Jump to content

Should Cache Approvers Become Editors?


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

With all the discussions (arguments?) going on about banning micros, not doing this, or logging that, I decided to throw in my two cents worth about a topic I wonder about.

 

And realizing this might add time to the cache approvers routine, here goes ....

 

How many times have you looked at a cache page and found:

 

1. mispellings

2. hints that are not hints

3. long list of cache contents

4. capital letters

5. wrong icon / cache type

6. elaborate and probably unnecessarily long narratives

7. photos

8. info repeated over and over

9. 'this is our first cache'

 

I take the Forrest Gump approach - the less said the better.

Link to comment

The reviewers already spend a lot of volunteer time to review caches and handling issues. They already assist with these pages but on a case by case basis, but don't get involved unless asked.

 

If the reviewer's were responsible for correcting the spelling, layout, grammer, etc, then it would only give more ammunition to angsty folks that nit pick everything that isn't "thier way".

Link to comment
...

7. photos

...

9. 'this is our first cache'

...

What's wrong with 7 and 9? Heck, my first cache has "first cache" in part of the name. The rest are sometimes annoying, but fixing them isn't really what approvers are volunteering to do.

 

Okay, I really would be appreciative if they moved hints that are not really hints to the description (like parking coords), but I wouldn't expect it to be done.

Edited by Vargseld? ™
Link to comment
However, making sure the correct cache type (and size maybe) would be something under their duties I would imagine.

Yes, reviewers do normally check for those types of errors. A Traditional that should be a Multi or Puzzle, etc.

 

As far as the cache listing contents, the owner is responsible for that and reviewers really shouldn't go changing things. It would cause more harm than good.

 

Edit: add completeness

Edited by RoadRunner
Link to comment
How many times have you looked at a cache page and found:

 

1. mispellings

I've seen puzzle caches where this was part of the puzzle

2. hints that are not hints

That's what you think

3. long list of cache contents

Good idea for a puzzle

4. capital letters

This has been part of some puzzles

5. wrong icon / cache type

I agree, all caches should use the 8.gif icon :blink:

6. elaborate and probably unnecessarily long narratives

Puzzle

7. photos

Puzzle

8. info repeated over and over

With minor differences, puzzle

9. 'this is our first cache'

Yeah. I don't care if this is the first cache someone hid ;)

Link to comment
With all the discussions (arguments?) going on about banning micros, not doing this, or logging that, I decided to throw in my two cents worth about a topic I wonder about.

 

And realizing this might add time to the cache approvers routine, here goes ....

 

How many times have you looked at a cache page and found:

 

1. mispellings

It happens and since the owner can go back and edit the cache at any time, mispelling can show up after the cache is approved. I won't expect an approver to check a cache after each edit. If I find a mispelling I usually send an email to the owner.

2. hints that are not hints

This has been beat to death many times. Do a search in the forums and you will find opinions ranging from everyone being forced to provide a hint to those that don't like any hints at all.

3. long list of cache contents

This is something that some people find find usefull and interesting and others could care less.

4. capital letters

I ASSUME YOU MEAN WRITTEN IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS AND JUST CAPITAL LETTERS IN GENERAL. YES, IT IS ANNOYING WHEN SOMEONE WRITES LIKE THIS. SOMEONE SHOULD CREATE A KEYBOARD THAT ADMINISTERS A SLIGHT ELECTRICAL SHOCK IF SOMEONE TYPES MORE THAN A FEW LETTERS WITH THE CAPS LOCKS ON. JUST AS A SUBTLE REMINDER. :blink:

5. wrong icon / cache type

Approvers rarely approve the wrong cache type. What usually happenes is, for example, someone sets up a multi-cache then a year or so later for whatever reasons desides to get rid of all but one stage. Converting it to a traditional cache. What they should do is archive that cache and submit a new cache, but people are lazy (not an excuse, some just are).

6. elaborate and probably unnecessarily long narratives

True, if is something that has nothing to do with the cache or the area that the cache is in. But if it has information about the cache area I find those interesting. If you think you can help someone improve their cache description, send them a polite Email.

7. photos

huh?

8. info repeated over and over

I havn't seen much of this. Usually when someone repeats something on a cache page it is because it is important. Like, make sure to look at and comprehend the time this park closes.

9. 'this is our first cache'

They are proud that they placed their first cache. I don't understand your compaint.

I take the Forrest Gump approach - the less said the better.

Link to comment
5. wrong icon / cache type

Approvers rarely approve the wrong cache type. What usually happenes is, for example, someone sets up a multi-cache then a year or so later for whatever reasons desides to get rid of all but one stage. Converting it to a traditional cache. What they should do is archive that cache and submit a new cache, but people are lazy (not an excuse, some just are).

I was under the impression (and checking just agreed with me) that once a cache was approved, the owner couldn't/can't change the cache type without help from GC.com. So shouldn't reviewers tell them to either archive it and get the regular approved or fix the multi?

Link to comment
5. wrong icon / cache type

Approvers rarely approve the wrong cache type. What usually happenes is, for example, someone sets up a multi-cache then a year or so later for whatever reasons desides to get rid of all but one stage. Converting it to a traditional cache. What they should do is archive that cache and submit a new cache, but people are lazy (not an excuse, some just are).

I was under the impression (and checking just agreed with me) that once a cache was approved, the owner couldn't/can't change the cache type without help from GC.com. So shouldn't reviewers tell them to either archive it and get the regular approved or fix the multi?

Yes, but I've seen some cache owners that are too lazy to archive and resubmit, opting instead to just change the description on the cache page to match the current state of the cache. "The container's gone, so just log it as a virtual now..."

Those lame caches are usually archived when brought to the reviewer's attention.

Link to comment
. . .
5. wrong icon / cache type

Approvers rarely approve the wrong cache type. What usually happenes is, for example, someone sets up a multi-cache then a year or so later for whatever reasons desides to get rid of all but one stage. Converting it to a traditional cache. What they should do is archive that cache and submit a new cache, but people are lazy (not an excuse, some just are).

 

. . .

There is a cache in this area that is a very long multi . . . about six miles, IIRC.

 

It is listed as a Traditional. ;)

 

I have the "Smart Name" in my GPSr with the cache type as part of the name. I have gone to the starting point of that cache twice thinking it was a nearby cache I wanted to do . . . :blink:

Link to comment

Yeah, like I've got that kind of time.

 

I am a stickler about cache types and will insist that the cacher change them (sometimes I do it, but more often than not I'll point it out and wait for them). Hints are sometimes a problem. As for spelling; usually I just cringe and list the cache anyway. There's no time to police the world's spelling.

 

RJ

Link to comment
I ASSUME YOU MEAN WRITTEN IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS AND JUST CAPITAL LETTERS IN GENERAL. YES, IT IS ANNOYING WHEN SOMEONE WRITES LIKE THIS. SOMEONE SHOULD CREATE A KEYBOARD THAT ADMINISTERS A SLIGHT ELECTRICAL SHOCK IF SOMEONE TYPES MORE THAN A FEW LETTERS WITH THE CAPS LOCKS ON. JUST AS A SUBTLE REMINDER. :D

Good idea...except for one minor detail.... I'm a draftsman for an engineering company. Any and all text in our drawings is typed in ALL CAPS. AT A GLANCE IT'S EASIER TO READ ON PLANS. Granted, on the internet, it's regarded as shouting, which many people just don't seem to understand. However, when I'm posting from work, I may not always disable CAPSLOCK before I start typing.

Link to comment

Cache reviewers attempt to catch things like incorrect cache type, but the rest of the list is the responsibility of the cache owner.

 

In many cases when they attempt to be "helpful" and comment on something like spelling or a bad hint the reply is one of many variations of "mind your own business". :D

Link to comment
And when you reviewers get through with the spell checks and such, please change the oil in my truck, wash and wax too. I need a lift kit put on my 4 wheeler too. ... if it isn't too bothersome. :D

 

:D

Funny, but I have usually done editing. I am a very good proofreader and if the queue is not overly busy I will make quick corrections to spelling and grammer and such, etc., etc. Not always, but usually. I don't list my caches because I like for someone else to look at it in case I have made a misteak.

 

:D:D

 

What kind of truck do you have? Oh, you might not like my rates though... :D

Link to comment

For a puzzle cache I say the approver should leave most everything alone.

 

Other than that.

1. mispellings

Not the reviewers job. Don't get paid enuf.

 

2. hints that are not hints

These stink. Some hints like "No hint needed." should be banned. If you are out and about getting eating by skeeters in 90 degree heat and you decode a hint like that you get :D :D :D

 

I wouldn't mind if the approver checked for stoopid hints.

 

3. long list of cache contents

Doesn't bother me, but I prefer the cache description be pretty much cut and dried. When I am paging thru the info on my PDA I am looking for info that will help get me to the cache and find it, not a bunch of fluff.

 

4. capital letters

THIS STINKS. Approver should ask them to resubmit after fixing it.

 

5. wrong icon / cache type

Approver should only approve if correct. (Seems that is what they do now.)

 

6. elaborate and probably unnecessarily long narratives

Bothersome, but not approvers job.

 

7. photos

Too many needless photos must make it tough for dial-ups.

 

8. info repeated over and over

Haven't seen it. On my puzzle caches I usually repeat "THIS IS A PUZZLE CACHE ...etc." in both the long and short descriptions, and I do put it in upper case. People will still go to the *listed* coords and complain they can't find the cache.

 

9. 'this is our first cache'

Lighen up. :D

 

You skipped my pet peeve: MUSIC on cache pages.

Link to comment

As a cache reviewer I make corrections on an almost daily basis, but it's not what you'd expect.

 

In reviewing European caches, 15% to 20% (or more) are submitted with a west longitude instead of an east longitude. Only Portugal, and parts of Spain and France are west of the prime meridian. Rather than put an Austrian cache on hold for such an obvious mistake I'll make the correction. I'm sure those others who cover specific European countries do the same for the caches they review.

The same happens in South Africa, where East and South are the proper longitude and latitude conventions, and Asia, where East is correct. Many don't realize that if the E/W or N/S field is still highlighted when they use there mouse's wheel to scroll down the page their selection will change too.

 

Ditto for correcting obvious spelling mistakes, or text all jammed together because someone checked the "using HTML" box without checking what the result was to a page that had no HTML coding.

 

I generally won't change typos to a cache name, as they're probably intentional.

My spelling isn't the greatest anyway...

 

~erik~

Link to comment
Funny, but I have usually done editing. I am a very good proofreader and if the queue is not overly busy I will make quick corrections to spelling and grammer and such, etc., etc. Not always, but usually. I don't list my caches because I like for someone else to look at it in case I have made a misteak.

 

:D:D

 

What kind of truck do you have? Oh, you might not like my rates though... :D

Hey! You mean I pay for a Premium Membership and I still have to pay for a wash and wax??? :D

 

Seriousily, You guys do a great job! You ought to get raises! A bigger cut!!! :D ... I wouldn't want to do what you guys do!

 

:D

Link to comment
As a cache reviewer I make corrections on an almost daily basis, but it's not what you'd expect.

<snip>

~erik~

I've visited some caches in Japan, where I presume you reviewed some of them. No problems for me, even if the English on their page is not what I'm used to.

 

Cache Approvers should not become editors in my opinion. This isn't the place to enforce correct language uses.

 

Don't we pay tuition and taxes to our educational infrastructure for that?

 

Is it just me, or has there been a noticeable increase in people requesting more "behavior features" lately? In the big picture, I consider this a disturbing trend. :D

Link to comment
I don't list my caches because I like for someone else to look at it in case I have made a misteak.

 

Now, I'm sure you can understand how thrilled you'd be if the approvers took a red marker to your cache submissions. :D

That's it! From now on instead of fixing the speeling misteaks, I'll just add html code to highlight them in red :D

 

Finally! Good reviewer there Hemlock. You get ice cream. :D

Link to comment
You skipped my pet peeve: MUSIC on cache pages.

What's wrong with music on cache pages? :blink:

 

Cinco.jpg

 

 

 

(yes, I know you meant the kind that plays automatically when you load the page. I hate that too) ;)

Yeah and I still haven't solved this one... maybe I will take another crack at it today. Flask (who is a music teacher) was working on it with me for a little while, then we dropped it and went caching. :P

Link to comment

--Another vote in favor of some long narratives! My most memorable caches often have a story to tell, sometimes essential to finding the cache (like puzzle caches), sometimes just background information. The shortest pages are often those micros hidden with little creative thought, though I realize many exceptions exist. I don't think it should be a hider's goal to make it quick and easy for me to read on my printout or PDA. Sometimes I want an adventure, not just a smiley.

 

--Forrest Gump? He wasn't a good example of brevity. He talked nonstop at that bus stop to a string of people for hours. Repeating mother's mottos doesn't mean you're concise.

 

Edit: subject-verb agreement :laughing:

Edited by Teach2Learn
Link to comment
I don't list my caches because I like for someone else to look at it in case I have made a misteak.

 

Now, I'm sure you can understand how thrilled you'd be if the approvers took a red marker to your cache submissions. :rolleyes:

That's it! From now on instead of fixing the speeling misteaks, I'll just add html code to highlight them in red :laughing:

 

Finally! Good reviewer there Hemlock. You get ice cream. :anicute:

 

and a cherry!

 

cc\

Link to comment

Gc.com is a listing service. When I make a cache, I take a lot of enjoyment in creating the cache page. In fact, I like it better than placing the cache itself. I feel as if I own that cache page, and I put a lot of effort into it.

 

Why would I want someone coming in and saying how I should arrange my own page, or even worse, changing it without asking me? :laughing:

 

Some of the best cache pages are historical stories with pictures. If reviewers edited those out, the cache would cease to have a meaning. If that makes it hard for people out of town who are using pq's, then perhaps they are attempting to do too many caches on their trip, and failing to appreciate the full spectrum of each cache.

Link to comment

I think it was more about making photos display than editing them out. I have had two examples of that in the last week no less. One was just a misdirected URL issue and the other was a geocities issue. The cache made no sense with one of them since the photos *were* the clue to solving the cache. I had to work with them to get them to display.

 

I change obvious spelling issues, but we never change the meaning of the cache. Sometimes you can tell they are on purpose, sometimes not. I usually post a reviewer note saying I made changes if I am not sure, and that deletes automatically when the cache is listed. When I see "teh" I know to change it.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...