The Hornet

Actually there is no RULE to say you can't place your cache there. A GUIDELINE exists to prevent oversaturation of a particular area and to prevent accidental confusion between 2 caches. I would suggest that as you have put in so much effort into creating an exceptional experience and the fact that the "essence" of the other Unknown cache is some distance away and cannot in any way be confused when mapping them out then the reviewer could use their discretion and allow this as an exception. Indeed, 200ft is still some distance away although clearly within the normal exclusion radius. Guidelines are meant to GUIDE and reviewers are meant to use their experience and discretion. They are good people who want the best for caching and cachers and should not be confused with inflexible jobsworths.

I refer to my posting in one of the multiple threads that have been set up to debate this topic.

My iPhone map still gives me the option to choose between Satellite, Topo or Street maps. My PC still provides a choice between sufficient maps for all the planning I would need. My GPS still points to the cache. I guess the only thing the site doesn't provide is someone to hold my hand and lead me step by step to the cache. Since when did "change" become a 4 letter word? Geocaching is all about finding HIDDEN objects with a GPS, anything else is pure fluff. And could a passing forum mod please consolidate these two (or more?) threads into a single topic.

Hereyou go. I think you'll find Wendy has contributed more than many over the years to Geocaching.

Hehehe!

So would I but it's not going to happen. Long term reliance on the goodwill of volunteers to keep your business earning you money rather than taking full control is, to my mind, not good business sense. Like it or not, Groundspeak have long since changed from essentially a hobby site to a full grown business now and I think this should be reflected in the way they use people to make their money.

I'd definitely consider doing it.

Hardly offensive these days John. I reckon I should be OK, after all if a Catholic priest can say it I should be safe.

Must have changed since I was reviewing. We used to insist the published coordinates were within a couple of miles of the final location (to maintain TB's mileage) but the stages could be miles apart, even at the opposite ends of the country. I remember one or two where they were on different continents but you were recommended to enlist the help of a foreign geocacher to complete them!!

Banned from Sainsbury's Didn't like shopping there anyway. Yesterday I was at my local Sainsbury's store buying a large bag of Winalot dog food for my loyal pet and was in the checkout queue when a woman behind me asked if I had a dog. What did she think I had an elephant? So, since I'm retired and have little to do, on impulse I told her that no, I didn't have a dog, I was starting the Winalot Diet again. I added that I probably shouldn’t, because I ended up in hospital last time, but I'd lost 2 stone before I woke up in intensive care with tubes coming out of most of my orifices and IVs in both arms. I told her that it was essentially a perfect diet and that the way that it works is to load your pockets with Winalot nuggets and simply eat one or two every time you feel hungry. The food is nutritionally complete so it works well and I was going to try it again. (I have to mention here that practically everyone in queue was now enthralled with my story.) Horrified, she asked me if I ended up in intensive care because the dog food poisoned me. I told her no, I stepped off the kerb to sniff an Irish Setter's arse and a car hit me. I thought the guy behind her was going to have a heart attack he was laughing so hard. I'm now banned from Sainsbury's. Better watch what you ask retired people. They have all the time in the world to think of daft things to say. (Sorry OT I know but it DID concern dogs )

To be fair Andy, we DID try on occasions to promote the local "consensus" to Groundspeak, sometimes with some limited success. I have no idea if that happens now but I suspect not. Very true. Another thought I've had, as well as the "professional reviewers", is wouldn't it be nice to have an independent body or person to appeal to in the case of a dispute. Right now if you disagree with something a Groundspeak reviewer does you are told that you can go to "appeals@Groundspeak.com". It is frankly laughable that if you disagree with Groundspeak you can take your grievance to .............. Groundspeak! Even when I was involved as a reviewer we knew that it was virtually inevitable that Groundspeak would side with the reviewer. In this country if a company has a monopoly or very dominant position within a particular market we can usually appeal to an "Ombudsman". Hence OFCOM or OFWAT or whatever. I know Groundspeak is not British and those rules don't apply but maybe as a public relations exercise they might consider the appointment of an independent "OFCACHE".

Over the last few weeks, having been reading the forums again, a thought has begun to form. It's something I've wondered for a long time now but it has resurfaced due to recent postings. It concerns Groundspeak Reviewers. Let me start by supporting the efforts my erstwhile colleagues and the host of new reviewers put in. I know better than many here the work involved in being a reviewer so I thank them all for their continuing unpaid efforts. But.... (there had to be a "but" with a start like that! ) I wonder how viable Groundspeak's business model can be, having to rely on more and more unpaid volunteers to keep their business running. In the early days it was relatively simple for a few dedicated cachers to volunteer their time to promote the game locally. At least that's how I felt when I was doing it. I was in a privileged position being able to help what I saw as a new but growing pastime. I felt I could contribute to its development in the UK and my reward was seeing it shaped in a way that suited our particular culture and customs. Times change and the pastime has grown dramatically. The numbers of caches submitted has skyrocketed and more and more part time volunteers are being recruited to keep things going. Also the whole ethos of the game has changed and because of its size it is becoming more homogeneous around the world. There is less room for localisation and local flavour. Because of this I wonder if the time has come to change the way Groundspeak run their business and to start employing a small group of paid, professional, reviewers. I would imagine being able to insist on a relatively large group of disparate volunteers to apply a unified corporate approach is much more difficult than controlling a small group of paid employees. Whereas once, reviewers played a part in trying to represent local cachers to Groundspeak, the exact opposite is now happening. Presumably at the insistence of the company, local reviewers are having to impose more centrally directed rules upon a growing mass of the geocaching public. When a volunteer loses the opportunity for discretion and creativity I question whether that person would be better off as a paid employee carrying out his/her employer's instructions. Let me finish by reiterating that I do consider all our volunteers to be honest and dedicated people. What I am questioning is whether it is still feasible for a company that has grown so much to continue to rely on what at the end of the day is a group of amateur enthusiasts to support their revenue stream and corporate growth.

Really?!!

Years ago I had a similar collection and I created a cache especially to pass them on. They went very quickly!! I don't think I would do the same these days as I doubt many cachers recognise their significance. Have you thought of contacting Tim & June to see if they would take them back?

Hmm? GAGB are elected and represent a small proportion of UK cachers. While they do a reasonable job I would suggest they hold little influence within Groundspeak. Reviewers have a hand in every single Groundspeak cache created in the UK. They have a direct line into the community of similar reviewers around the world (the Reviewers' Watering Hole or whatever it's called these days) and it is this community which DOES have influence on Groundspeak's management. I would argue that UK reviewers ought to be using that forum to argue for the benefit of UK cachers. They OUGHT to be using their unique position to represent the rest of us. I know from personal experience that this used to be the case, not just me but my predecessors as well. If current UK reviewers believe they have no role to play in representing the rest of us then you have all gone down in my estimation. Sigh!

Ouch! I find myself agreeing with Moote again While I can understand the reason to want to stop geocaches being created purely as a marketing tool I believe, as I have always done, that reviewers should be allowed to use common sense to read a cache page and make a decision as to whether the setter is trying to actively promote something for commercial purposes or whether they are trying to help other cachers. Yes, that would inevitably lead to some inconsistencies but in my mind, better that than the ludicrous situation being described in this thread. Reviewers are chosen among other things for their intelligence and integrity (yes really!) so they should be trusted to use those attributes.

Be fair, they did admit their overzealousness in that case apologised. However some of the automatic forum censoring does assume everyone in the world speaks a language originating somewhere mid-way between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and has the same values and customs as the inhabitants of that region. The fact that it has been pointed out many times over the years and nothing has been done about it very irritating. But hey, I get easily irritated these days

As you seem fairly new in terms of forum posts and caches found may I let you know that you don't apply to become a reviewer, you are selected by those already in place. If you "rock the boat" you almost certainly will be blackballed by those who approve appointments.

Nobby, I think your words might be a little intemperate but I understand where you are coming from and given my experiences I can sympathise to some extent. When Dave (the short, fat bearded one!! ) and I resigned it was because of the very same concern about our inability to have a meaningful say in the way we were doing things here. It's not worth dwelling over nor repeating the arguments, but suffice it to say that after a long break I see little change. If anything things have become even more homogeneous and "Corporate" than way back then. I would suggest you keep on railing against what you disagree with but my advice would be to minimise emotion while clearly stating your views (which are already very clear). Nobody could deny you the opportunity to say what you feel on a discussion forum. Could they?!

I totally agree!!!!

Ah! I quite agree but unfortunately common sense is something increasingly frowned upon these days. There was a time reviewers attempted to use common sense but this was stamped upon. Which is one reason for the proliferation of petty rules nowadays. Sigh!!

Maybe I should clarify a little. My first thought was that as I no longer actively used the domain I might be able to sell it to a commercial organisation and make a few pence. However when Andy made his suggestion I thought it would help a commited group of volunteers doing something for UK based cachers. So I decided to let them have it for nothing on the proviso it was used by them on a not for profit basis. Andy readily agreed to this and I am delighted to be able to hand it over. I know from correspondence with Andy he has NO intention of selling it on to make a quick buck. So if anyone has the idea of trying to buy it I would suggest they don't bother.

Thanks for the offer but I've already decided to give it to Andy (Amberel) of opencaching.org.uk

I agree, a great idea so that's where it's going. I've temporarily set up web forwarding on www.geocache.co.uk until it can properly get sorted. Thanks for the suggestion.

A long time ago, when geocaching was in its infancy I bought the domain www.geocache.co.uk. I initially used it as a general resource when I was a reviewer and latterly as a list of links to my various caches. I have not kept it up to date and having just received a renewal notice I wondered whether I might get rid of it. What do people think I should do with it?