Groundspeak Portal

Thanks.I hope someone in the group stops by to provide some insight as to how the voting went. I'm curious as to which of the published Peer Review criteria were most commonly used as a reason for 'nay' votes.Or if some other criteria was used.

Thanks for the update, Bruce.Do you happen to know if it failed by peer vote, or was it not allowed by Groundspeak?

cache_test_dummies: opinionate:-Multiple waymark visits (This was done intentionally at Jeremy's request, but the *way* it works may need investigationDo you mean that waymarking is now going to allow multiple visits per waymark like it did originally?I would consider this to be a very positive development. As of the moment, it appears that ...

What was the result of the peer review on this category?

I guess it comes down to who one considers to have contributed the most 'value' to this process - the person who originally discovered the object/location and brought that information to the web site, or the person who was able to identify a category into which to place it. 

I pretty much agree with you, but I'm not going to make a final decision until we hear from lliuqrevlis.

Good thinking!Ok, I've changed the variable types on all the date related fields in all my categories from 'simple date' to 'Islamic/Hebrew/Star Date'.Dates must now be entered in the following format:Remember that because of a bug, you have to drop any leading characters.Thanks, BQ!

Are there any workarounds for getting in a date with a three digit year?

At the moment, the simple date field is not accepting dates for years earlier than 1000.This is a problem reported to me by someone trying to submit a waymark to the Grave of a Famous Person category for an individual born in 699.

Ah, I see. So it is broken.At the moment, 1/1/1700 works, 11/11/1700 works, 01/01/1700 results in an error.Thanks, Bruce.

Has there been a change to the simple date variable type?Attempts to enter dates in a new waymark submittal always result in the error ''You must enter a valid date in the mm/dd/yyyy format''. I have tried using various date format, and have had no luck getting around the error (except to leave the response blank).

I don't really have a horse in this race, but I still haven't seen any good reason for not allowing it. Nothing that I thought was a good reason, anyway. silverquill:Okay, this is the purported reason for this category - not finding unique and interesting places to visit, but to help people find public facilities.Many categories don't specify a ...

opinionate:-Multiple waymark visits (This was done intentionally at Jeremy's request, but the *way* it works may need investigationDo you mean that waymarking is now going to allow multiple visits per waymark like it did originally?I would consider this to be a very positive development.

silverquill:Prevalent - fails this test because they are TOO prevalent!  Unless the category is severely restricted.I respectfully disagree that they are too prevalent. The limits to entries in the category as described in the OP and in a follow-up post sound like a reasonable approach to me. silverquill:You can't seriously tell me someone is

edit: post removed, already covered above.

Please understand that I'm not trying to be argumentative - I'm just trying to understand the value of your idea versus the 'cost'. BruceS:I am not looking at this really serving the current waymarking community as much as broadening the waymarking community in other ways.Even if a special categories feature isn't intended to serve the current ...

BruceS:Only place it is sometimes hard to find a restroom is a large city.Not so sure about that. I've encountered a few unexpected public toilets in rural areas that were most welcome. Lots of small towns don't have fast food places, and in small towns especially, libraries and other public buildings can have pretty unusual business hours. But ...