Cache Not Approved, Your Help Needed

January 16, 2006

Dear Geocaching Community (Cachers and Reviewers):

I've been having trouble getting a cache of mine approved and it has been officially archived by the reviewer so I've been told I can start the appeal process if I deem it necessary. Part of that process is getting feedback from the caching community. Now I know I could make some small changes to this cache listing to get it approved, but that's actually what I'm trying to avoid. So as to give you all the information I will post all the messages between the reviewer and I. Some things will be edited out that I feel compromise the cache (if it does get approved) and the reviewer will be kept annonymous because I don't know if he/she wants to be mentioned by name. But first a brief summary of the cache:

The cache is placed inside a library (with permission and help from the library). It is a mystery cache so by the description for a mystery cache the coordinates given are to a "general reference point" (in this case the front entrance). From this point the cacher will have a dewey decimal code (given in the name of the cache) that they will use to locate a book (disguised as a library book) that is actually the log book. It's a really fun cache that we've done in other areas and enjoyed.

Here's our message history:

January 14 by AZBliss02

This cache is actually a book placed inside the [edited] Library, [edited]. We discussed this cache placement with [edited] from the [edited] Library and she approved its placement and even helped with making the book look as authentic as possible to a library book. If you should need to contact her she can be reached at [edited]. FYI - you probably won't receive an immediate response from her, it sometimes takes a week or so because of her position with the library.

reviewer response:

January 15 by REVIEWER

Hi. I'm reviewing your cache, [edited].

There's one problem. In the most recent revision of the cache placement guidelines, the use of a GPS is emphasized. Because a cache in a library doesn't require the use of the GPS to find anything, the best solution is to use a historical sign or micro cache outside that you use to give the location inside.

In order for me to publish this cache, you'll need to use a method like this. After you've changed your cache, post a Note to Reviewer that you've made the modifications.

Thanks for understanding,

REVIEWER

Geocaching.com Volunteer Reviewer

my response:

January 15 by AZBliss02

Thank you for responding to our cache listing. I understand the new focus Geocaching.com has taken on emphasizing the use of a GPS unit, however I'm not sure that our cache placement doesn't encourage the use of a GPS unit. Now granted, someone could pull up a map and see that the cache is at the library and then go from there, but we've done that with numerous caches that are located in parks (google map rocks), just looking without a GPS unit. However, a GPS unit still plays an important role in finding this cache, the coordinates lead to the entrance of the library which will help guide cachers into the library to find the cache. The adventure of using your GPS unit to find the library and then using your noggin' to find the log book (disguised as a library book) is such an experience and is our key purpose for placing this cache. In other words, although I understand where you're coming from, I really want to play out all our possible options with this one.

If you can please explain to me how our cache doesn't fall within the description for a mystery cache:

" The “catch-all” of cache types, this form of cache can involve complicated puzzles you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. The only commonality of this cache type is that the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location. Due to the increasing creativity of geocaching this becomes the staging ground for new and unique challenges."

Here, our coordinates to the front door mark our "general reference point".

If you need to discuss this with other approvers I understand and encourage you to do so.

Would it also be possible, if the cache doesn't fall under the "mystery cache" guidelines, to consider it as a Letterbox Hybrid cache?

Again, thank you for taking the time to analyze our cache listing.

Thank you,

AZBliss02

reviewer response:

January 15 by REVIEWER

"GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions."

(visit link)

Please change the cache so that it fits within this guideline.

Thank you,

REVIEWER

Geocaching.com Volunteer Reviewer

my response:

January 15 by AZBliss02

REVIEWER, please tell me how our cache doesn't fit within those guidelines. A cacher MUST use our coordinates to find the entrance to the library (nothing on the page directly tells them to go to the library, they have to use the coordinates in some way to determine that). Therefore, without the coordinates, this cache would be useless.

Furthermore, tell me how our cache doesn't fit within the description set forth by Geocaching.com that explains what a Mystery Cache is:

"The “catch-all” of cache types, this form of cache can involve complicated puzzles you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. The only commonality of this cache type is that the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location. Due to the increasing creativity of geocaching this becomes the staging ground for new and unique challenges."

This specifically states "The only commonality of this cache type is that the coordinates listed are NOT of the actual cache location but a general reference point..." Here our general reference point is the Front Door.

REVIEWER, if you have something personel against us, or this type of cache, please send it on to another reviewer or multiple reviewers so it can be fairly discussed/reviewed.

According to the link you sent me, the guidelines were last updated on (and I quote): "Guidelines last updated November 2, 2005"

Here are 3 mystery caches that fall in line similar to the cache I am attempting to have approved. Please note ALL of these caches (located in Ohio) were approved within the last month so they do not fall underneath any "Grandfathered" guidelines:

GCRK9J

GCRMRZ- This cache states it doesn't even give coords, and that they aren't needed. Atleast I am incorporating coords in mine.

GCRWCT

Please, how can these be approved under the same guidelines that my cache is being reviewed against, yet my cache cannot be approved?

Please REVIEWER, work with me. I've dealt with other approvers on previous caches and have always had great experiences, I'd really like to be able to continue that.

Sincerely,

AZBliss02

reviewer response:

January 15 by REVIEWER

I am in a position where I need to archive this cache, even though I think it could be listed with a couple changes. I have take this to the other reviewers and they agreed that it cannot be listed as it stands. This is so that you may take up the appeal process as it appears you may do.

The way to have this cache published is to use something like a micro or some sign or historical marker to give the directions to find the cache in the library. A differant way to go is to place coordinates to a physical cache in the library. If this is done, it can be unarchived and published.

This is a decision that Groundspeak has made. It is not personal. I have worked with several cachers who have modified their caches to comply with this guideline.

Now, if you feel that you can't make it to the cache to modify it, then that's something differant. Since that cache seems to be right around [edited] miles away from home, I can understand that. If this is the problem, perhaps you can enlist the help of [edited] to help you fit this within the guidelines.

I have no problem with this being a Mystery/Puzzle cache if it fits into that category once it complies with the general guidelines.

If you feel that the guideline is unfair, you are welcome to post about it in the forums. This is how the guidelines recommend to do it.

"If your cache has been archived and you wish to appeal the decision, first contact the reviewer and explain why you feel your cache meets the guidelines. Exceptions may sometimes be made, depending on the nature of a cache. If you have a novel type of cache that “pushes the envelope” to some degree, then it is best to contact your local reviewer and/or Geocaching.com before placing and reporting it on the Geocaching.com web site. The guidelines should address most situations, but Groundspeak administrators and reviewers are always interested in new ideas. If, after exchanging emails with the reviewer, you still feel your cache has been misjudged, your next option is to ask the volunteer to post the cache for all of the reviewers to see in their private discussion forum. Sometimes a second opinion from someone else who has seen a similar situation can help in suggesting a way for the cache to be listed. Next, you should feel free to post a message in the “Geocaching Topics” section of the Groundspeak Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks. If the majority believes that it should be posted, then Groundspeak administrators and volunteers may review the listing and your cache may be unarchived. Finally, if you believe that the reviewer has acted inappropriately, you may send an e-mail with complete details, waypoint name (GC****) and links to the cache, to Groundspeak’s special address for this purpose: appeals@geocaching.com."

I hope to be able to unarchive this cache for you soon.

Good luck,

REVIEWER

Geocaching.com Volunteer Reviewer

I apologize for this being so lengthy but I wanted all the information from both sides to be presented.

Thanks,

AZBliss02

1.5k · January 16, 2006

I agree that it's more of a semantic issue with where the initial coordinates direct you, but the point that the reviewer is making is that per the guidelines, you can't have the coordinates lead you to the entrance of the library.

The cache that I've done in a similar fashion to this leads you to a spot on the library grounds to use information gathered to solve the location of the next stage, then that stage gives you information and redirects you to the final logbook inside.

I don't really agree with the guidelines on this point, but that's what they are, so I recommend you modify your cache approach slightly and get it approved. These are really neat caches!

Edited January 16, 2006 by KoosKoos

January 16, 2006

Hey ..... They did this on the last episode of "SURFACE" .... going to a Library and finding a folder with identity documents based on a dewey decimal location!

If it were my cache .... I would just hide a micro (film container) outside the Library, with a slip of paper containing the dewey decimal number...... or make it a puzzle cache with the parking coordinates of the Library as the reference waypoint coordinates ... having to solve the dewey decimal number from a SUDOKU puzzle.

It has to be very well stated "The times you can do the cache".

Good luck getting approved. Nice IDEA!!! ImpalaBob

2.7k · January 16, 2006

I agree. I ahd planned to make a library cache at one point but never completed the steps needed (talking to teh library, finding an appropriate container, etc. I was going to use nearby statues, plaques, etc. to provide the final clues. These points all had their own waypoint, so it would have been a multi.

I do want to say thank you for the manner in which you had presented this thread. There have been a few times where people have come in and presented the information in an angry way, and sometimes leaving out important information. So, kudos!

Either way, good luck!

January 16, 2006

Just make the change that the posted cords don't lead you to the library door. If it is a puzzle cache, make it one.

You're getting your underwear in a knot for no reason.

6.5k · January 16, 2006

I have found several caches hidden inside libraries. The only one that was really memorable was a multi that took me to several landmarks in the public areas outside the building that could only be found with a GPS (or really detailed letterbox type clues I guess), required me to do some math, and then led me to the front door of the library. Only then did I realize what to do with the numbers that were not coordinates. Can't you set something like this up to get yours Ok'd?

3k · January 16, 2006

I don't see why you can't hide a tiny micro outside telling cachers how to find the cache inside. How deep are the nostrils on the lions out front? Really, it's easy to fix this.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Planet

January 16, 2006

Okay, I think I see what the OP is confused about. Looking at the guideline that he has quoted twice in the emails to the reviewer, I see that it could be construed that a Mystery cache does not need GPS usage due to the listed coords being just a reference.

However, what they are overlooking is that nowhere does it say that Mystery caches are exempt from the guideling quoted by the reviewer that states that a GPS usage must play a role in finding of the cache.

Put these guidelines together, expecially with the responses from the reviewer, and you get this: Caches must involve the use of a GPS in the finding of, even Mystery caches. The listed coordinates for a Mystery cache do not need to be a part of the cache, but at some point in the finding of this cache a GPS must be used.

Now, I know at some point someone will bring up a few examples of caches that do not need a GPS. Remember that past caches do not have any bearing on the approval of new caches.

8k · January 16, 2006

The guidelines (or at least their interpretation) have been changed. A cache like this might have been approved in the past but not under the new guidelines. The new guidelines emphasize use of the GPSr as an essential element of the cache search. In this case, it seems to be a slight modification that is needed to get the cache listed. I'm not sure if there needs to be a micro or or sign outside the library that you use to get information that you need to find the cache inside, as the reviewer suggested. I think doing it as an offset cache with letterbox style clues on the cache page may be enough. I would try the following:

List the cache as a multi-cache (offset) type.

Change the description. Go to the coordinates listed. Once there, procede xxx feet south by soutwest (whatever the direction is). You way will be blocked if you try this outside of

. Now think about [dewey decimal number]. Keep thinking till you find the cache.

Don't reveal the cache is in the library to discourage people just going to the library. Make them go to the coordinates and discover the library is there. No guarantee the review will accept this, but it may be worth a try.

January 16, 2006

If it were my cache .... I would just hide a micro (film container) outside the Library, with a slip of paper containing the dewey decimal number...... or make it a puzzle cache with the parking coordinates of the Library as the reference waypoint coordinates ... having to solve the dewey decimal number from a SUDOKU puzzle.

It has to be very well stated "The times you can do the cache".

Good luck getting approved. Nice IDEA!!! ImpalaBob

I can't take credit for the idea as we're simply using the idea from a cache we've found before. However, the area we are placing it in doesn't seem to have anything like this and we really wanted to give them a new interesting cache to find.

I really do like your SuDoku puzzle idea and I had actually been throwing the idea around, although I'm not sure if it will be approved. To verify what you've said, if the coordinates given for the cache are to the library and then it contains a sudoku puzzle that they will solve in order to find the dewey decimal code, you think that should be enough? I was thinking the same but I wasn't sure if that would really be a big enough change because it doesn't seem like it's making GPS a bigger part of it, it's just adding an extra step to get the dewey decimal number.

Thank you to everyone that has responded so far. I attempted to post this thread kindly and with respect and I'm pleased to receive respectful replies.

I do like the idea of using nearby signs and statues (although there aren't many) however I don't live in the area (I visit my parents there often and they are the cachers who will maintain the cache). I don't really like giving them any of the details to the cache ahead of time because then I wouldn't allow them to FTF (or possibly even find) the cache. As it stands right now they only know that I have a cache in there area that could be approved at any time.

At worst, I may have them hide a micro in a nearby park with coordinates to the library and the dewey decimal code. Atleast then they could still go and find the actual cache (after of course it has been initially found).

Again thank you all for your comments, but is there anyone that thinks this cache could be approved as it stands currently? Am I really outside the guidelines?

AZBliss02

January 16, 2006

why not use coords of the library sign and decode letters from the sign to make up dewey number? Or place a small tag (with permission) on sign post with dewey number. Easily fixed

January 16, 2006

Here are 3 mystery caches that fall in line similar to the cache I am attempting to have approved. Please note ALL of these caches (located in Ohio) were approved within the last month so they do not fall underneath any "Grandfathered" guidelines:

GCRK9J

GCRMRZ- This cache states it doesn't even give coords, and that they aren't needed. Atleast I am incorporating coords in mine.

GCRWCT

Please, how can these be approved under the same guidelines that my cache is being reviewed against, yet my cache cannot be approved?

I noticed some of you stating that this type of cache would not be approved under current guidelines. I ask you to please take a close look at the 3 caches listed above that I also sent to the reviewer. These were, in fact, approved under the latest revision of the guidelines. It seems like such a grey area.

I NEVER tell the cacher in the cache description that they are going to the library. if they use the coordinates they will arrive at the library where they will then use the given code (which most people may disregard until they arrive at the library via their GPSr) to find the cache. Isn't this integrating the use of GPS in the find?

Again thank you all for your micro recommendations, but right now I'm really trying to figure out why my cache falls on one side of this grey line while others (including those noted above) fall on the other side (under the same guidelines).

Thanks,

AZBliss02

1.5k · January 16, 2006

Here are 3 mystery caches that fall in line similar to the cache I am attempting to have approved. Please note ALL of these caches (located in Ohio) were approved within the last month so they do not fall underneath any "Grandfathered" guidelines:

GCRK9J

GCRMRZ- This cache states it doesn't even give coords, and that they aren't needed. Atleast I am incorporating coords in mine.

GCRWCT

Please, how can these be approved under the same guidelines that my cache is being reviewed against, yet my cache cannot be approved?

I noticed some of you stating that this type of cache would not be approved under current guidelines. I ask you to please take a close look at the 3 caches listed above that I also sent to the reviewer. These were, in fact, approved under the latest revision of the guidelines. It seems like such a grey area.

I NEVER tell the cacher in the cache description that they are going to the library. if they use the coordinates they will arrive at the library where they will then use the given code (which most people may disregard until they arrive at the library via their GPSr) to find the cache. Isn't this integrating the use of GPS in the find?

Again thank you all for your micro recommendations, but right now I'm really trying to figure out why my cache falls on one side of this grey line while others (including those noted above) fall on the other side (under the same guidelines).

Thanks,

AZBliss02

I couldn't tell you why those are ok and your cache isn't...other than the fact that we have "guidelines" and not rules, so sometimes, interpretation works in different ways.

And since the guidelines also tell you that preceding caches won't help your appeal, your choices are a bit limited here.

Again, not that I agree with the decision, but I don't think it's a big change to make.

24.7k · January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

This cache has all the elements of a cache. The “GPS” element is artificial and doesn’t make finding that box any more fun. The cache meets with the spirit of geocaching, it has permission from the library who would enjoy seeing people hunt for the cache. A higher purpose was not served by archiving your cache. The owner gave it permission, the hunt will be enjoyed by those who seek it the creativity is above the average. Not approving it lowered the quality f caches in your community.

If it were my cache I’d do exactly what you did, and see what shakes out. If this site won’t list it, another will. The cache isn’t broken, the “GPS emphasis” is.

Hell, when I find them I sure as heck don't certify that I complied with the GPS Emphasis and use my GPS to find the cache. Come to think of it a GPS has never found a cache, plus the most common advice about finding a cache is "When you are in the area put the GPS down and look."

21.9k · January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

None of these statements quite captures what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else. Geocaches rely on GPS use. Of course, we all know that some people enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, using only tools such as maps, aerial photos and a compass. The guideline is written so as not to discourage that.

To the OP, you have received many helpful suggestions on how to incorporate GPS usage into your cache. Any of them will work. But giving the coordinates to the front door of a library, museum, etc., will not.

Interestingly, in eastern Ohio I recently gave the exact same answer to someone else on essentially identical facts: a library cache using the coordinates for the front door, relying upon other library caches hidden prior to the guidelines change, and hidden hundreds of miles from the owner's home coordinates. So from my experience, I would say that the reviewer in your case acted entirely consistent with both the Guidelines and the actions of at least one other cache reviewer (me) in nearly identical circumstances.

January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

None of these statements quite captures what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else. Geocaches rely on GPS use. Of course, we all know that some people enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, using only tools such as maps, aerial photos and a compass. The guideline is written so as not to discourage that.

To the OP, you have received many helpful suggestions on how to incorporate GPS usage into your cache. Any of them will work. But giving the coordinates to the front door of a library, museum, etc., will not.

Interestingly, in eastern Ohio I recently gave the exact same answer to someone else on essentially identical facts: a library cache using the coordinates for the front door, relying upon other library caches hidden prior to the guidelines change, and hidden hundreds of miles from the owner's home coordinates. So from my experience, I would say that the reviewer in your case acted entirely consistent with both the Guidelines and the actions of at least one other cache reviewer (me) in nearly identical circumstances.

Thank you for the response Keystone, I was hoping you'd join in to bring more insight into this. What I'm trying to figure out though is why giving coordinates to the library doesn't establish the use of a GPS unit?

My argument:

1. Coordinates on my page are given for a general reference point (be it the front door or the parking lot)

2. NEVER on the cache page or in the description do I mention a library or anything that will lead someone to believe that.

3. The dewey decimal code given is not described as a "Dewey Decimal Code" it is simply put in the name of the cache.

4. A cacher would have no idea of what they're doing until they use their GPSr to get them to the library, at that time they would probably go, "Hmm... oh so I gotta use this code for something now." As uncommon as the Dewey Decimal System has become it really doesn't *click* for most people until they actually get to the library (which they found by following their GPS unit).

I know I could add a simple micro container and call this quits, but I really feel that it qualifies as a valid cache placement. I also feel that if we thoroughly discuss this (even if we have to drive it right into the ground) atleast in the end we should have a concise answer, one way or the other, that future cachers/reviewers can refer to.

AZBliss02

3k · January 16, 2006

How is your idea any different than all the caches you reach by getting to a waypoint coordinates and then following compass bearings? At that point you are no longer using your gps, just as in yours once you reach the front steps of the library.

1.6k · January 16, 2006

I also feel that if we thoroughly discuss this (even if we have to drive it right into the ground)

Or, as one of my old bosses used to say, "You can't beat a dead horse enough."

3k · January 16, 2006

I'll give you one reason why the coords to front door of the library don't work.

I was in Vermont the other day. Driving around with a whole bunch of waypoints loaded into my GPS , but not a cache page on me. A waypoint comes into view on the GPS, we head over and it's the (yep you guessed it) front door of the library. Not having the cache page with me I just said "Ah it's one of those library caches and I don't have the info. Let's go" and we didn't do it. Suppose I had decided to do that cache and had gotten out and was snooping all over the place outside the library looking for the container and there wasn't one to tell me what to do? I would've been disappointed. If there was something to find I could have had instructions to follow to finish the cache. That's just one reason, cachers without cache pages.

January 16, 2006

I'll give you one reason why the coords to front door of the library don't work.

I was in Vermont the other day. Driving around with a whole bunch of waypoints loaded into my GPS , but not a cache page on me. A waypoint comes into view on the GPS, we head over and it's the (yep you guessed it) front door of the library. Not having the cache page with me I just said "Ah it's one of those library caches and I don't have the info. Let's go" and we didn't do it. Suppose I had decided to do that cache and had gotten out and was snooping all over the place outside the library looking for the container and there wasn't one to tell me what to do? I would've been disappointed. If there was something to find I could have had instructions to follow to finish the cache. That's just one reason, cachers without cache pages.

I'm sorry, but while I sympathize with you because we've done the same thing, that would eliminate a number of other mystery caches. For instance any cache that states "The coordinates given are not the actual coordinates" would certainly leave you a little disappointed (and in some cases in the middle of the ocean!)

Usually you make that mistake once, then you either 1) keep cache pages in the car, 2) phone a friend, 3) go ahead knowing you might not have all the needed information.

AZBliss02

7.3k · January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

None of these statements quite captures what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else. Geocaches rely on GPS use. Of course, we all know that some people enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, using only tools such as maps, aerial photos and a compass. The guideline is written so as not to discourage that.

To the OP, you have received many helpful suggestions on how to incorporate GPS usage into your cache. Any of them will work. But giving the coordinates to the front door of a library, museum, etc., will not.

Interestingly, in eastern Ohio I recently gave the exact same answer to someone else on essentially identical facts: a library cache using the coordinates for the front door, relying upon other library caches hidden prior to the guidelines change, and hidden hundreds of miles from the owner's home coordinates. So from my experience, I would say that the reviewer in your case acted entirely consistent with both the Guidelines and the actions of at least one other cache reviewer (me) in nearly identical circumstances.

Thank you for the response Keystone, I was hoping you'd join in to bring more insight into this. What I'm trying to figure out though is why giving coordinates to the library doesn't establish the use of a GPS unit?

My argument:

1. Coordinates on my page are given for a general reference point (be it the front door or the parking lot)

2. NEVER on the cache page or in the description do I mention a library or anything that will lead someone to believe that.

3. The dewey decimal code given is not described as a "Dewey Decimal Code" it is simply put in the name of the cache.

4. A cacher would have no idea of what they're doing until they use their GPSr to get them to the library, at that time they would probably go, "Hmm... oh so I gotta use this code for something now." As uncommon as the Dewey Decimal System has become it really doesn't *click* for most people until they actually get to the library (which they found by following their GPS unit).

I know I could add a simple micro container and call this quits, but I really feel that it qualifies as a valid cache placement. I also feel that if we thoroughly discuss this (even if we have to drive it right into the ground) atleast in the end we should have a concise answer, one way or the other, that future cachers/reviewers can refer to.

AZBliss02

Two things that come to mind.

1. Technically, you should put the hours of the library in the cache page, so people know not to do it at night. Not sure if you did this or not.

2. If I was a local, looked at the map and saw it in the general area of the library, and saw the hours, I would automatically know that I would need to go into the library to complete it.

There have been at least two caches in my area where I looked at them, and automatically knew where they were. One was in a library like yours, and the other was in front of the museum. Both I found easily without my gps. I still enjoyed them tremendiously, but technically it wasn't geocaching, since I didn't use a gps.

It's frustrating to have to do some silly little extra thing like hide a micro nearby just to get this cache approved, but it is a new guidline and ultimately it makes sense.

January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

None of these statements quite captures what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else. Geocaches rely on GPS use. Of course, we all know that some people enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, using only tools such as maps, aerial photos and a compass. The guideline is written so as not to discourage that.

To the OP, you have received many helpful suggestions on how to incorporate GPS usage into your cache. Any of them will work. But giving the coordinates to the front door of a library, museum, etc., will not.

Interestingly, in eastern Ohio I recently gave the exact same answer to someone else on essentially identical facts: a library cache using the coordinates for the front door, relying upon other library caches hidden prior to the guidelines change, and hidden hundreds of miles from the owner's home coordinates. So from my experience, I would say that the reviewer in your case acted entirely consistent with both the Guidelines and the actions of at least one other cache reviewer (me) in nearly identical circumstances.

Thank you for the response Keystone, I was hoping you'd join in to bring more insight into this. What I'm trying to figure out though is why giving coordinates to the library doesn't establish the use of a GPS unit?

My argument:

1. Coordinates on my page are given for a general reference point (be it the front door or the parking lot)

2. NEVER on the cache page or in the description do I mention a library or anything that will lead someone to believe that.

3. The dewey decimal code given is not described as a "Dewey Decimal Code" it is simply put in the name of the cache.

4. A cacher would have no idea of what they're doing until they use their GPSr to get them to the library, at that time they would probably go, "Hmm... oh so I gotta use this code for something now." As uncommon as the Dewey Decimal System has become it really doesn't *click* for most people until they actually get to the library (which they found by following their GPS unit).

I know I could add a simple micro container and call this quits, but I really feel that it qualifies as a valid cache placement. I also feel that if we thoroughly discuss this (even if we have to drive it right into the ground) atleast in the end we should have a concise answer, one way or the other, that future cachers/reviewers can refer to.

AZBliss02

Two things that come to mind.

1. Technically, you should put the hours of the library in the cache page, so people know not to do it at night. Not sure if you did this or not.

2. If I was a local, looked at the map and saw it in the general area of the library, and saw the hours, I would automatically know that I would need to go into the library to complete it.

There have been at least two caches in my area where I looked at them, and automatically knew where they were. One was in a library like yours, and the other was in front of the museum. Both I found easily without my gps. I still enjoyed them tremendiously, but technically it wasn't geocaching, since I didn't use a gps.

It's frustrating to have to do some silly little extra thing like hide a micro nearby just to get this cache approved, but it is a new guidline and ultimately it makes sense.

Firstly, yes I have posted the hours of availability for the cache, I think that should go without saying for any cache of this type.

Secondly, you're absolutely correct however one could argue that you can do the exact same with a cache in a park. In fact, our first day of geocaching we found 10 caches and we didn't even own a GPSr at the time.

So granted, anyone that knows the area and decides to look on a map, probably won't need the coords, but this can be done with a number of caches (like Keystone said, they're not trying to discourage people from using a compass and a map, they're just trying to put focus on using a GPS unit). I can't control what someone does with the coordinates I give them, but if they just take the information for what it is and plug it in to their GPSr, I'm pretty sure it'll be just like any other caching experience.

Aside from someone looking at a map (which like I've said above can be done with other caches), can anyone tell me that by giving coordinates (and nothing else) that I'm not incorporating the use of a GPS unit?

AZBliss02

7.3k · January 16, 2006

A GPS is not needed for any part of geocaching. It is nothing more than a tool that makes it easier for most of us.

If the guidelines "emphasize" the use of a GPS that is not the same thing as "Your cache must require the use of a GPS". The issue comes down to how the reviewer chose to split the hair on the rules er…guidelines.

None of these statements quite captures what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else. Geocaches rely on GPS use. Of course, we all know that some people enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, using only tools such as maps, aerial photos and a compass. The guideline is written so as not to discourage that.

To the OP, you have received many helpful suggestions on how to incorporate GPS usage into your cache. Any of them will work. But giving the coordinates to the front door of a library, museum, etc., will not.

Interestingly, in eastern Ohio I recently gave the exact same answer to someone else on essentially identical facts: a library cache using the coordinates for the front door, relying upon other library caches hidden prior to the guidelines change, and hidden hundreds of miles from the owner's home coordinates. So from my experience, I would say that the reviewer in your case acted entirely consistent with both the Guidelines and the actions of at least one other cache reviewer (me) in nearly identical circumstances.

Thank you for the response Keystone, I was hoping you'd join in to bring more insight into this. What I'm trying to figure out though is why giving coordinates to the library doesn't establish the use of a GPS unit?

My argument:

1. Coordinates on my page are given for a general reference point (be it the front door or the parking lot)

2. NEVER on the cache page or in the description do I mention a library or anything that will lead someone to believe that.

3. The dewey decimal code given is not described as a "Dewey Decimal Code" it is simply put in the name of the cache.

4. A cacher would have no idea of what they're doing until they use their GPSr to get them to the library, at that time they would probably go, "Hmm... oh so I gotta use this code for something now." As uncommon as the Dewey Decimal System has become it really doesn't *click* for most people until they actually get to the library (which they found by following their GPS unit).

I know I could add a simple micro container and call this quits, but I really feel that it qualifies as a valid cache placement. I also feel that if we thoroughly discuss this (even if we have to drive it right into the ground) atleast in the end we should have a concise answer, one way or the other, that future cachers/reviewers can refer to.

AZBliss02

Two things that come to mind.

1. Technically, you should put the hours of the library in the cache page, so people know not to do it at night. Not sure if you did this or not.

2. If I was a local, looked at the map and saw it in the general area of the library, and saw the hours, I would automatically know that I would need to go into the library to complete it.

There have been at least two caches in my area where I looked at them, and automatically knew where they were. One was in a library like yours, and the other was in front of the museum. Both I found easily without my gps. I still enjoyed them tremendiously, but technically it wasn't geocaching, since I didn't use a gps.

It's frustrating to have to do some silly little extra thing like hide a micro nearby just to get this cache approved, but it is a new guidline and ultimately it makes sense.

Firstly, yes I have posted the hours of availability for the cache, I think that should go without saying for any cache of this type.

Secondly, you're absolutely correct however one could argue that you can do the exact same with a cache in a park. In fact, our first day of geocaching we found 10 caches and we didn't even own a GPSr at the time.

So granted, anyone that knows the area and decides to look on a map, probably won't need the coords, but this can be done with a number of caches (like Keystone said, they're not trying to discourage people from using a compass and a map, they're just trying to put focus on using a GPS unit). I can't control what someone does with the coordinates I give them, but if they just take the information for what it is and plug it in to their GPSr, I'm pretty sure it'll be just like any other caching experience.

Aside from someone looking at a map (which like I've said above can be done with other caches), can anyone tell me that by giving coordinates (and nothing else) that I'm not incorporating the use of a GPS unit?

AZBliss02

I see what you are saying.

The way I look at it, is that the library one almost automatically does not need a gps at all, if you are a local.

The generic caches in a park maybe can be done without a gps, but it is not automatic. Just because you know which park it is in and the general area, it still can be pretty broad. You could be looking for a micro in a 100-200 foot radius. Who wants to do that? It provides some doubt and more need for the gps.

7.3k · January 16, 2006

Yes, by giving coordinates in your discription, you are providing the requirement of gps coordinates.

But in this cases, gc.com has decided that this is not enough, for the reasons that they stated and I stated.

Even if you don't understand and don't agree, this is just the way that it is going to be, and it's not going to change.

I have not created some caches that I would like to, because of certain rules on this site. It hurts a bit, but I just go on and focus on caches that I can set out that do conform to this sites rules. Then I am happy.

Otherwise, you are just hitting your head against a brick wall and hurting yourself.

January 16, 2006

Otherwise, you are just hitting your head against a brick wall and hurting yourself.

I'm perfectly fine with this (I've got a pretty strong forehead). Until I can get a better answer than "Because I said so." I keep having the same piece of literature quoted to me:

"GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions."

This is used against my cache, but why?

GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching.

Okay.

Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS,

True, they can be

the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

The coordinates given are very accurate for the means they are meant to serve and if someone chooses to ignore their option of finding the cache without a GPS unit, the coordinates would be a very integral part of finding the cache.

Is there really no one that agrees with me. Have I really become that crazy cacher that everyone decides to flame out of the forums? [they don't have the signal frog on fire so just imagine that smiley here]

AZBliss02

3.2k · January 16, 2006

We have at least two caches that uses a similar tactic in Illinois. I have found them both very creative and enjoyable.

There is this cache, which does not require a GPS. I have always wondered how it got approved. it is simply "walk two blks north, then 2 blocks west, etc".

Edited January 16, 2006 by baloo&bd

7.3k · January 16, 2006

Otherwise, you are just hitting your head against a brick wall and hurting yourself.

I'm perfectly fine with this (I've got a pretty strong forehead). Until I can get a better answer than "Because I said so." I keep having the same piece of literature quoted to me:

"GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions."

This is used against my cache, but why?

GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching.

Okay.

Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS,

True, they can be

the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

The coordinates given are very accurate for the means they are meant to serve and if someone chooses to ignore their option of finding the cache without a GPS unit, the coordinates would be a very integral part of finding the cache.

Is there really no one that agrees with me. Have I really become that crazy cacher that everyone decides to flame out of the forums? [they don't have the signal frog on fire so just imagine that smiley here]

AZBliss02

I hope that you don't think that I was flaming you. I was just trying to explain it the way that I see it. :lol:

January 16, 2006

I hope that you don't think that I was flaming you. I was just trying to explain it the way that I see it.

Oh no, I didn't consider that a flame. I'm just feeling like the crazy old geocacher that "eventually" gets flamed out. I guess I'm just looking ahead at what's to come.

AZBliss02

1.5k · January 16, 2006

The coordinates given are very accurate for the means they are meant to serve and if someone chooses to ignore their option of finding the cache without a GPS unit, the coordinates would be a very integral part of finding the cache.

Is there really no one that agrees with me. Have I really become that crazy cacher that everyone decides to flame out of the forums?

I didn't see anyone flaming you. I see a lot of people (pretty much everyone) explaining to you repeatedly that your idea, however fun and exciting it might be, doesn't meet the guidelines.

Whether or not you or I agree that a GPS should be a requirement to do a cache, the guidelines says it is a requirement. A library, whether you give coords to it or not, doesn't require a GPS to find. People visit libraries every day without the aid of a GPS unit. In my town, little blue signs actually point you to the library. So no, no GPSr is required, whether you want it to be or not. Therefore, your cache, as it stands, does not meet the guidelines and the reviewer was correct in archiving it.

If you would do as others have already (repeatedly) suggested and hide a micro with the dewey decimal numbers, your cache would be fine. Since you placed the cache so far from home, it's not handy for you to do that. Perhaps someone local could help you out there, but that's not Groundspeak's problem.

You used the appeal process, you didn't hear what you were hoping to hear, it's time to move on. Them's the rules we all have to play by, whether we like 'em or not.

January 16, 2006

The coordinates given are very accurate for the means they are meant to serve and if someone chooses to ignore their option of finding the cache without a GPS unit, the coordinates would be a very integral part of finding the cache.

Is there really no one that agrees with me. Have I really become that crazy cacher that everyone decides to flame out of the forums?

I didn't see anyone flaming you. I see a lot of people (pretty much everyone) explaining to you repeatedly that your idea, however fun and exciting it might be, doesn't meet the guidelines.

Whether or not you or I agree that a GPS should be a requirement to do a cache, the guidelines says it is a requirement. A library, whether you give coords to it or not, doesn't require a GPS to find. People visit libraries every day without the aid of a GPS unit. In my town, little blue signs actually point you to the library. So no, no GPSr is required, whether you want it to be or not. Therefore, your cache, as it stands, does not meet the guidelines and the reviewer was correct in archiving it.

If you would do as others have already (repeatedly) suggested and hide a micro with the dewey decimal numbers, your cache would be fine. Since you placed the cache so far from home, it's not handy for you to do that. Perhaps someone local could help you out there, but that's not Groundspeak's problem.

You used the appeal process, you didn't hear what you were hoping to hear, it's time to move on. Them's the rules we all have to play by, whether we like 'em or not.

Please read posts thoroughly, I just said that I was only looking ahead at things to come in regards to the flaming (I agree, no one is flaming here).

Just as you say, a library does not need coordinates to find it. That is, if I TOLD THEM THAT IT WAS AT A LIBRARY!! People, please, I'm NOT telling cachers that it is at a library, all they have are coordinates and a few numbers (ex. 123.456).

And yes, I'm aware that people have repeatedly told me to hide a micro container, even though I've repeatedly said that I'm aware of that option and that's not what I'm currently looking for (it's a last resort).

I can bullet-point explain how coordinates are being used in my cache and all I'm getting back is, "No, no it's not." Explain to me how giving useful coordinates is NOT giving useful coordinates? that's essentially what I'm being told.

AZBliss02

5.2k · January 16, 2006

Finding the front door of a library does not require a GPS. Even if I use my GPS to "get me in the area" and park in the parking lot 500 feet away, I could leave my GPS in the car and walk to the front door with no effort. That's not geocaching. I should have to use my GPS to find some distinct target, whether a micro outside, or a specific sign to read some info from. Heck, even the guys that geocache without a GPS spend considerable time studying maps, measuring and plotting coordinates, then carefully matching real-life terrain to those maps. None of that is needed to find the front door of a library :grin:

1.5k · January 16, 2006

Just as you say, a library does not need coordinates to find it. That is, if I TOLD THEM THAT IT WAS AT A LIBRARY!! People, please, I'm NOT telling cachers that it is at a library, all they have are coordinates and a few numbers (ex. 123.456).

I can bullet-point explain how coordinates are being used in my cache and all I'm getting back is, "No, no it's not." Explain to me how giving useful coordinates is NOT giving useful coordinates? that's essentially what I'm being told.

Not telling them it's at a library does (in my mind) certainly further your arguement, although I suppose TPTB could easily argue that looking at any paper map, mapping software, or online map program would quickly tell the seeker that there is a library at those coords.

I suppose I should also state that the requirement that a GPS be used is not something I fully agree with, exactly because of cases like this one. There's a gray area, and I do see your point. The question that really needs to be answered is "how much difficulty must someone without a GPSr have to go through in order for the coords to be useful?"

At least, this is my interpretation. Pretty much ANY cache CAN be found without a GPS unit, but usually only with extrordinarily detailed maps and map reading skills. Sounds like a cache at a library (whether you specifically mention it or not) isn't deemed as difficult enough to find without a GPSr to warrant approval, possibly because it would be noted on any map and no extraordinary skills would be needed to find it without a GPSr.

Again, their game, their rules. And the necessity of this particular rule is one I've questioned. But I'm not the one making the rules...

January 16, 2006

I'll jump in here. I'm somewhat new to geocaching, but I don't think that matters.

AZBliss02 just wants a clear specific answer, so that this stops being a grey area for him and others. He wants someone to say:

"The coordinates of the libaray don't meet the guidelines of needing a GPS unit becuase ... And this is different than other caches like ones that use a bearing from coordiates becuase ..."

Or mabye even, "The new guidelines were put in place to prevent caches where ..., and this caches seems too much like one of those."

Otherwise it seems like this sort of cache gets approved based on the whim of the reviewer instead of from any specific understanding of the guidlines that people could follow.

AZBliss02 can make this a multi-cache or a puzzle cache, but first he wants to understand how the guidelines are being used in a way that he can understand clearly.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the the way he has it set up is fine. Though some more experienced cachers are saying it's too easy, so if it were me I'd probably turn it into a multi/puzzle cache - probably put some coordinates or a puzzle to coordiates in the library "book" that would lead people to another/last leg of the multi.

- bones

1.5k · January 16, 2006

You are right. :lol: The admin is wrong. :grin: It should be approved! :lol:

3.5k · January 16, 2006

Library caches are certainly not a new idea. Think of something else and move on.

9.4k · January 16, 2006

I've done a few library caches, but I must say, it isn't really geocaching if all you're doing is sending cachers to the front door of the library. This may work as the start to a multicache, have the cacher find the book which only contains coordinates to the next stage outside somewhere.

8k · January 16, 2006

Admins can answer if this would be okay or not.

Using a satellite photo, the OP posts the coordinates for where his cache actually is inside the library. Then on the cache page he writes: Reception in the area is not very good. Once you get in the general area you may want to use the hint.

I've seen many caches where the coordinates are not very good - urban canyon, canyon, heavy tree cover, in a cave - and the cache page is something like this. The finder uses the GPSr and gets near but can't really get to zero - so the hint is decrypted and they search without a GPSr. Are all cache of this type now outside of the guidelines?

January 16, 2006

seems fair enough to me - think it should be approved, i'd be happy to find a cache in the uk like this one though im not sure if any exist.

why the numerous comments on the necessity for the gps?

sure, most of us use one to find caches, though there are many who are involved in the sport who rely on ordnance survey maps (etc) and the hint.

(though they often seem to buy a gps unit after some finds though)

i stand by what i say - it should be approved from what ive heard about it.

24.7k · January 16, 2006

I'll give you one reason why the coords to front door of the library don't work.

I was in Vermont the other day. Driving around with a whole bunch of waypoints loaded into my GPS , but not a cache page on me. A waypoint comes into view on the GPS, we head over and it's the (yep you guessed it) front door of the library. Not having the cache page with me I just said "Ah it's one of those library caches and I don't have the info. Let's go" and we didn't do it. Suppose I had decided to do that cache and had gotten out and was snooping all over the place outside the library looking for the container and there wasn't one to tell me what to do? I would've been disappointed. If there was something to find I could have had instructions to follow to finish the cache. That's just one reason, cachers without cache pages.

If the cache is listed as a puzzle or multi (offset) cache as it should be, you should know to have the cache page. If you don't then you are assuming too much about puzzle and multi caches both of which often require the cache page to compete.

Now if knowing this you get out and look anyway, good luck wiht that.

24.7k · January 16, 2006

...what is meant by the guidelines change. The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt. Otherwise, it's letterboxing or something else...

It appears that using a GPS to get a cacher close to the location is the clue to the entire puzzle. By that alone, this cache looks like it fits with your intent.

Heck by using an arial photo and estimating the location of the cache inside the building they could meet both your intent and theirs. (tozainamboku said this first...)

Edited January 16, 2006 by Renegade Knight

3.9k · January 16, 2006

I personally don't see a problem with how it's being submitted. However with that being said, it's obvious that the rule is going to stand.

If you follow the advice on how to make adjustments I think you will create an even better cache than you first planned. So make the adjustments required and let the locals enjoy a new cache.

El Diablo

10.1k · January 16, 2006

I really do not see how this cache differs from "find the monument in the park, and count the number of string beans etched in the base."

Here's a recent example "Use the courdinates for stage 1 and answer the questions to get the courdinates for the second stage Questions 1-3 will give the last three digits of the north courdinates def 1. D=A 2. E=B + number of slides 3. F=C + number of picnic benches Questions 4-6 will give you the last three digits of the west courdinates jkl 4. J=G + the number of spring animals -1 5. K=H - number of animals on the marygo round 6. L=I -benches in gazebo" (Is this a jumble of random, misspelt thoughts?) But, anyways...

I can use Google Earth, or Topozone to locate the monument in question. The only difference being that those numbers must be fed into the GPS to reach the next stage. (Or fed into Google Earth.) :grin: I don't know if "Read the sign, add and multiply to determine the clue for the next stage (The Dewey Decimal Number) would be enough." (The times, they are a-changing.)

Second point is that you can't beat city hall. Work with your reviewer, rather than being obstinant. "You can catch more flies with honey..." Have your parents go to a nearby historical marker, or the house numbers across the street, or the cornerstone on the library, or the church down the street! Use those numbers to direct the cacher to the front door!

The answer to your question is No, the cache is not appropriate, because your approved has told you so.

1.5k · January 17, 2006

The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt.

Actually, in re-reading this statement, I'm changing my mind to side with the hider. The GPS IS available for some portion of the hunt: it does get you to the door of the library (and you don't know you're going to a library from the cache page, which is a key factor). From there you use the dewey numbers to score the find. How is this different from an offset cache where you use the GPS to get to point A, then a bearing and distance to get to point B? Or a cave cache, where the GPS gets you to a map which directs you to the cache?

Each implementation has its nuances, but each also incorporates a GPSr and some other directional aid to get to the cache. If the writeup stated "start off by going to the library at the posted coords" I'd side with the reviewer. However, it doesn't so I think this should be allowed. I also think it would be *better* if there was a micro or a "virtual" stage that you went to first to get the dewey decimal numbers, but that's irrelevant. As is, I think it should be ok, using the clarification that Keystone made in the quote. If the intent of the guidelines is to not allow this type of cache, that intent is NOT clear.

1.5k · January 17, 2006

The answer to your question is No, the cache is not appropriate, because your approved has told you so.

Actually, you're incorrect, according to the guidelines. If you and your approver disagree, other approvers get involved and it gets discussed here, just as we're doing now. Just because you and your approver disagree doesn't simply mean the approver is right and you're wrong. AZbliss02 is following the procedures as they're written, don't fault them for it.

6.4k · January 17, 2006

I'll jump in here. I'm somewhat new to geocaching, but I don't think that matters.

AZBliss02 just wants a clear specific answer, so that this stops being a grey area for him and others. He wants someone to say:

"The coordinates of the libaray don't meet the guidelines of needing a GPS unit becuase ... And this is different than other caches like ones that use a bearing from coordiates becuase ..."

Or mabye even, "The new guidelines were put in place to prevent caches where ..., and this caches seems too much like one of those."

Otherwise it seems like this sort of cache gets approved based on the whim of the reviewer instead of from any specific understanding of the guidlines that people could follow.

AZBliss02 can make this a multi-cache or a puzzle cache, but first he wants to understand how the guidelines are being used in a way that he can understand clearly.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the the way he has it set up is fine. Though some more experienced cachers are saying it's too easy, so if it were me I'd probably turn it into a multi/puzzle cache - probably put some coordinates or a puzzle to coordiates in the library "book" that would lead people to another/last leg of the multi.

- bones

Sounds like you and a few others are asking for a bright-line rule, rather then a somewhat vague guideline.

Be careful what you wish for.

It should seem pretty obvious that the basic idea of geocaching is finding the cache with a gps. Yes, people do it every day without one, but if you insist on forcing a hard and fast rule on this, it's going to require a GPS, plain and simple.

If you don't think so, just look what happened to virtual caches when some people complained the "wow factor" was too subjective.

January 17, 2006

For what it's worth, I agree with you, OP... I think that the GPS is integrated into the cache as much as any other, and I don't think that the cache, as described, would negate or disregard any of the "guidelines." I hope it all works out.

Happy Caching!

Lori V.

TeamVilla5

10.1k · January 17, 2006

The answer to your question is No, the cache is not appropriate, because your approved has told you so.

Actually, you're incorrect, according to the guidelines. If you and your approver disagree, other approvers get involved and it gets discussed here, just as we're doing now. Just because you and your approver disagree doesn't simply mean the approver is right and you're wrong. AZbliss02 is following the procedures as they're written, don't fault them for it.

January 15 by REVIEWER

I am in a position where I need to archive this cache, even though I think it could be listed with a couple changes. I have take this to the other reviewers and they agreed that it cannot be listed as it stands. This is so that you may take up the appeal process as it appears you may do.

That was step two.

Has discussion here ever changed the reviewers' opinion? Perhaps if there were a groundswell of opinion, perhaps. That does not seem to be the case here.

My brother proposed a cache, based on a few existing caches, with coordinates for the parking area. "Now find this" with a photo. He was turned down fo the same reasons as OP. He contemplated the thought, and accepted their opinion.

Edited January 17, 2006 by Harry Dolphin

6.4k · January 17, 2006

I gotta wonder if the hider is so resistent to changing the cache because he states it's hidden far from home and someone else is going to maintain it? Any changes suggested here would require him to travel back to the cache location. Might he be more willing to adapt if the cache was only 15 minutes away?

2.5k · January 17, 2006

I think that perhaps the guidelines could have been worded better, it seems the approver is having as much difficulty understanding what it means, as well as the others. At the very least, the approvers should have all met in their online lounge and discussed what it all means over a few virtual beers. A lack of consistency in interpreting the guidelines is not something new around here though. :grin:

As for the cache, my vote would be to approve it. If coordinates are given, that would satisfy the GPS portion of the guideline. There's a library cache around here that I found without a GPS, just by reading the description, and I didn't read the hint either. The printout was in my car and I was in the neighborhood, so I decided to get the missing pieces. Once I got the missing information, the direction and cache name clicked triggered something that led me to find the cache. I believe that if I had my GPS it would have pointed me to the front door. This cache follows the guidelines and might even be harder to solve than the one being proposed. It was among the more enjoyable caches I have hunted.

I don't see how providing coordinates will not satisfy the GPS requirement. The guideline should have probably been clearer by focusing on the coordinates rather than than the GPS. That happens when you write stuff that can be interpreted in many different ways. Better off not writing a guideline at all then, in my opinion.

I remember one of the multis that I placed which required some math. I get an email from Waldenrun, who doesn't use a GPS. Attached is a map with a dot on the final. It wasn't really solveable that way, but he has a knack, I guess. I don't see the point of making the customers jump through hoops when the cache is perfectly acceptable and follows the guidelines.

21.9k · January 17, 2006

The intent (and I am the author of the sentence in question) is that GPS use must be *available* as an option for some portion of the cache hunt.

Actually, in re-reading this statement, I'm changing my mind to side with the hider. The GPS IS available for some portion of the hunt: it does get you to the door of the library (and you don't know you're going to a library from the cache page, which is a key factor). From there you use the dewey numbers to score the find. How is this different from an offset cache where you use the GPS to get to point A, then a bearing and distance to get to point B? Or a cave cache, where the GPS gets you to a map which directs you to the cache?

The two situations are distinguishable. In the offset cache, one uses (or can use) their GPS to arrive at a given set of coordinates, whether that's a statue, the front door of a library, or a random spot in an open field. You then march 50 paces from a point that has meaning.

The coordinates for the front door of the library have no meaning to this type of cache, other than to say "there is something inside the library; go find it." I can look at an online map and figure out that it's a library at the corner of Main and Maple. That tells me nothing about where the cache is.

If the instructions were to go to the sidewalk in front of the library, and walk 57 steps on a bearing of 75°, taking me inside the library and to the "geography" shelf in the reference area, well, that would involve GPS use. There's a connection.

Cache Not Approved, Your Help Needed

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

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