should be brought to the attention of GC.com then send them an e-mail.

 

A lot of the time what happens, and is the case in our neighborhood here in Canada, a problem is just ignored and GC.com never hears about it. GC.com (Jeremy and Hydee) have invited us (above in this topic) to tell them what problems we are having with certain people and/or approvers, etc.

 

I encourage the people in Canada (and other parts if they too are having problems) to not be afraid and to speak your mind. Do not let the bullying of certain people intimidate you. If you do not let GC.com know then they will not know the situation and it will continue to be swept under the rug.

 

Again, I ask for no flames on this topic or to me. I think a lot will agree with me on what I've said above. I'm not out to attack anyone. But if there are problems then we need to bring it to the attention of GC.com. A lot of the time we do not want to go whining to GC.com and complain about someone / something. Perhaps we should else they won't know about it. And the forums are probably not the best place to do this. Make use of the approvers@geocaching.com and contact@geocaching.com addresses.

 

Thank you,

 

Robert

Link to comment

We have a pub night in southern ontario in St. Kitts, I'll be sure to mention it and spread the word, those having issues with him to post their emails.

 

Jeremy - You noted how there have only been 2 emails...I'll follow that up with the sheer fact that many of us feel helpless and left to the mercy of these approvers that sending emails seem pointless.

 

But if its emails you want...we'll see how well we can spread the word and get the flood gates moving.

 

Keith

 

Bear & Ducky

Link to comment

if what RobertM says is true, then the site bosses need to take action swiftly. There is no need for people to act in such a manner. we are all adults (myself excuded). Further (and i know several admins and have met them personally and know its not true with them) if an admin acts in such a manner, its obvious that he/she cannot handle the "power" that they have and should not be in a position of responsibility. If an admin really thinks that doing this for gc.com makes them powerfull, i got a bridge in brooklyn i would like to sell them. geocaching IS A G A M E, GAME! get over yourself. but like i said before, i know serveral admins personally and i know some of the Groundspeak folk and know they will give this a fair review. my 2 ontopic cents

 

danny

 

MY STATS

height:5'9" eyes: blue

weight: 240 hair: not much

age:31 marital status: if you have to ask

sex: is there such a thing after children?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

I just find it odd that someone who is notorious for his dishonesty became an approver in the first place.


 

Notorious for some really silly, bad judgement, in the past, for which he paid the price. His contribution to geocaching, and vast knowledge and experience, and record and actions since that scandal, and the fact that he is a really decent guy, in my opinion overcomes any bar to him being an approver.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by sranddboggny.us:

if what RobertM says is true, then the site bosses need to take action swiftly. There is no need for people to act in such a manner. we are all adults (myself excuded). Further (and i know several admins and have met them personally and know its not true with them) if an admin acts in such a manner, its obvious that he/she cannot handle the "power" that they have and should not be in a position of responsibility. If an admin really thinks that doing this for gc.com makes them powerfull, i got a bridge in brooklyn i would like to sell them. geocaching IS A G A M E, GAME! get over yourself. but like i said before, i know serveral admins personally and i know some of the Groundspeak folk and know they will give this a fair review. my 2 ontopic cents

 

danny

 

MY STATS

height:5'9" eyes: blue

weight: 240 hair: not much

age:31 marital status: if you have to ask

sex: is there such a thing after children?


 

HEY! You sold ME that bridge! It's mine! Mine Mine Mine!

 

I cache, therefore I am.

 

Planet

Link to comment

quote:

Notorious for some really silly, bad judgement, in the past, for which he paid the price. His contribution to geocaching, and vast knowledge and experience, and record and actions since that scandal, and the fact that he is a really decent guy, in my opinion overcomes any bar to him being an approver.


I am not sure the whole geocaching community would agree with you, especially the way they make a big deal about people that cheat. A leapord doesn't change its spots. Further, the fact that he came up with some cock and bull story after he was caught red handed just added fuel to the fire. The arrogance to think that we would believe the "my co worker did it as a goof" story was just too much. There are a lot of good, decent people in the geocaching community who do nothing but good things for their areas (see planet, she works hard) and yet get very little recognition. shame on you, seneca. Should we make reformed cache theives (aka pirates) approvers after their momentary lapse in judegment?

Link to comment

The proper way to deal with issues of this sort is through emails to Groundspeak. A public discussion forum is not a place to discuss these allegations.

 

I am looking into the emails that I have received, and I will address the issues with those involved. Please feel free to email us with additional concerns. If you have an issue with an Approver, please email approvers@Groundspeak.com. In that email please include specific details as to their actions that need to be looked at. If you have an issue with a Geocacher, please email contact@Groundspeak.com.

 

Now to move on, I see some concerns being expressed that we can address. My suggestion is developing some sort of written guidelines that govern the Approvers, if you would like to have input I would be happy to accept feedback and suggestions. Please keep in mind that the final decisions will be made by Groundspeak as it will be the published honor code for Groundspeak volunteers. But I would greatly appreciate all feedback and suggestions from the community.

 

Please feel free to email your suggestions to contact@Groundspeak.com I will also take suggestions in a new thread dedicated to the topic.

 

cute.gif hydee cute.gif

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

 

edit to fix a spelling error icon_confused.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

The proper way to deal with issues of this sort is through emails to Groundspeak. A public discussion forum is not a place to discuss these allegations.


 

It has seemed to many however that no action has ever or would ever be taken thus you are getting an larger and larger discussion in public as people are now connecting the dots and seeing more cases of these problems.

 

Thats why a public discussion has been warrented and many new private emails ones I might add.

 

If you want the discussions to end then hopefully we'll start to see results further through the emails but its hard to just turn off the discussion here when its been building up for some time.

 

quote:

Now to move on, I see some concerns being expressed that we can address. My suggestion is developing some sort of written guidelines that govern the Approvers, if you would like to have input I would be happy to accept feedback and suggestions. Please keep in mind that the final decisions will be made by Groundspeak as it will be the published honor code for Groundspeak volunteers. But I would greatly appreciate all feedback and suggestions from the community.

 

Please feel free to email your suggestions to contact@Groundspeak.com) I will also take suggestions in a new thread dedicated to the topic.


 

Well I didnt see a new thread so I'll recheck and start one. I definately say this needs discussion, as well I'd like to see discussion on the appointing of admins and how they get appointed, how do we get a better ratio etc...

 

Keith

 

Bear & Ducky

Link to comment

Bear & Ducky,

 

Be fair in your comments. I You have never sent an email with concerns so you do not know if the issues have been addressed or ignored. We will address the issues with the individuals invloved. If you have any further comments please forward specific examples to approvers@Groundspeak.com.

 

cute.gif hydee cute.gif

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

Bear & Ducky,

 

Be fair in your comments. I You have never sent an email with concerns so you do not know if the issues have been addressed or ignored. We will address the issues with the individuals invloved.


 

I am being fair, unfair would be to copy and paste the amount of emails and messages from outside forums where cachers gather to chat (an be unmoderated by gc.com) where they continue to list requests for reasons and complaints yet get ignored...

 

I guess the only other option is every one of them lied.

 

So true I have never sent, but I've heard enough to be in the mind set to realise it was pointless.

 

I simply stated that and simply stated you will need to gain the trust of cachers to simply make us drop a subject becuase you say its now being addressed.

 

I don't know how much fairer I could put that.

 

Keith

 

Bear & Ducky

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Bear & Ducky:

 

I am being fair, unfair would be to copy and paste the amount of emails and messages from outside forums where cachers gather to chat (an be unmoderated by gc.com) where they continue to list requests for reasons and complaints yet get ignored...

 


 

Huh? What am I misunderstanding here?

 

You are angry that complaints and other messages posted on outside websites are being ignored? How would the staff here learn of them?

 

You feel that TPTB should do something about a perceived problem, yet have never taken the time to make sure they know about it?

 

Then you feel it is appropriate to discuss the complaints publicly, when doing so attacks the reputation of another cacher. Do you actually know anything about this subject, or are you reacting to hearsay?

 

If you have pertinent information, send it to the people who can do something about it.

 

Ron/yumitori

 

---

 

Remember what the dormouse said...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by yumitori:

Huh? What am I misunderstanding here?


 

Your misunderstanding that the outside discussions are not the spot where people post their original issues...they originally email the appropriate emails or discuss in forums. Then when they are ignored, muted or otherwise dealt with they go onto community forums outside gc.com to discuss.

 

quote:

You are angry that complaints and other messages posted on outside websites are being ignored? How would the staff here learn of them?


 

Again as above, these are not the issues, the issue is complaints posted here get unresolved so people discuss them (not complain..discuss) on outside websites, you missed the whole context of the message being conveyed.

 

quote:

Then you feel it is appropriate to discuss the complaints publicly, when doing so attacks the reputation of another cacher. Do you actually know anything about this subject, or are you reacting to hearsay?


 

I have openly said I have not personally experienced it, if you read the entire discussions rather than just replying to recent messages you may have caught that.

 

Beyond that I have experienced second hand the results and I am arguing on behalf of issues that I and many others in here are talking about. If it wasn't an issue I wouldn't bother with it.

 

Keith

 

Bear & Ducky

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:

I cannot think of anybody who would be more qualified to be an approver than him.


 

Someone please, please dig up a copy of the photoshopped hand (or hands, as I remember there were quite a few variations) and post it for those that don't remember.

 

While I know from a friend in BC that his caches are interesting and well done, the thought that he is someone that has approval authority over some of the very cachers that he duped in the past is rather disappointing.

 

And people that "don't suffer fools well" shouldn't be in postions where they will have to suffer fools.

 

If indeed someone has brought a valid concern to the staff of Groundspeak (this TPTB thing is getting a little tired, we're the customer and they are the vendor) and has not reveived a response then they have a right to make that known. Conversly, if they do receive a prompt resolution, even if it isn't in their favor, I would hope that they would also share that with the community to let them know that Groundspeak is indeed being responsive and is holding everyone accountable.

 

I'm just someone who goes caching every once and awhile, reads the forums every couple of days and wants to be treated like a valued customer, just like I would expect from any company that I do business with.

 

I think that a lot of people feel the same way but that's just my .02 (0.0263502 CDN).

Link to comment

quote:
Notorious for some really silly, bad judgement, in the past, for which he paid the price.

 

What price was that? He's been given a great responsibility as a represntative of this website and has the esteem of many. That's paying a price?

 

Maybe they should track down Electric Shavers and make him a partner.

 

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Bear & Ducky:

 

I have openly said I have not personally experienced it, if you read the entire discussions rather than just replying to recent messages you may have caught that.

 

Beyond that I have experienced second hand the results and I am arguing on behalf of issues that I and many others in here are talking about. If it wasn't an issue I wouldn't bother with it.

 

Keith

 


 

I also caught Jeremy saying there's no record of e-mail complaints, so I feel that addressing it here first is quite premature.

 

It's admirable that you wish to stick up for your friends, but you are muddying the waters. A geocacher and an approver (perhaps the same person, perhaps not) are being attacked here with admitted hearsay rather through the standard channels of complaint.

 

If people are complaining elsewhere, encourage them to write TPTB, not spread stories where they do no good. If they say they did write, then they need to find out why those messages never made it to Jeremy and Hydee.

 

Again, this is not the place to air the alleged issues.

 

Ron/yumitori

 

---

 

Remember what the dormouse said...

Link to comment

quote:
Yumatori wrote:

I also caught Jeremy saying there's no record of e-mail complaints


No, that's not what he said. He said that there's no record of e-mail complaints from Cache-Advance. I know he can't say the same of MrGigabyte. It was obvious side-stepping by not being completely upfront about the matter.

 

Bear&Ducky is not muddying the waters -- he's bringing to this forum the concerns of those in his region, as he's already noted.

 

*****

Frogs taste like chicken, but fish is better for you.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BusBoy:

Conversly, if they do receive a prompt resolution, even if it isn't in their favor, I would hope that they would also share that with the community to let them know that Groundspeak is indeed being responsive and is holding everyone accountable.


I'm still waiting for a follow up on the e-mail in reply from approvers@geocaching.com aka Hydee. Let's hope the response is as quick as the first, although it doesn't seem to be happening. She's made at least 20 posts on the forums today but has not had a chance to respond. I'll continue to wait, but I'll be watching that broom and rug VERY closely. ;-)

Link to comment

You as a community has been given a proper place to voice your concerns. Through emails to Groundspeak. If you choose not to email Groundspeak that is your choice.

 

The Groundspeak Forums is not the place. Dredging up the past is not going to help. Approvers are chosen by Groundspeak, and to this time the approver that is being constantly brought back up has done a great job as an approver. Most of the cachers expressing concerns here are voicing hearsay not actual experience.

 

Again. This is not the place for this discussion.

 

cute.gif hydee cute.gif

I work for the frog

Please don't throw sand when playing in the sandbox!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...