Email Address Aliases Approver Suggestion

June 8, 2005

It'd be quite a bit nicer if you could email your local approvers in an easy way prior to setting up a cache (as is frequently recommended in the forums and in the rules). It's hard to do this in areas where multiple approvers may be in control of an area. Specifically, if you could email some address and have it get to all of your local approvers it would excellent. There are a few ways you could do this:

admin-state@admin.geocaching.com

admin-ZIP@admin.geocaching.com

for example. You'd need the reviewer help to do this, of course, but it would be fairly easy to do the first since I think you likely have the info. The second would be much more useful in high-density states, however. I think eve that would be fairly useful. You probably have coordinates for admins already, and that an a admin-search radius tied to the zip code DB would easily let you create mail alias maps.

18.9k · June 8, 2005

Find a new(ish) cache near your Home coordinates - look at the bottom of the page to see who approved it - click link to contact. Poor man's way of finding your approver. Not gauranteed to be 100% accurate but not a bad way to start.

1.2k · June 8, 2005

325 found and you dont know your reviewer?????

June 8, 2005

I also would like to see the approvers have addresses that have geocaching.com somewhere in them. Just had someone spoofing MTfellwalkers name on the new Montana group and it has caused some confusion- and accusations of rigging the voting. I would hope that having a geocaching.com or Groundspeak.com e-mail address would make it harder to pretend to be an approver.

I don't care what they call themselves (volunteers, slaves, bearers of burden, approvers, whatever) , but think they need an offical e-mail address that can be used instead of yahoo, gmail, hotmail, personal or freesite addresses.

As this activity continues to grow, there will continue to be calls for approver lists and contact information. I can only hope that there the plan for how this site grows includes something that alleviates them. But right now.... is there any way to make the volunteers an offical part of the website instead with e-mail addresses that are actually connected with it instead of a seperate entity?

Pretty Please?

-Jennifer

1.4k · June 8, 2005

Almost all of the reviewers have a @geocachingadmin.com email address. Not all of them use it, though.

June 8, 2005

Almost all of the reviewers have a @geocachingadmin.com email address. Not all of them use it, though.

Good to know, thanks!

-J

June 8, 2005

Find a new(ish) cache near your Home coordinates - look at the bottom of the page to see who approved it - click link to contact. Poor man's way of finding your approver. Not gauranteed to be 100% accurate but not a bad way to start.

No no no. I do know who mine are. But, they did recently change and I didn't know that during the change period. And they do change. And there are multiple reviewers and I want to mail them all at once and don't want to have to personally keep track. When everyone is forced et personally keep track of stuff like that, errors happen regardless of how old a cacher is or how new (who certainly make more). It's just a convenience. A process improvement. Likely, it's an easy one. And it would be much more accurate.

(I'd bet that my potential cache-placement circle overlaps multiple zones too but I don't know where those boundaries actually are.)

June 8, 2005

Find a new(ish) cache near your Home coordinates - look at the bottom of the page to see who approved it - click link to contact. Poor man's way of finding your approver. Not gauranteed to be 100% accurate but not a bad way to start.

well thats not always true

i had one of my own caches get appoved by a guy in navada (roadrunner)

and i live on the coast of oregon. out of the hundreds of appovers its some time its random

the local one i have ran in to on the oregon coast is

Team Misguided

out of seattle wa.

Edited June 8, 2005 by Charles Iverson

21.9k · June 8, 2005

A process improvement. Likely, it's an easy one. And it would be much more accurate.

Ummm, nope... not at all.

In many cases we use a latitude line or a longitude line to divide the territory between two reviewers. Oh, and we can adjust that boundary from week to week, depending on who's busy. In other cases it's state or national boundaries. For me, you would need to program the following: New cache reviews and cache maintenance issues for all of West Virginia, the portion of Pennsylvania that's west of W078°, and all of Ohio except for the portion south of N40° and west of W083° 50', plus cache maintenance issues (but not new cache reviews) for all of Maryland and DC. Oh, and that is expected to change once and probably twice later this summer.

The makeup of the review team and the boundaries of the territory we cover change almost weekly. For instance, the information in Charles Iverson's post was accurate during the week when his cache was approved, but not any longer. Or, we added another reviewer in Europe this week, thereby relieving the overworked Erik88l-r from responsibility for several countries whose geocachers speak various languages that babelfish could barely help him with.

We have not yet found a method to keep an up-to-date list or map of the review territories available to the community. It's harder than it looks, otherwise it would already be in place. To go a step beyond that and program something based on zip codes would be light years away.

Find a new(ish) cache near your Home coordinates - look at the bottom of the page to see who approved it - click link to contact. Poor man's way of finding your approver. Not gauranteed to be 100% accurate but not a bad way to start.

Ummm, that only works if that new(ish) cache is one of yours.

If you are unsure who to contact, send an e-mail to contact at geocaching.com and ask for it to be forwarded to the proper reviewer.

June 8, 2005

We have not yet found a method to keep an up-to-date list or map of the review territories available to the community. It's harder than it looks, otherwise it would already be in place. To go a step beyond that and program something based on zip codes would be light years away.

That's what I was afraid of. Oh well, it was just an idea to help the users. If it's not possible, then it's not possible!

Thanks.

18.9k · June 8, 2005

Find a new(ish) cache near your Home coordinates - look at the bottom of the page to see who approved it - click link to contact. Poor man's way of finding your approver. Not gauranteed to be 100% accurate but not a bad way to start.

Ummm, that only works if that new(ish) cache is one of yours.

If you are unsure who to contact, send an e-mail to contact at geocaching.com and ask for it to be forwarded to the proper reviewer.

Ok - so it works much better for those of us out here on the sparsely populated plains where e-mouse rules!!!.

........(sparsley populated caches and people).

9.4k · June 8, 2005

If there's a particular problem you have I need to know what it is. You're suggesting a solution and I'm trying to determine the particular problem you're having.

It isn't about contact issues, because obviously your issues are being answered rather quickly here. And it doesn't seem to be a reviewer contact issues since you were able to access these forums and have access to what you need.

Please help me by bringing up a specific issue you may be having. The only specific issue seems to be that you were unaware of any changes to the guidelines recently. My answer would be to visit the "hide and seek a cache" page and check the date the guidelines were last updated. We were nice enough to show the date in the text before the new cache submission form.

June 8, 2005

If there's a particular problem you have I need to know what it is.

This suggest was only to make it easier for people to contact their approvers, especially if they're not certain who it is. As many have pointed out, you can jump through less-than-obvious hoops to figure out who your approver is and contact them. My suggestion was merely to help newbies figure it out in an easier and straight forward way.

Personally, I don't have a problem. I know who my approvers are (though I have yet to place a cache to the far west of me where the approvers are quite possibly a different crowd; I could still figure it out by looking at the bottom of a number of web pages. But wouldn't it be easier on everyone if there was a simple address mapping to mail to that would get automatically redirected?)

Anyway, it's been explained that this isn't possible since the data is not there to create a mapping. Thus, my suggestion is unimplementable currently I believe.

24.7k · June 8, 2005

The suggestion is valid. The question comes up all the time. "Who is my approver" it gets answers, most of the time in the forums, but you have to realize that you can ask the question in the forums to begin with.

9.4k · June 8, 2005

Actually not really. If your cache is being reviewed, the reviewer will contact you. If you have a particular question about cache placement, the forums and contact page are perfectly acceptable ways to get in touch with who you need to get in touch with. Having a general "hmm.. what do folks think about this idea?" question is good for the forums.

So again, I ask what the specific problem is, not a solution to an undefined problem.

24.7k · June 8, 2005

The suggestion is valid because the question keeps coming up. Simple as that. In an approver based system it would be nice to know who you're approver is to ask them question. They are the one you have to sell on whatever idea you have. The bottom line is that if you are going to use approvers, they really need to be easy to find and contact before there is an issue. It’s easier for everyone involved. Evidently it’s difficult to accomplish because even approvers hate the concept of being easy to contact or they would not rally against any means of making them easy to find for any area. If the need wasn’t there the question would not keep coming up.

However in a very real way you are right.

My track record working with approvers in advance of a cache is about a 33% response rate. Questions and clarifications on the guidelines in advance of a cache must of been a low priority at the time.

As for using the forums. Bah. Face it: Most of us forum regulars can kibitz but we don't have any real say, and even less sway.

So doing nothing and not knowing who your approver is, is 66% effective based on my experience.

9.4k · June 8, 2005

The suggestion is valid because the question keeps coming up. Simple as that.

No it isn't that simple. You can take a number of questions that are well documented and have answers readily available - but they still keep being brought up in the forums or at the contact address. And this is a place to ask questions, isn't it?

Generally people don't read and it is as simple as that. Creating a complicated change form to tell you who your reviewer is doesn't really solve any issue of which I am aware.

June 8, 2005

Jeremy says: If your cache is being reviewed, the reviewer will contact you. ... So again, I ask what the specific problem is ...

The problem is knowing whom to contact before I click the "Yes, this cache is currently active" checkbox. Or even before I create a cache in the first place. Reviewing comes fairly far down in the list of cache placement activities.

First I have to decide where to place a cache. This may involve long hikes or bike/car travel.

Second is making up the container (especially if the container depends on the location.)

Third is creating the cache page.

Finally comes the review process and any follow up revisions to the cache.

If instead I could ask someone before step #1 about the legality of the cache placement (e.g., "can I place a cache in the state park") or about qualifications of a multi-cache or ... well ... any number of questions then I could save myself a whole lot of trouble from the very beginning.

Now personally I am willing to accept that there is currently no good way to allow a person to figure out whom is his/her approver. I hope that some day there will be a method, especially one based on zip code or city. However to say that there is no problem is just ignoring the very real troubles that the rest of us have in knowing from the git-go as to the validity of a cache placement.

9.4k · June 8, 2005

"can I place a cache in the state park"

This is a specific question. It depends. Since we assume you received permission the reviewer really doesn't have much to say on that. If you have a question about particular policies you can post a message in the regional forum.

) or about qualifications of a multi-cache or ... well ... any number of questions then I could save myself a whole lot of trouble from the very beginning.

That's what the forums are for. You can solve a major percentage of issues by posting here. Of course I can try and assist you if you have any particular questions, but if it is an item out of the ordinary you can use the contact link on every page of the web site.

I'm still trying to figure out the root problem. Is the idea of a username reviewer a kind of, I don't know how to put this, but some kind of security blanket? I don't see any more use of it than a warm fuzzy feeling, especially since the contact link is a pretty good source of question answering.

18.9k · June 8, 2005

... ignoring the very real troubles that the rest of us have in knowing from the git-go as to the validity of a cache placement....

ummmm....

Try reading the guidelines, that is the reference that the reviewers will use. If it isn't covered in the guidelines - come here to the forums and ask. Or simply use the contact@geo...com address and, as has been mentioned, it will be forwarded to the appropriate person.

June 8, 2005

I have brought this idea up in the past

Why not have a list of all the reviewers in order of state or we can always go off of what the forums go by

Geocaching Groups by Region / State

just a idea

6.4k · June 8, 2005

I have brought this idea up in the past

Why not have a list of all the reviewers in order of state or we can always go off of what the forums go by

Geocaching Groups by Region / State

just a idea

In many cases we use a latitude line or a longitude line to divide the territory between two reviewers. Oh, and we can adjust that boundary from week to week, depending on who's busy. In other cases it's state or national boundaries. For me, you would need to program the following: New cache reviews and cache maintenance issues for all of West Virginia, the portion of Pennsylvania that's west of W078°, and all of Ohio except for the portion south of N40° and west of W083° 50', plus cache maintenance issues (but not new cache reviews) for all of Maryland and DC. Oh, and that is expected to change once and probably twice later this summer.

The makeup of the review team and the boundaries of the territory we cover change almost weekly. For instance, the information in Charles Iverson's post was accurate during the week when his cache was approved, but not any longer. Or, we added another reviewer in Europe this week, thereby relieving the overworked Erik88l-r from responsibility for several countries whose geocachers speak various languages that babelfish could barely help him with.

We have not yet found a method to keep an up-to-date list or map of the review territories available to the community. It's harder than it looks, otherwise it would already be in place. To go a step beyond that and program something based on zip codes would be light years away.

June 8, 2005

I have brought this idea up in the past

Why not have a list of all the reviewers in order of state or we can always go off of what the forums go by

Geocaching Groups by Region / State

just a idea

In many cases we use a latitude line or a longitude line to divide the territory between two reviewers. Oh, and we can adjust that boundary from week to week, depending on who's busy. In other cases it's state or national boundaries. For me, you would need to program the following: New cache reviews and cache maintenance issues for all of West Virginia, the portion of Pennsylvania that's west of W078°, and all of Ohio except for the portion south of N40° and west of W083° 50', plus cache maintenance issues (but not new cache reviews) for all of Maryland and DC. Oh, and that is expected to change once and probably twice later this summer.

The makeup of the review team and the boundaries of the territory we cover change almost weekly. For instance, the information in Charles Iverson's post was accurate during the week when his cache was approved, but not any longer. Or, we added another reviewer in Europe this week, thereby relieving the overworked Erik88l-r from responsibility for several countries whose geocachers speak various languages that babelfish could barely help him with.

We have not yet found a method to keep an up-to-date list or map of the review territories available to the community. It's harder than it looks, otherwise it would already be in place. To go a step beyond that and program something based on zip codes would be light years away.

well on that list you can put if you live latitude line or a longitude line

here is your reviewer and so on and so on... of all the states on one page.. and put the admin in charge of changing there listing

Edited June 8, 2005 by Charles Iverson

6.4k · June 8, 2005

I have brought this idea up in the past

Why not have a list of all the reviewers in order of state or we can always go off of what the forums go by

Geocaching Groups by Region / State

just a idea

In many cases we use a latitude line or a longitude line to divide the territory between two reviewers. Oh, and we can adjust that boundary from week to week, depending on who's busy. In other cases it's state or national boundaries. For me, you would need to program the following: New cache reviews and cache maintenance issues for all of West Virginia, the portion of Pennsylvania that's west of W078°, and all of Ohio except for the portion south of N40° and west of W083° 50', plus cache maintenance issues (but not new cache reviews) for all of Maryland and DC. Oh, and that is expected to change once and probably twice later this summer.

The makeup of the review team and the boundaries of the territory we cover change almost weekly. For instance, the information in Charles Iverson's post was accurate during the week when his cache was approved, but not any longer. Or, we added another reviewer in Europe this week, thereby relieving the overworked Erik88l-r from responsibility for several countries whose geocachers speak various languages that babelfish could barely help him with.

We have not yet found a method to keep an up-to-date list or map of the review territories available to the community. It's harder than it looks, otherwise it would already be in place. To go a step beyond that and program something based on zip codes would be light years away.

well on that list you can put if you live latitude line or a longitude line

here is your reviewer and so on and so on... of all the states on one page..

June 8, 2005

um put the reviewers in charge of it

if they want to be listed

you know what i meen?

9.4k · June 9, 2005

um put the reviewers in charge of it
if they want to be listed

you know what i meen?

We know what you mean. We just don't think you know what we mean. It has been discussed quite thoroughly here, as Mopar has highlighted above.

21.9k · June 9, 2005

Jeremy is understandably reluctant to turn over control of the html for general pages on *his* website to a bunch of volunteers. For instance, I would likely turn the Pennsylvania page into a gallery of cute hamster pictures.

June 9, 2005

Yep. We're at an impass. There isn't data to list an easy way to contact a local approver or find out who one is (even though the guidelines suggest in multiple places that you should contact a "local approver" with questions about a potential placement before beginning other parts of the process). Newbies will either have to look at the near by caches and figure out who the approver might be or figuring out that the forums exist and posting there. That seems to be the official policy of the site and if so, then that's that.

I'll close the topic. [if anyone has something informative to add that hasn't been stated, let me know and I'll reopen it]

Email Address Aliases Approver Suggestion

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment