Website Enhancement Idea

[+Deneye]

Ran into a problem recently which i'm sure many others have ahead of me where a cache you plant is too close to another which you don't know about. All that time & effort put into planting the cache and building the page for it...all for naught.

 

So it got me thinking...

 

How about having the ability to punch in a set of coordinates and have the website tell you if that spot is available for hiding a cache at or not...based on distance to caches that we can't see. It doesn't have to give away any info as to what caches are around or how far away...just a yea or nay for cache hiding.

 

This would allow us players to sort of pre-approve a location before spending effort on it and then having to wait a week to find out it's no good.

 

If this has been asked for already or previously discussed, then consider this a thread bump.

Edited June 20, 2005 by Deneye

[Jeremy]

I'm probably missing a something that would make this question moot, but shouldn't a coordinate search on the web site show the closest cache to that coordinate?

[+geognerd]

Why not just enter the approximate coordinates for the area you want to place a cache into a search on the website? It'll give you the distances to caches near the set of coordinates you entered. Your idea is nice, but not really necessary.

[+geognerd]

Geez, Jeremy and I were writing the exact same thing at the same time. Great minds think alike.

[Keystone]

Sometimes there is a conflict between a new cache submission and the intermediate or final stage of a nearby puzzle or multicache. These obviously don't show up in a search for caches nearest to a set of coordinates. The initial stage might be a safe distance away, but the other cache could end right near the spot chosen for the new cache.

 

My advice to hiders is to first find all of the other caches in the general area (same park, trail, etc.) -- especially puzzles and multi's that begin within a mile or two of your desired spot, or whose descriptions suggest the possibility of a conflict ("this multi gives you a very thorough tour of the trail system in Memorial Park"). Being familiar with the existing caches will help to prevent proximity problems. Also, not as a "rules" matter but as a cache quality matter, many geocachers believe that a new cache ought to be hidden in a way that complements and builds upon the caches that are already present in the area. Sometimes, that question is best answered by saying "you know, this area doesn't really *need* another cache 600 feet away from the one further down the trail."

 

There are still occasional problems, such as a multicache that starts 25 miles away but ends right next to the hider's chosen spot. Fortunately these are few and far between.

[+geodarts]

The feature makes sense to me. I once planned to put a cache near where the second stage of a multi was hidden. After planning the cache and hiding it, I found the multi and was taken back within 40 feet of the spot I picked. I could not have known this through the web site, because the coordinates for the first stage were in a completely different area. (It was further complicated because the first stage of the multi had limited accesibility --- open only during my normal work hours --so I was unable to find it before planning my cache.)

 

One could run into the same type of a problem with an unknown puzzle cache, where the listed coordinates do not necessarily reflect where the cache is hidden.

 

I know other cachers have run into the same type of thing. One cache was actually placed within a few feet of a puzzle cache and had to be archived -- but this one would have slipped through the cracks even with the web site feature.

Edited June 20, 2005 by Erickson

[+tozainamboku]

In addition to puzzle caches and waypoints of multi-caches, there is also the problem (for non-premium members) of members only caches. I often tell people(only half in jest) that this is why I became a premium member. When I wanted to hide my first cache, I could tell that there was a members only cache on the same trail where I was going to place my cache but since I didn't have the coordinates I paid for a premium membership just to be sure that I wasn't too close to the existing cache. Two and half years later there are still only 2 caches on this trail.

[+Semper Questio]

Fiding all the caches in an area isn't the answer either. For a vast array of reasons, a cacher may not be able to find all the caches in an area. Heck, there are several near me I can't get because I can't figure out the stinkin' puzzles so I sure can't know where the other legs are, much less the starting or final coords. Of course, that's a brain cell limitation on my part, but what about those with physical limitations? This just isn't a realistic answer.

 

A simple tool that tells a placer there are coords nn ft. (or just within the 1/10 mile limitation) in a general direction from their entered coords would be quite helpful and could really cut down on some of the work (and flak) the approvers have to go through.

[Keystone]

Such a 'simple tool' could be abused to zero in on the final coordinates of one of those hard-to-solve puzzles. If you know the puzzle ends in Memorial Park, but you can't solve it, one could use the suggested feature to enter a series of coordinates, marching around the park in a grid pattern, until there's a "hit" for a puzzle cache ending nearby. A few other "hits" from other directions and you can narrow down the search area. It's just like playing the game "Battleship." The exercise would be one of simple triangulation if the tool reported back that there was a cache waypoint 276 feet away. But even if the tool just said there's a puzzle cache ending within .1 miles, several hits from different directions could narrow down the search area to something manageable, or could facilitate reverse-engineering the puzzle solution.

 

I am constantly amazed at what I hear of people using the website's features to "beat the system." Why add a tool to the toolbox?

 

If you can't figure out a nearby puzzle cache, or if there's a nearby Members Only cache and you're not a premium member, you can always write to your friendly neighborhood cache reviewer and ask whether a cache located at coordinates X and Y would pose any sort of a problem under the listing guidelines.

[CoyoteRed]

Limit the "battle ship" fishing to one an hour or, heck, once a day. How often does someone need to know there is a cache too close to where he is putting his?

[+Deneye]

It's just like playing the game "Battleship."  The exercise would be one of simple triangulation if the tool reported back that there was a cache waypoint 276 feet away.  But even if the tool just said there's a puzzle cache ending within .1 miles, several hits from different directions could narrow down the search area to something manageable, or could facilitate reverse-engineering the puzzle solution.

 

I am constantly amazed at what I hear of people using the website's features to "beat the system."  Why add a tool to the toolbox?

Which is why in my original post I suggested just a Yea or Nay kind of answer. But you are correct in saying even that could be used to zero in on something...argh.

 

As already mentioned, limiting the number of queries per hour might help....hey, how about integrating it somehow into the pocket queries? ...set up a PQ to check availability of location x/y ....PQs are highly limited in their activity due to their nature already...

 

Otherwise it seems that our only other recourse is to submit a blank cache proposal with just the coords posted and then wait until the location has been approved before actually putting together a cache and building a page for it. My experiences are discouraging to me. I currently see absolutely no use in spending time, money and effort on planting a cache until i can be guaranteed that the location i want is acceptable...and I doubt that is the way it should be played.

 

The point though, is it's going to become a problem with the ever increasing saturation of urban caches.

 

If you can't figure out a nearby puzzle cache, or if there's a nearby Members Only cache and you're not a premium member, you can always write to your friendly neighborhood cache reviewer and ask whether a cache located at coordinates X and Y would pose any sort of a problem under the listing guidelines.

 

That leaves us relying on people who are busy, have lives and won't get back to you until they feel it's time. Sorry if it sounds negative. I'm sure I'll get over it eventually.

[Keystone]

I have the perfect answer for you, but I have a life and I am very busy. When I feel that you are ready for this answer, I shall post it.

[+Lux]

It might be an interesting RED NOTE error when you enter a new cache giving you a warning (could even warn of unapproved caches in the area).

 

Waiting for the Pocket Query Chorus to chime in.

[+Deneye]

I thought about trying to include unapproved caches in such a feature, but in the case of multi's or puzzles & offsets....the real cache coords are not used in the cache page submission except maybe as a note to the reviewer...and it's those actual cache coords which are the important ones.

 

It'd be too much trouble to try and scan the notes for coordinates that may not be in a format that you'd want them to be in..parsing the notes inotherwords. Not pretty in any progamming language.

 

Best to leave it as a first come first served basis.

 

but if something could be worked up, i think it'd really streamline the approval system and help everyone on both sides of the fence.

 

[edited to add]

 

unless of course the submission form was changed to include extra sets of coordinates for multi's & offsets.

Edited June 21, 2005 by Deneye