mtn-man

Of all the times I've been suspended it was never for disagreeing with Groundspeak or even for saying that I thought a reviewer made a mistake. I have been suspended for saying Groundspeak was lazy because they wouldn't post a clarification to a guideline and once when a moderator interpreted what I said as implying that reviewers play favorites, but never for disagreeing. IMO, Groundspeak doesn't mind being questioned about the guideline or how they should be interpreted. What they (or at least the forum moderators) care about is that you follow the guidelines for using the forums. That means treating everyone with courtesy and respect. Thank you. Well said Toz. Disagreeing is fine. Coming into a topic that is going well and attempting to derail it isn't. Indeed. Quite a nice one. I hope some of the suggestions work out for the OP.

Closed at the request of the original poster.

Your best bet is to log yet another NA note on these caches. You can then forward one of them to Groundspeak to the contact address and say that these are not being attended to. That is the best course of action for you at this point. I wondered if nacissa's comment was some sort of joke frankly. I don't know where they heard that if that was a serious comment. I've never heard of anything like that. The TX reviewer does work on Greasemonkey script tools for fellow reviewers, but I am unaware of any work done directly for Groundspeak from what I know (but then again, I would not need to know really). He is owed many beers from the reviewer staff for his tremendous volunteer work and his efforts have made reviewing far better for me than those early days in 2002.

One thing that pretty much shoots some people down is comments like you have made in the past.

OK, and now for the facts. The cache was entered into the system on January 3. That's eleven days. On January 7 the reviewer posted that they had indeed been sick with a high fever and had taken time off from review to get better. This was posted a week before requested publication. Having just had a serious health issue myself, I understand this totally. The only thing I could think of was pain, pain, ouch, ouch. There were exchanges on January 7th regarding the placement. It required that the cache be moved from the original location. On January 9 the cache owner responded that the cache was in place and ready to be published. This isn't two weeks before, but rather just five days. The following day on January 10, the reviewer posted the following note: I am sure your cache will be published sometime soon. I am glad that people in my area are nice and understand that we as reviewers have personal lives, and sometimes we can be stressed in a big way. Comparing a volunteer cache reviewer to a volunteer fireman is absurd. Your comparison is more insulting to volunteer fireman than it is to volunteer cache reviewers. It is pitiful that you cheapen the work of these people. They volunteer their services to save people's lives and to save their property. I think you need to apologize to volunteer firemen frankly.

Yeah, I agree. Have to admit that I don't understand that one. You were born and raised in Tuscaloosa? I knew something wasn't right about you. (You know I'm kidding, and War Eagle.)

The first line of the note from the reviewer originally is: "The location is fine, and it's okay to use a fake electrical box/panel as long as you have specific permission for it." The cache owner then wrote to them via email saying they got permission, but then said: "I have taken down the cache". They then began to site several caches similar to the one they hid and others unrelated to the type of hide in issue here. I found it interesting that the cache owner said: "So what I want to know is do I just need to forgo telling you anything at all or just right out lie to you about any future caches?" The reviewer responded via the cache page that they would be happy to list the cache and quoted the parts of the guidelines that say "Having all the relevant information up front during the review process will help ensure a speedy listing." The reviewer then pointed out that if they do lie to the reviewer, then their peers might report the bad hide, which is true. There is no berating in the original reviewer note. The reviewer simply quoted the guidelines, and then gave examples of what public officials might think of this type of placement if they were called out due to suspicious activity. The reviewer note is rational and informational and not condescending.

I know it doesn't have to be perfect, but I think you could be susceptible to being complacent about it and not looking close enough. Right now we check that as a normal thing, but sometimes obviously still miss it since no one is perfect. These are great suggestions though, and it has been nice to see our reviewer tools improve and improve as the years have gone by. I remember those first days while on dial-up checking maps and kicking back while the map loaded and then nearest caches, etc. So much better now and it keeps getting better and better for us through the hard work of the Groundspeak developers. Kudos to them, as if we don't thank them enough.

By the way, there are newer reviewer tools to highlight a possible error and alert you to check more closely. It is an improvement for sure. That cache was in 2008 and I don't think that tool was active at that time. Hopefully this type of issue is less prevalent in the future.

Google has the data required. The TOS require you to use it in conjunction with displaying a Google map, though, so it can't be used stand-alone. It's also restricted tom something like 2500 queries per day. There is also geonames.org, which provides a reverse geocaoding Web service that even works down to the city level. It's pretty spiffy. I've used it to determine the names of cities for various challenge caches. I agree that the site should not be in the business of determining the state (or country) of a cache close to the border, but perhaps a system can be built to give an alert if the coordinates are, say, more than a few miles from the claimed state or country. For the example given, Washingont and California do not share a common border, so there would be no confusion. I'd be glad to donate my reverse-geocoding code to the reviewers! It isn't exact as it relates to state borders. I've seen this numerous times. A good example is a bunch of caches along the LA/AR border. Many look like they are in one state on Google, but they are in the other. I had to confirm with the cacher that they were in fact in the state he listed them in. I've seen this on the AL/MS border too. It would have to be exactly perfect, and it isn't. There is plenty of proof out there.

Wrong. They are in the queue based on the state or country selected. For states with multiple reviewers, each reviewer has to look at the coords and decide whether or not the cache is in his/her part of the state. Oh, that's very interesting. I stand corrected. So if I enter coordinates for a cache in Central Park, but select California as my state, it will jump to Krypton's queue? Yes, the queue for all California reviewers. Keep in mind that for the site to determine what state or even what country the cache is in based on the coordinates only, you would have to have a very highly accurate system that knows the exact boundary line for every state and every country on the globe. Considering the wiggly nature of some boundary lines, this seems impossible with the current data available.

Thanks for the link to the other topic. I'll close this one.

I changed it. You can contact the reviewer that published it by looking for the published log on more recent caches. The reviewer can then change it.

Any plans to give us the ability to provide a reason in that notification? Doubt it. Not a subject for the forum or this topic. Take it to the Feedback site. If you can find the cache-log that was deleted, it can possibly be reinstated if you email Groundspeak. If he found the cache, he found the cache. You can no longer delete finds on a whim. You have to have a good reason.

I have one hidden like that. It is upright and I won't tell how I hid it. I will send you a PM though the forums. Check your private messages.

You would probably need to use this link to recover your information. http://www.nevadageocaching.com/index.php/component/user/remind I'll move this to the regional forum so maybe someone can help you further.

Groundspeak does not use the forums for addressing web site or forum issues anymore. The Feedback Site was created for posting and resolving issues, and the Groundspeak Lackey's monitor the Feedback Site for issues and address them there. If you notice, the "Geocaching.com Web Site" forum is closed and read only, and has also been moved to the very bottom of the forums. If you have a web site issue and want comments from Groundspeak, then you should go to the feedback site by using the link in the upper section of the main forums page or by using the link on the left side of every cache page that says "Feedback". I am sorry that the moderators did not notice this topic. It happens. With the holidays I am sure all of the moderator team has been trying to squeeze in some fun with family and friends. Personally I was down with a severe root canal failure and resulting in endodontic treatment (last week was rough). In the forums you will get help from the community mostly, as you can see here. On the Feedback Site Groundspeak will see the issue and get involved directly. I hope that helps.

The snarkyness level in the forums is really getting to condition orange at this point. Posts like yours are not exactly showing ambassadorship either. Pot, kettle. Read The Forum Guidelines If you actually looked at their logs, you would see that they type more than "TFTC". That is at the end of their logs. You do not have to attend events or place caches to contribute to this game. That is absurd. It is great for the game when you take time to explain what you are doing to folks that don't cache and tell them about the fun you have. Explaining how the kids love the activity and sharing the fun with others and trading fairly and so many other things can make you a good ambassador to the game. Helping people in the forums is another way. Being snarky to people in the forums isn't one of them. Your comments illustrate why people don't come to these forums. Perhaps you should learn from the Howard Family as to how to post here.

All wheel mice, irrespective of age, have this function. Also, unless you have a mouse with some unique functions and or buttons, there is usually no need to run a special drive for it. XP and up will have suitable drivers built in. Off hand, the only thing I can think of is that either the wheel button on your mouse is broken, or at some point its function has been changed from the default and or left blank. An alternate method is to left click the link, while holding the Ctrl to open in a new Tab, and the Shift key to open in a new Window. One thing I have learned about an absolute statement like the one above is that they are typically absolutely incorrect. I have a Logitech Anywhere MX wheel mouse on my laptop. Pushing the wheel button down changes from a "clicky" type interval scroll (as in a line of text at a time) to a smooth, free-form scroll. In the free-from mode I can scroll it really fast and it will continue to scroll until I touch the wheel and stop it. I love this function! I can zip up and down forum pages in a flash. There is a button behind the wheel though, and pushing this button opens a clicked link in a new tab. The wheel did work on our desktop computer though. I'll check work tomorrow. This does illustrate that not all wheel mouse devices have this function. I have a few more traveling caches for the exclusions list. GC2CE0 -- GeoRover #2 (Archived in Tunisia, over 5,000 miles from me) GCD870 -- 50 States Cache (archived) and going back to the very beginning of course... GCC6B -- my first Mars Rover Traveler, the very first traveling cache. GCD5C -- Markwell's "Scooby Doo, Where are You?" traveler, the second traveler. GC105D -- my second Mars Rover, and the third traveling cache. Here is a bookmark list for you of traveling caches, though it is not complete. It has more than other bookmark lists from what I can tell. Most of these travelers are on some bookmark list somewhere. http://www.geocaching.com/bookmarks/view.aspx?guid=1a957e59-0482-4dd6-9f96-c864a578296f

Of course it's right. As long as it serves the powercaching community's desires, anything goes. Wow. Snark level just went off of the scale, Cap'n! From a moderator, no less! Probably why Keystone was the Geocacher of the year for 2009 and 2010.

Please don't use the word "puritan" to describe those who disagree with you on this topic. It's offensive and uncalled for. Using derogatory names does not promote constructive discussion, IMO. Agreed. Well said, and for the second time in this topic. You trying to get a moderator job Fizzy?

I saw the flooding on the news. Take care and I hope you and your extended family are all OK and unaffected. Closing the topic per your request.

You should look at Fizzy's reply below yours quoted above. Name calling is unacceptable in the forums. Fizzy did a much better job of getting the point across and was not offensive in the process.

Yes, doing this violates the Terms of Use for the site. Please feel free to become a premium member so you can gain this ability to download multiple caches yourself. I am going to close this topic.

Oh, rats! I did too. And I'd really like to have it back. Oh man, bummer on that one for sure. All of mine is lost in cyberspace too. I see we lost some of the signal icons too. Did Signal sell the tiniest violin on eBay? No more ice cream? No more popcorn? Oh the humanity! Some of us do have Signal stored away though. Still there - just click on the "Show All" and they show up. Now if the clipboard information was as easily fixed. Awesome! Will take some getting used to.