Jump to content

Hemlock

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1353
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hemlock

  1. I notice the OP corrected the problem, and answered the reviewers other question, but forgot to re-enable the listing. Your reviewer said "You can re-enable your listing when you're ready for me to take another look." Until you do that, your reviewer won't see your answer. There's even a helpful link at the end of your reviewer's log that tells you how to re-enable your listing.
  2. Let me tell you what happened the one and only time I gave a hider carte blanche on a hide. This was years ago before we had Favorite Points, but when I look now, that same cacher's hides all have lots of Favorite Points. I lived and cached in his area, and found many of his hides, and knew they were good and adhered to the guidelines. So one day I'm going through the Review Queue, and the last one in the list was by this hider. It was getting late and I was tired, and I "trusted" this hider, so I barely looked at it, and simply hit the Publish button. Then I went to bed. The next morning I opened my email and Holy Smokes, Batman! Dozens of emails all about this one cache. Including one from the CO himself. It turned out there was a typo in the coords. The whole degrees was off by one. This put the coords smack in the middle of the Concord Naval Weapons Station, one of the most secure military bases in the area. Trust me. I learned a lesson that day.
  3. How long ago did you email him? There are no less than FOUR reviewers in Northern California, so it's not like you didn't have someone else to contact. At any rate, I took care of it for you. You probably need to update the description now.
  4. And now, as they say, the rest of the story... Please tell your friend to read the reviewer's note again carefully. Sorry for the bad machine translation from Turkish, but the reviewer said: Note the word "recommended." The reviewer did not deny the cache based on this. The actual reason the reviewer denied the cache is: (again, sorry for the bad translation) This is based on the cache's description: The guidelines clearly prohibit a cache placed within a business, especially if you have to interact with the employees.
  5. Actually, the long description was fine. The problem was in your hint where you had the following UBB code: [blue]...[/b] See the problem? HTML is run through HTML-Tidy which properly closes all HTML tags. Unfortunately it doesn't do the same for UBB code. I went ahead and changed the "blue" to just "b"
  6. Funny. I only see one cache of yours with this issue What you should do is communicate with your reviewer. Unfortunately that note you posted last week will not be seen by your reviewer until you enable the listing. Please read the 2nd paragraph of the note he posted to you.
  7. The new Cache Submission Form includes a few examples of coordinate formats that it accepts. As a reviewer, I have received several emails, and seen dozens of comments on submissions saying things like "I love the new form, but I don't know how to enter the degree symbol" or "nice form, except for the degree not on my keyboard" and one guy tried really hard with "I couldn't figure how to enter the degree so I had to convert to decimal. Very annoying." Please add another example that does not include any fancy characters. I also suggest the initial sentence be re-written so it doesn't sound like the list is the only formats accepted. Perhaps something like
  8. It is soooo tempting to move this full-circle back to the bug reports section, just for giggles :laughing:
  9. I've always used the logic that if a Challenge Cache owner requires a Bookmark List as proof of qualification, then the Challenge Cache itself must be PMO because only PMs can create Bookmark Lists. I see no reason to change that logic with the new guidelines.
  10. Does that mean that Kansas Stasher is not allowed to change it to a micro? Or simply that a micro throwdown is no substitute for the real thing? I've been avoiding commenting on that, mainly because the speculation here has been so dang entertaining. But since the thread may be closed soon, and you asked so nicely, I will say that I was only expressing my opinion and dislike for throwdowns and my desire for Kansas Stasher to replace it again. IIRC he had already replaced it once at that point, and I wanted to see it properly replaced again. I have clarified that to KS via email and have told him point blank that all he has to do is update the size to micro and enable the listing, and the cache would be within the guidelines. I've been ignored. At this point it is out of my hands and in Groundspeak's court. I expect a decision from them very soon unless KS wakes up and does something.
  11. Merged duplicate threads.
  12. Closing this thread in favor of the other one on the same subject, now that people are just cross-posting to both. I'm sure I'm not the only one who tires of reading the same posts twice.
  13. It is my experience that the majority of the time when a cache owner has to move his puzzle, he does not update the additional waypoint on the website. There is approximately zero incentive for him to do so. And don't get me started on all the cache owners that outright lie about where the final is
  14. Please keep this thread on topic. --Ringbone
  15. Actually, that was the 18th. Friday. Two days ago. Correct, but that is only for the first review. That happened within 2 days of your submission. Once that "first contact" happens, there is no guarantee of how long it may take.
  16. The threats of personal violence are already pouring into my inbox You'd think I'd killed someone's kitten or something
  17. Forum regulars will remember a cache in California that was placed in front of a school, with explicit permission from the principal. Problem was he didn't let all the staff know. So one day when he was away on business, a teacher sees someone hiding something in the school sign, and calls the cops. The school was placed on lockdown and it was a real mess. To this day I will not knowingly publish a cache on school grounds, even with permission. That said, if I make a mistake, I encourage you to send me an email and let me know. I'm sure all the other reviewers would appreciate the same.
  18. You might want to add some additional waypoints to your listing, so when your local reviewer looks at it, she'll be able to actually review it instead of just asking you to add the waypoints.
  19. Congrats! You found a cache that was never published. And it won't be, as it is in the Lake Mead recreational area, which is run by the National Park Service.
  20. I am a reviewer, but not for NH so it doesn't matter what I think either, but... I would not publish the new cache. 1. The waypoints of the older multi are marked as "stages of a multicache" which protects them from encroachment. The reviewer side of me is not going to second-guess whether they should really be classified that way or not. 2. The player side of me doesn't want to ruin the puzzle as set by the other hider. Of course your reviewer may or may not agree with my interpretation.
  21. I'm not in the closet, but I don't advertise either. I was recently at an event and sitting at a table with a bunch of people. Somewhere along the line a newbie starts ranting about a new cache of his that his reviewer (not me) wouldn't publish because of an agenda. Several people around the table, who knew who I am, snickered. Meanwhile, I calmly asked him for a little more information, then explained the agenda guideline to him and suggested ways to tone his page down so it could be published. I also told him to knock off the attitude because his reviewer was a. just doing his job and b. is a human being just like him. And I told him "for all you know, your reviewer might be here at this event." (He was, standing just 50 feet away talking to another group of people.) In the end, I don't think this newbie ever got a clue that he was talking to a reviewer, but I do think I changed his attitude a little and hopefully he went home and edited his cache and got it published. Unfortunately he had a really long obtuse handle and I couldn't remember it if my life depended on it, so I can't look up his cache.
  22. As one of the three reviewers for Northern California, I can let you know how things work here. Most answers are probably the same in Ohio. Or not. Maybe. But I did that once and was bitten. Bad. Someone I knew who had many fine caches submitted a new one. I opened the page, did a quick basic check and saw it was not near any other caches, and published it. A short time later I checked my email and there was several frantic emails telling me this new cache was deep inside the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Obviously off-limits. The last email was from the hider saying he fat-fingered the coords and the degrees should have been 121 not 120 or something like that. So now I look at everything. Every time. I usually look at them in order, but if I run across one that needs work, I'll typically set it aside and continue down the list publishing the ones with no issues, and perhaps putting notes on the easy ones with minor issues, such as simple proximity. Sometimes I'll have a limited time available to review, so I'd rather publish as many as possible, without getting held up for 10-15 minutes dealing with one complex one. There is just one queue. We grab from it whenever we get a chance. Sometimes we even grab the same one and review the same cache at the same time. I hate it when that happens.
  23. While you're doing that, I'll archive all the caches in California where one might be bitten by a rattlesnake or a tick which carries Lyme Disease, which should be about 95% of the caches. This is going to take a while
×
×
  • Create New...