When is an answer not an answer?

[Simply Paul]

When it's an answer on the 'other place's' forum by a Groundspeak Lackey (the correct technical term, as approved by GS) to a cacher's question.

Is it just me or have straight answers to straight questions become a bit few and far between from GS? What have they got to hide? What are they protecting us from? If knowledge is power, I'm feeling pretty powerless. I've had the same experience via email in the last few months too, with various US/global/super Mods and/or Reviewers making several lines of text say absolutely nothing. Worthy of a politician, in fact.

Has anyone else detected this trend, and could perhaps post their favourite example of a non-answer response?

I should point out that I think the UK Mods/Reviewers have generally been rather more open/clearer/helpful- even if I've not much liked the look of their responses, on occasion.

[Wadders]

When it's an answer on the 'other place's' forum by a Groundspeak Lackey (the correct technical term, as approved by GS) to a cacher's question.

Is it just me or have straight answers to straight questions become a bit few and far between from GS? What have they got to hide? What are they protecting us from? If knowledge is power, I'm feeling pretty powerless. I've had the same experience via email in the last few months too, with various US/global/super Mods and/or Reviewers making several lines of text say absolutely nothing. Worthy of a politician, in fact.

Has anyone else detected this trend, and could perhaps post their favourite example of a non-answer response?

I should point out that I think the UK Mods/Reviewers have generally been rather more open/clearer/helpful- even if I've not much liked the look of their responses, on occasion.

Totally agree, with your sentiments, I find it downright rude!
But as everyone keeps telling us.......it's their forum
We are just customers that they don't give a s. h. 1. t about!

Honestly, if they were just a bit more forthcoming and open, perhaps some of the animosity would diminish

[The Hornet]

It would certainly seem to be the latest policy although I'm at a loss to know why. It always seemed to be that questions used to be answered, or at least commented upon. Not any more though.

Shame how things have developed over at GSP.

[Jaz666]

Perhaps they've been taking lessons from UK Polititians?

[fraggle69]

They voted a retarded cowboy in for 8 years, how can you expect them to give you a straight answer. That was Russel Brands words not mine...

[Dave from Glanton]

Has anyone else detected this trend, and could perhaps post their favourite example of a non-answer response?

How about this from Michael?

The question was just brought to my attention. I do not read every thread in this forum. As I have stated before the best way to ask me a question is to email me through my profile. I check emails everyday. I do not check this forum every day.

In response to the question at hand. I gave all the detail I was able to give in my first post. I have no additional information that I can give out in response to the question.

As I said in response to Alaisair's earlier comment within the thread which that came from "No reply I am afraid, but Michael does not know me and would have no reason to trust me more than anyone else I guess."

"No reason to trust you more than anyone else" == "you have as much right to receive a reply as any other member of the GC.com community"

So that would be no right at all then?

[Mrs Blorenge]

When I noticed on the Forum that Michael had not responded to the question, I contacted him and gave him the link to it as I assumed he hadn't seen it. He put up his response within 20 minutes...

You might not like his response but have you considered the possibility that either

a) He doesn't have any further details to give because someone else is dealing with this matter. (I'd guess MissJenn, as she was the one who archived the caches in London) or

b) He may know further details but GSP may have been asked to keep them confidential, for whatever reasons?

I think it's wrong to automatically assume that because someone asks a question then they have a right to a detailed answer.

[The Hornet]

I think it's wrong to automatically assume that because someone asks a question then they have a right to a detailed answer.

I agree 100% that no one has a right to a DETAILED answer.

However I do believe that it is only reasonable to expect that an question in a Groundspeak forum (which IS being closely monitored by Groundspeak at the moment), aimed at Groundspeak warrants the courtesy of at least a brief reply.

That happened in this case so I have no complaints in this example.

What does cause me frustration is the frequent lack of "official" communication elsewhere in the UK section of the Groundspeak forums, even when it is requested politely.

[PopUpPirate]

I agree 100% that no one has a right to a DETAILED answer.

However I do believe that it is only reasonable to expect that an question in a Groundspeak forum (which IS being closely monitored by Groundspeak at the moment), aimed at Groundspeak warrants the courtesy of at least a brief reply.

That happened in this case so I have no complaints in this example.

What does cause me frustration is the frequent lack of "official" communication elsewhere in the UK section of the Groundspeak forums, even when it is requested politely.

Yet conversely, if you step out of line, that's dealt with rapido!

[Dave Gerrie]

When I noticed on the Forum that Michael had not responded to the question, I contacted him and gave him the link to it as I assumed he hadn't seen it. He put up his response within 20 minutes...

You might not like his response but have you considered the possibility that either

a) He doesn't have any further details to give because someone else is dealing with this matter. (I'd guess MissJenn, as she was the one who archived the caches in London) or

b) He may know further details but GSP may have been asked to keep them confidential, for whatever reasons?

I think it's wrong to automatically assume that because someone asks a question then they have a right to a detailed answer.

or c) GS are endeavouring to find out from the London authorities exactly what the situation is/was with those caches, and don't want to make any statements until they know what happened.

Incidentally, and interestingly, the three forcibly archived london caches were collected in by JT a few days later, and none had been tampered with - all in all, very odd!

Back to OP though, I do agree that there seems to be a lot more reticence on the part of GSP to provide any feedback (for want of a better word) even if it only amounts to an acknowledgement that we have asked a question! I'm an optimist though, and like to think this is because they are so busy feeding the hamsters, rather than part of a large anti UK conspiracy!

Dave

[Mrs Blorenge]

... I'm an optimist though, and like to think this is because they are so busy feeding the hamsters, rather than part of a large anti UK conspiracy!
Dave

I don't know about anybody else, but I've found that the recent batch of hamsters are just not cutting the mustard - Very poor quality. I have a feeling that someone's cutting corners and using those pigmy ones from Siberia.

[Edgemaster]

I don't know about anybody else, but I've found that the recent batch of hamsters are just not cutting the mustard - Very poor quality. I have a feeling that someone's cutting corners and using those pigmy ones from Siberia.

Yeah, they seem to keep dying in the middle of posting a message