Groundspeak Portal

On geocaching.com they have nice and easy to read instructions on placing caches - http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx.  These instructions help out newbies.

Being a newbie to Waymarking we have already gotten in trouble.  Not wanting this to happen again, and still wanting to be a contributor, is there a similar page for listing waymarks? 

 

How or what did you get in trouble for?  Maybe you are misunderstanding the situation?

We got in trouble for not putting enough information on the page.  Areeably we did not put a lot on it, but had we been able to find instructions we might have understood what needed to be in Quick Description vs. Long Description and the amount of information required. 

Honestly, there is no answer to this issue you bring up.  Some people want a wordy description on everything.  Some people are ok with whatever you write.  I find that some waymarks lend to a wordy waymark while others only make me want to write a word.

You'll figure it out...  Check out some of the other threads.  There are a bunch about this.

There are two things I advise when submitting waymarks for the first time in a category:  1st read the category description fully not just the short description of the category.   2nd look at a few of the recent submissions in the category, these will give you an indication of what is acceptable in the category.

So it seems rules vary by groups or reviewers.  I guess it has to be that way based on how waymarking works. 

Getting an email from a reviewer which includes "For the life of me I cannot figure out why you would refuse to write a complete and comprehensive waymark." is not encouraging.  I was not refusing, I wanted to particpate but the rules were not clear.

This is not meant to call out the reviewer, just point out that instructions / minimum requirements might be helpful to newbies and may help to encourage new people to contribute to the game.

twocat:

So it seems rules vary by groups or reviewers.  I guess it has to be that way based on how waymarking works. 

Getting an email from a reviewer which includes "For the life of me I cannot figure out why you would refuse to write a complete and comprehensive waymark." is not encouraging.  I was not refusing, I wanted to particpate but the rules were not clear.

This is not meant to call out the reviewer, just point out that instructions / minimum requirements might be helpful to newbies and may help to encourage new people to contribute to the game.

Each category has its own requirements for waymarks to be submitted.  You should strive to make a waymark you are proud of and not want to just meet some minimum requirements, however the reviewer should give more complete information on what is needed for your waymark to be acceptable without being sarcastic.

BruceS:

twocat:

So it seems rules vary by groups or reviewers.  I guess it has to be that way based on how waymarking works. 

Getting an email from a reviewer which includes "For the life of me I cannot figure out why you would refuse to write a complete and comprehensive waymark." is not encouraging.  I was not refusing, I wanted to particpate but the rules were not clear.

This is not meant to call out the reviewer, just point out that instructions / minimum requirements might be helpful to newbies and may help to encourage new people to contribute to the game.

Each category has its own requirements for waymarks to be submitted.  You should strive to make a waymark you are proud of and not want to just meet some minimum requirements, however the reviewer should give more complete information on what is needed for your waymark to be acceptable without being sarcastic.

Agreed. While I don't like seeing minimal amounts of text, I like to think that I'm neutral enough in my declines when I suggest they give more content.

If that quote you gave was the real quote, I wouldn't have been impressed either. There was a lot of negative tone in there. Instead wording like "I'd suggest adding more text to make this a more complete and comprehensive waymark."

Nagative comments create Nagative replies.

BQ

the blue quasar:

BruceS:

twocat:

So it seems rules vary by groups or reviewers.  I guess it has to be that way based on how waymarking works. 

Getting an email from a reviewer which includes "For the life of me I cannot figure out why you would refuse to write a complete and comprehensive waymark." is not encouraging.  I was not refusing, I wanted to particpate but the rules were not clear.

This is not meant to call out the reviewer, just point out that instructions / minimum requirements might be helpful to newbies and may help to encourage new people to contribute to the game.

Each category has its own requirements for waymarks to be submitted.  You should strive to make a waymark you are proud of and not want to just meet some minimum requirements, however the reviewer should give more complete information on what is needed for your waymark to be acceptable without being sarcastic.

Agreed. While I don't like seeing minimal amounts of text, I like to think that I'm neutral enough in my declines when I suggest they give more content. If that quote you gave was the real quote, I wouldn't have been impressed either. There was a lot of negative tone in there. Instead wording like "I'd suggest adding more text to make this a more complete and comprehensive waymark." Nagative comments create Nagative replies. BQ

Yes, don't let this discourage you. Most of us here are always willing to help out an newbie.

I also recieved a, rather small amount of sarcasm, when I was turned down.  I responded back with a question about the problem and never recieved a reply.

 

Like the "little train that could" I will keep plugging away.  Its kind of like GeoCaching, you have been told the problem and now you have to try and figure out whats wrong. 

The way I look at it is we all are a bit unsure when we start out new things and over time, get better at it. You will get better at it too as you hang in there. But then, I have gotted feedback that I considered demanding and bordering on being a veiled threat. Ticked me off for a while. Then I remembered that unfortunatley, there are just people out there that have a poor sense of how they feed back. The key is that because you got poorly phrased feedback, does not mean that you did anything wrong. We can all, especially me, do better and that is where you could concentrate.

You cannot be successful pleasing everyone. You can be successful in pleasing yourself.

Unfortnately the saga continues.  The email from the reviewer indicated that we had left him not choice but to put it up for a vote and we would hear back in 3 days.  Now over a week later we have not heard back and the waymark is locked.  Because of his attitude all we want to do at this point is acrhive it and never hear from him again, and we can't even do that.

Frustrating.

twocat:

Unfortnately the saga continues.  The email from the reviewer indicated that we had left him not choice but to put it up for a vote and we would hear back in 3 days.  Now over a week later we have not heard back and the waymark is locked.  Because of his attitude all we want to do at this point is acrhive it and never hear from him again, and we can't even do that.

Frustrating.

The delay might be related to the Group Vote Bug mentioned in another current thread.

0ccam:

twocat:

Unfortnately the saga continues.  The email from the reviewer indicated that we had left him not choice but to put it up for a vote and we would hear back in 3 days.  Now over a week later we have not heard back and the waymark is locked.  Because of his attitude all we want to do at this point is acrhive it and never hear from him again, and we can't even do that.

Frustrating.

The delay might be related to the Group Vote Bug mentioned in another current thread.

Thanks for the heads up - I sent off a mail to the reviewer and he unlocked it.

I don't think any of us is unsympathetic to the problem that you describe.  I know I've occasionally been frustrated by a waymark that was declined.

As one who also reviews categories, I've seen a lot of waymarks from new people.  I spend a lot of time with these new waymarks and try to point out ways to improve them, if needed.  I'll decline a new waymarker's submission only if I really have to.  (Like one today where coordinates were in the ocean off Cuba).  I've seen some new waymarker, who were patient and willing to learn, turn out some of the highest quality waymarks around.  There have been a few who never seem to get it, and despite repeated suggestions and help, seem to submit sub-standard work.  But, that is rare.

BruceS has the best two suggestions, and that is what I try to emphasize.

Each category has different and often very specific requirements for posting a waymark, so it is important to read the expanded descriptions and the posting requirements for each category.  Granted, some are better written than others, but most give you a good idea of what they are looking for.  And, looking at the existing waymarks in a particular category can be very useful, keeping in mind that some of those waymarks are better than others.  So, take the best ones as examples to follow.

Even though I'm a fairly experienced waymarker, this is the way I approach a category that may be new to me.  (A few times I didn't do this thoroughly and was embarrassed).  If I'm not sure I've understood everything, I will include a note in the private message box when I submit the waymark expressing my desire to have a good waymark and asking for advice if there is something lacking.  This goes a long way in good communication.

Then, you will find that there are just personal differences from one category to another, and even among officers in the same category, maybe from one day to another . . . .  So, I hope that you will continue to be persistent and not get too put off by one or two bad experience.  I think we do have a lot of fun here, and that is our goal.

silverquill:

I don't think any of us is unsympathetic to the problem that you
describe.  I know I've occasionally been frustrated by a waymark that
was declined.



As one who also reviews categories, I've seen a lot of waymarks from
new people.  I spend a lot of time with these new waymarks and try to
point out ways to improve them, if needed.  I'll decline a new
waymarker's submission only if I really have to.  (Like one today where
coordinates were in the ocean off Cuba).  I've seen some new waymarker,
who were patient and willing to learn, turn out some of the highest
quality waymarks around.  There have been a few who never seem to get
it, and despite repeated suggestions and help, seem to submit
sub-standard work.  But, that is rare.



BruceS has the best two suggestions, and that is what I try to emphasize.



Each category has different and often very specific requirements for
posting a waymark, so it is important to read the expanded descriptions
and the posting requirements for each category.  Granted, some are
better written than others, but most give you a good idea of what they
are looking for.  And, looking at the existing waymarks in a particular
category can be very useful, keeping in mind that some of those
waymarks are better than others.  So, take the best ones as examples to
follow.



Even though I'm a fairly experienced waymarker, this is the way I
approach a category that may be new to me.  (A few times I didn't do
this thoroughly and was embarrassed).  If I'm not sure I've understood
everything, I will include a note in the private message box when I
submit the waymark expressing my desire to have a good waymark and
asking for advice if there is something lacking.  This goes a long way
in good communication.



Then, you will find that there are just personal differences from one
category to another, and even among officers in the same category,
maybe from one day to another . . . .  So, I hope that you will
continue to be persistent and not get too put off by one or two bad
experience.  I think we do have a lot of fun here, and that is our goal.

What SilverQuill posted above, simply put is excellent advice and guidance. I had to give praise for such a well constructed posting.

BQ

the blue quasar:

silverquill:

I don't think any of us is unsympathetic to the problem that you describe.  I know I've occasionally been frustrated by a waymark that was declined.

What SilverQuill posted above, simply put is excellent advice and guidance. I had to give praise for such a well constructed posting. BQ

Indeed, SilverQuill has always been an example of how we should play the game and interact with one another. BQ on the other hand is such a kiss@ss

Seriously, (you know I had to do it) we're here for the fun we have waymarking and this forum was set up so we can help one another with these kind of issues. All of the folks who've responded are people I enjoy dealing with and have made the game not only fun to play, but a lot easier to understand the differences one may encounter, so don't let a few snags discourage you, twocats.

Peace,

TF7

Due to the abuse from the reviewer we have archived the one Waymark that was approved,  deleted the Waymark that was denied, and we will not be submitting any new Waymarks to this or any other cateogory he is a reviewer in.

However, we are not discouraged - we are looking forward be being active contributors to Waymarking!

<twocat> skrev i en meddelelse news:21866@portal.groundspeak.com...

However, we are not discouraged - we are looking forward be being active contributors to Waymarking!

twocat:

Due to the abuse from the reviewer we have archived the one Waymark that was approved,  deleted the Waymark that was denied, and we will not be submitting any new Waymarks to this or any other cateogory he is a reviewer in.

However, we are not discouraged - we are looking forward be being active contributors to Waymarking!

Sad to hear that someone was less than helpful. Good to know that you are going to keep at it.

BQ

Q10:

Please, please, are there not a Permanent
Orienteering Course for me? :-)

I am so crazy about seeing orienteeringsmaps from
all over the world.

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

skrev i en meddelelse
href="news:21866@portal.groundspeak.com">news:21866@portal.groundspeak.com...

However, we are not discouraged - we are looking forward be being active
contributors to Waymarking!
src="http://portal.groundspeak.com/emoticons/emotion-2.gif">

You are a Premium Member, and as such you are entitled to start a Group for the purposes of creating such a category.



BQ

<the blue quasar> skrev i en meddelelse news:21876@portal.groundspeak.com...

You are a Premium Member, and as such you are entitled to start a Group for the purposes of creating such a category.

Well lookie that... it already exists. I can't keep up with all the categories anymore LOL.

BQ

There are a number of Categories that it is just too much of a hassle to contibute to.