fantastic_4

Sorry just checking in to see if this public webspace was up and running again. Move along, nothing to see here...

Correct way to look at it, and this is part of the problem, this has not gone through the appeal process. Answers have been given and suggestions on adjustments, all ignored. This is now most likely being viewed as a no win situation. It does appear that no matter what is said, the OP will not be satisfied with the answer. Unfortuatley you are probably correct. It is a "Do as I say, not as I do" attitude.

or maybe not... I wonder if this is a public website? I stopped by to see if there was any response to this topic and what do you know, the site was down. Ironic isn't it?

I guess the general geocaching community has a vast knowledge of Quantum Physics, Pirate Lore, WWI codecs and Poki-Mon... at least a lot more than this cacher... because there are a good number of puzzles I couldn't solve only using the info on the cache listing. Now I feel stupid. You are overlooking the plain wording of the quoted guideline. It does *not* say "only using the info on the cache listing." It says "solvable from the information provided on the cache listing." Those are two very different statements. I think that's where the failures are coming into play here. From what I can understand from the situation the rule is being misapplied. It is my understanding the rule is in place so a cacher can proceed from one point to another without any requirement to email, or otherwise contact, the cache placer who would then provide you with a key piece of information. Unless I'm missing something, following clues from one web page to another does fit the standard of "solvable from the information provided." All of the elements are in place for the cacher to complete the hunt without any other outside input. Am I wrong in my interpretation? You are dead on. All elements were in place to solve the puzzle to the cache. CR you have been around to see this issue longer than we have. From what I have heard, we should not question the reviewer or we will not get our caches through to publishing, or we should be nice to the reviewer. I do want to have a good communicating relationship with the reviewer, but he/she is a person too. If any member of our group questions a decision, we are going to appeal it. That is what the process is for. I don't think this persons decisions were questioned enough and now has a "God Like" image. I may be wrong, because I am a person too, but we will question poor decisions such as this one.

Some markers are not Benchmarks at all. They may look the same with same type of inscription however, they may be ROW markers "Right of Way". They are placed as survey control points by various agencys such as the department of transportation, utility companies,etc... I was the consultant for the SCDOT realignment and drainage project involving the entrance to Lander University. We placed 7 of the markers and you would think they were benchmarks if you saw them.