Jump to content

Cache Not Approved, Your Help Needed


AZBuckeye04
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

After due consideration, and careful thought (?), I have decided that the cache proposed by OP does, indeed, fit the requirement of the guidelines for the need (?) of a GPS. There are coordinates listed. Put them into the GPS to find the 1st stage. Requirements filled. The interpretation being used is that all stages must be findable using a GPS. That is not clear in the guidelines, but is consistant with recent approvals. The proposed solution "Go seventy two paces at 279º" does not seem to require the use of a GPS any more than the problem of being able to find the starting point using Mapquest or Google Earth. I have a compass, and am not afraid to use it! The only viable solution that I can see, with this interpretation, is to climb on top of the library roof to get a valid GPS reading for the location of the book in question. That would require playing a number game with the hours of service at the library for the Dewey Decimal number of the book, but that is minor. With proper use of a compass and a GPS, you should be able to determine the exact coordinates of the book in question. You could probably even fake it using Topozone or Google Earth! Oops. <_<

If each stage does require GPS usage, than I would never approve any cache saying "Go seventy two paces at 279º".

To clarify: GPS use is not required at EACH stage of a multistage hunt. Having meaningful GPS coordinates for ONE stage is sufficient. If you follow letterbox style clues from there, or if you provide a compass bearing and distance offset from that point, that's fine.

Link to comment

An offset cache is one where you go to a specific point, and instructions are given on how to proceed to the cache relative to that given point.  Here, the coordinates for the front door of the library bear no relationship at all to the location of the container.  It is the same thing as saying "here are the coordinates for the sign at the park entrance.  There is a cache in the park somewhere.  Here are some non-GPS clues on where to find it."

 

This is not an offset cache.

OK, I'm starting to see both side now and have a question that possibly Keystone can answer.

 

What if the OP were to take you to some part of the library (outside) via GPS coords. They then Had you use a sign or date to come up with a formula. That "formula" came up with a number within the Dewy Decimal system (where the log is located).

 

Would this satisfy the requirements? I have done two similar however they were posted considerably before Nov-05, so not sure if they would still qualify. One reason for my curiosity is I am moving to a new area and was considering something similar to this after the move.

I've taken a break from this thread for awhile so that community members could provide input without fear of being shot at by site volunteers. Thank you to everyone who provided constructive comments. Your views *ARE* taken into account by Groundspeak and the volunteer team when interpreting and even revising the listing guidelines. Thanks especially to AZBliss02 for remaining patient and respectful.

 

I'm going back through the thread now and responding only on those issues where a reviewer's input was sought, but has not yet been provided. I'll begin with this one. It is just fine to use a sign or other source of letters or numbers, at a location defined by GPS coordinates, to provide the clues for the location of the final container using Dewey Decimal numbers. The first part of the cache includes sufficient GPS usage under the guidelines.

 

This is one of several suggested solutions that would work just fine for the cache at issue in this thread. I recognize that AZBliss02 wishes to appeal the cache *as submitted* vs. being required to modify it.

So if I now starting to understand...the problem is that the clue is in the title of the cache instead of being found or calculated as a result of finding point 1? PS glad to see you back in this thread. It does help a lot to have concise input from the approvers instead of trying to figure out what you are thinking.

Edited by edscott
Link to comment
I think a guideline that could potentially ban night caches using reflectors, cave caches, tunnel caches, or other similar types of caches where a general location, rather than a specific one is used as the initial stage warrants discussion.  That appears to be what the decision of the admins is, at least as I interpret it.

 

Since some of the above types of caches are among my favorites, I am a bit concerned.  In this one specific application it might appear to be reasonable, and understandable, but when applied to other simlar situations... the implications are staggering.

 

Who exactly is this guideline supposed to benefit?  I'm still trying to figure that out.  It's not the hider, or the potential finder, or the property owner....  who's left?  Groundspeak?  Is it tinfoil hat time again?

Please don't be overly concerned about traditionally structured night caches, cave caches, tunnel caches, etc. Provided that the use of GPS coordinates takes you to a specific spot in the middle of the woods to find the first reflector, the little-known cave entrance, or the particular drainage pipe, then there is sufficient GPS use involved.

 

In contrast, if the cache page said "this is a night cache, it is somewhere in Memorial Park and the coordinates are for the parking lot, please wander around with your flashlight until you find the first reflector," then this is closer to the library cache example. The coordinates for Memorial Park's parking lot, or for the library's front door, are not *connected* to the solution to the cache. You can bushwack to the reflector trail, ignoring the parking lot. You can enter the library through the back door, ignoring the front door.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment
I know that previous caches hardly ever have any weight when compared to a cache you're attempting to get approved. However, here are two caches that were approved either the same day or after my cache was first denied:

 

GCT276

This cache: Provides coordinates for the trail/highway intersection and for a parking lot

My cache: Provides coordinates to the building while at the same time NOT specifying the object that the coordinates are for. (if you want, I'll add coords to the parking lot)

 

This cache: From here you read a description to help you determine how to find the cache. No GPS usage is apparent.

My cache: Provides a code in the format '123.45 ABC' with nothing (other than the encrypted hint) specifying that the code is Dewey Decimal.

 

GCT10M

This cache: Provides a set of coordinates that don't appear to have any purpose (although I'll admit that they could, obviously I only know what is on the cache page) along with parking lot coords

My cache: Provides coordinates to the building while at the same time NOT specifying the object that the coordinates are for.

 

This cache: A very detailed story appears to guide you along to help you find the cache.

My cache: Provides coordinates to the building while at the same time NOT specifying the object that the coordinates are for.

 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these caches. Not only do I agree with their approval, I think they sound like a ton of fun!

 

Again, one of these was approved the same day I submitted my cache. The other was approved on Monday, possibly after this thread was started (certainly after all the reviewers had a chance to discuss and deny my cache in their private forum).

 

AZBliss02

Both caches are distinguishable. This is one of several reasons why the guidelines say that no cache serves as precedent for publishing another cache.

 

I have the advantage of being able to see the reviewer notes for these caches. One cache involves solving a puzzle which yields coordinates. Go to those coordinates and find a container. The other cache has something specific located at the posted coordinates which has relevance to the cache.

Link to comment
So if I now starting to understand...the problem is that the clue is in the title of the cache instead of being found or calculated as a result of finding point 1?  PS glad to see you back in this thread.  It does help a lot to have concise input from the approvers instead of trying to figure out what you are thinking.

Thank you for your kind words. May I say that it is because of superhumans like yourself, who enjoy the challenge of finding caches without a GPS, that the guidelines are a bit less definitive than they might be. One can *always* find a cache without a GPS, as you, Walden Run, Web-ling and others have proven. The distinction is that a mere mortal like myself, who can barely find a cache *with* a GPS, needs to have the option of using a GPS somewhere along the way as an integral element of the hunt. We can't say that you HAVE to use a GPS somewhere along the way, just that you can if you want to. So, it's all your fault. <_< Just kidding!

 

The only numbers on the cache page that are connected in a meaningful way to the hunt for the cache are the Dewey Decimal numbers in the title. I can't input those into my GPS. This fact in and of itself doesn't make the cache fail -- there are other library caches that do NOT use Dewey Decimal as the "hook." My reading of the guidelines is: ALL library caches which include GPS use somehow in the hunt should be published -- regardless of whether Dewey Decimal is relevant. ALL library caches which do not have GPS coordinates as an integral element of the hunt should not be published as-is, but rather should be revised to incorporate GPS use. That is how the guidelines were interpreted here.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

So if I'm understanding correctly: This cache only has the coordinates lead you to the front door, but there is nothing at that specific location that tells you anything about the puzzle. If the OP left everything as is (including the title of the cache) and also placed a small sticker on the "in" door with the geocaching logo and said "Reference inside", this would then make the specific location you've been led to integral to the cache.

 

That sound right <_<

 

Celticwulf

<edit for spelling>

Edited by celticwulf
Link to comment

Thank you for rejoining us Keystone. For a while there I thought maybe you had attempted to find a cache using edscott's method and ended up getting lost. <_<

 

You are certainly providing some good remarks on this topic. I'm still curious if it was discussed again by the reviewers/administrators and if so what their final judgement was.

 

Obviously I can assume the answer based on your stance, but I'd like to know for sure. In the meantime I think I'll get this John Cougar Mellencamp song queued up. <_<

 

AZBliss02

Link to comment

So if I now starting to understand...the problem is that the clue is in the title of the cache instead of being found or calculated as a result of finding point 1? PS glad to see you back in this thread. It does help a lot to have concise input from the approvers instead of trying to figure out what you are thinking.

I can also understand how that excuse could be used to try to justify the archive decision, but I don't think it's still as clear cut, and I would admit that I don't have the advantage of seeing reviewer notes. But here is the reason it can still be approved as is.

 

If the coordinates lead to the front door, the GPS component is satisfied. If the actual book is located within reasonable distance of the front door, than we can say the coordinates also point to the cache. (The cache can be located on the second floor just above the door, as an example. Most geocachers are in agreement that a cache up to 60 ft away from the coordinates is acceptable, 30 ft error for both hider and finder) So assuming, the cache is within 60 ft of the front door, the only objection is that the Dewey Decimal number is in the title. I would disagree that this is a problem, as lots of caches include hints in the cache name, ie. Between a Rock and a Hard Place.

 

Not being able to enter the Dewey Decimal numbers into the GPS to help find the cache is no different than not being able to enter the words "between a rock and a hard place" and not being able to find the cache.

Link to comment
The distinction is that a mere mortal like myself, who can barely find a cache *with* a GPS, needs to have the option of using a GPS somewhere along the way as an integral element of the hunt.  We can't say that you HAVE to use a GPS somewhere along the way, just that you can if you want to.  So, it's all your fault.  <_<  Just kidding!

Keystone, I believe that you are trying to skirt around the fact the the GPS can be used in the cache listing, as is. Is there other information we are missing here, or are you trying to pretend that a GPS cannot be used here. I'm not trying to be offensive here, I just feel you are trying to side step this issue.

 

Edit: spelling

Edited by cachew nut
Link to comment
If the coordinates lead to the front door, the GPS component is satisfied.

I tend to disagree with this, and I'm seeing more and more why there was discussion by the reviewers prior to archiving but I am agreeing with the archiving. There is nothing specific about the coordinates that is necissary for the cache. In my mind (based on what I've found and what I've seen here) puzzle caches have two different varieties: Those that are "not at the posted coordinates" and those where the posted coordinates do have something specific there to lead you further into the puzzle. The front door of the library would not be specific enough in my opinion, unless something like my sticker example above was in place. The "not at the posted coordinates" caches tend to be ones that you need to figure out ahead of time.

 

If the coordinates were changed to somewhere NOT at the library, say a sign on the side of the road with the arrow to the library, then this may be more of a puzzle cache that requires the coordinates. The leap of logic would be to see the sign, then see the title, and go to the library from there. The front door is just not quite enough IMHO.

 

At least that's what I'm thinking now...I could be wrong as usual though <_<

 

Celticwulf

Link to comment
Thank you for rejoining us Keystone. For a while there I thought maybe you had attempted to find a cache using edscott's method and ended up getting lost. <_<

 

You are certainly providing some good remarks on this topic. I'm still curious if it was discussed again by the reviewers/administrators and if so what their final judgement was.

 

Obviously I can assume the answer based on your stance, but I'd like to know for sure. In the meantime I think I'll get this John Cougar Mellencamp song queued up. -_-

 

AZBliss02

You're welcome. I have found one cache without a GPS -- my first one, while waiting for the GPS to arrive in the mail. It took me 90 minutes to find what I would now call a "park and grab" tupperware jar hidden 20 feet from the parking lot. So, I doubt I'll be using the EdScott method anytime soon! <_<

 

I am not authorized at this time to say whether or not your appeal will be successful. Nor can I share the confidential "tally" of votes for or against your cache appeal. I am just one reviewer. The recent responses that I've posted ARE authorized, because they represent my best efforts to summarize consensus positions developed by the volunteer group when discussing/interpreting the guidelines.

 

You will hear from either Groundspeak or, more likely, your original cache reviewer, regarding the outcome of your appeal here in the forums. In the meantime I hope you have a chance to go find some geocaches.

Link to comment
[

Please don't be overly concerned about traditionally structured night caches, cave caches, tunnel caches, etc.  Provided that the use of GPS coordinates takes you to a specific spot in the middle of the woods to find the first reflector, the little-known cave entrance, or the particular drainage pipe, then there is sufficient GPS use involved.

I am sorry, but I remain concerned as you stress "in the middle of the woods", little-known cave entrances etc. Although my question does not directly relate to the library cache, I'd like to ask for a clarification of your statement.

 

Is your intent to say that caches in well-known caves (for example caves that can be reached by marked hiking trails), traditional caches in the immediate vicinity of the summit cross of a well-known mountain, or traditional caches located at well-known and easily identifiable objects in cities are no longer acceptable at gc.com?

(As an example of the latter type consider this very popular cache in Vienna

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...&log=y&decrypt=

or that one

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...88-0c7fa1151ddf

).

 

So far I have never seen it as target of a cache to be hard to find without a GPS, I thought the possibility to find it with a GPS and the attractiveness of the location to which the cachers are led, are the important aspects. In other words, I have no objections against a cache that you could find without a GPS (using a map, but not disposing of the skills of an experienced orienteering person like edscott).

 

To return to the library cache, I am wondering whether a traditional cache (a micro) hidden outside the library in the entrance area (with the description mentioning that fact) would have been approved.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment
Thank you for rejoining us Keystone. For a while there I thought maybe you had attempted to find a cache using edscott's method and ended up getting lost. <_<

 

You are certainly providing some good remarks on this topic. I'm still curious if it was discussed again by the reviewers/administrators and if so what their final judgement was.

 

Obviously I can assume the answer based on your stance, but I'd like to know for sure. In the meantime I think I'll get this John Cougar Mellencamp song queued up.  :wub:

 

AZBliss02

You're welcome. I have found one cache without a GPS -- my first one, while waiting for the GPS to arrive in the mail. It took me 90 minutes to find what I would now call a "park and grab" tupperware jar hidden 20 feet from the parking lot. So, I doubt I'll be using the EdScott method anytime soon! <_<

 

I am not authorized at this time to say whether or not your appeal will be successful. Nor can I share the confidential "tally" of votes for or against your cache appeal. I am just one reviewer. The recent responses that I've posted ARE authorized, because they represent my best efforts to summarize consensus positions developed by the volunteer group when discussing/interpreting the guidelines.

 

You will hear from either Groundspeak or, more likely, your original cache reviewer, regarding the outcome of your appeal here in the forums. In the meantime I hope you have a chance to go find some geocaches.

Thanks Keystone. I guess I'll put the "Authority Song" on hold for now -_-

 

I gotta tell you though, the mere fact that this has moved on in accordance with the appeal guidelines should be a testament to all who say it isn't followed. Granted, "maybe" it doesn't matter, but atleast the process IS followed.

 

The cache hunting is a good idea. It has been a little while (but not because of this thread, i assure you).

 

Maybe I'll take an edscott approach to some, it's been a while since I've been completely lost.

 

AZBliss02

Link to comment
There is nothing specific about the coordinates that is necissary for the cache.  In my mind (based on what I've found and what I've seen here) puzzle caches have two different varieties: Those that are "not at the posted coordinates" and those where the posted coordinates do have something specific there to lead you further into the puzzle.

 

Good point. I took another look and the OP says that it is a "Mystery cache". I have been to Mystery caches that aren't puzzles, so while I see your point about puzzle caches, this one is not really a puzzle. More like a mystery or brain-teaser even.

 

The front door of the library would not be specific enough in my opinion, unless something like my sticker example above was in place. The "not at the posted coordinates" caches tend to be ones that you need to figure out ahead of time.

 

If it was not in the library, but in a hollow log, would you feel that the there should by a sticker on the forest preserve sign?

 

If the coordinates were changed to somewhere NOT at the library, say a sign on the side of the road with the arrow to the library, then this may be more of a puzzle cache that requires the coordinates.

 

There already are coordinates. What you are describing is a multi-cache. I don't believe the OP intended the cache to be either a multi or a puzzle.

 

Edit:spelling

Edited by cachew nut
Link to comment

Oops, I see the OP is satisfied for now with his appeal process, so I guess we can all wait and see what the decision is. Thanks for your input too Keystone. It's interesting to see your thought process even if I don't agree with you. I guess we will all watch for the decision. Here's hoping you do the right thing.

 

Edit:spelling

Edited by cachew nut
Link to comment
Cache Name: Crazy Cache Name #3: 198.285

 

Description:

 

Often when explaining Geocaching to someone the phrase "High-Tech Treasure Hunting" is used. It is in the spirit of treasure hunting that this cache has been placed.

The listed coordinates will NOT put you directly at the cache!

Your GPSr can only get you so far on this one, then it's all on you to figure it out. We placed this after experiencing a similar cache in Phoenix, AZ that we really enjoyed.

 

This cache is accessible at only the following times (and inaccessible on most holidays):

Monday - Thursday 9:00am - 8:00pm

Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm

Saturday (Summer Hours Only) 9:00am - 2:00pm

 

Please do not bother with trade items as they will not fit (however there is a dollar bill for the FTF). Be sure to bring your own writing instrument to sign the log.

 

The title of this cache is a clue, not a cheat, you WILL need it.

 

This is a historical piece of [edited] County. Please be very respectful and if you have the time, explore the history surrounding this location.

 

Happy Caching!

 

OK, I'm lost. How does this tell you where the cache is? And how is it different from some of the traditional caches I've seen that have enough information in the description or title to find without a GPS -or- even looking at a map?

Link to comment
OK, I'm lost. How does this tell you where the cache is? And how is it different from some of the traditional caches I've seen that have enough information in the description or title to find without a GPS -or- even looking at a map?

Puzzles and Traditional caches are like apples and oranges on this point. With a traditional cache, by definition, I can leave my PDA or cache page printout at home, enter the waypoint into my GPS, and go find the container that's located at the posted coordinates. I have the option of using a GPS to find the cache.

Link to comment
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

And that would be me. :blink:

 

Just my two cents' worth...

 

Many times I do not look at a detailed map on the cache page. I simply look at the general one that gc.com shows. I doubt that that general map would show that this location is a library. Merely that it's in --- ----. Once I USED MY GPS to get me in the general vicinity, THEN I would have to use the clues to find the cache.

 

Seriously, that is how I would approach this cache. Use my GPS to get me to the posted coordinates and go from there. In that respect, I feel this cache meets gc.com's guidelines.

 

And I do hope that I can find this cache someday soon............ :drama:

 

 

That being said, I'm continuing to read this thread, and maybe what I've said won't make sense by the time I get to the end of it. In that case, never mind. :blink:

Link to comment

Hi Team RJMK,

 

If you check the original post, you will see that the cache was submitted as a Mystery cache. From the latest guidelines that were updated on November 2, 2005, you can see that this cache was submitted properly and should be approved. Even if it was miscategorized, it probably could pass as a traditional cache as well. At this point, it isn't about whether or not the cache should be approved. The guidelines already say it should be approved.

 

Mystery or Puzzle Caches

 

The “catch-all” of cache types, this form of cache often involves complicated puzzles that you will first need to solve in order to determine the coordinates. The information needed to solve the puzzle must be available to the general caching community and should be solvable from the information provided on the cache listing. For example, a puzzle that requires research on public websites in order to determine the coordinates may be acceptable, while a puzzle that requires sending an e-mail to the cache owner with the solution in order to obtain the coordinates may not be. 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. Unless a good reason otherwise can be provided, the posted coordinates should be no more than 1-2 miles away from the true cache location. This allows the cache to show up on the proper vicinity searches and to keep the mileage of Travel Bugs that find their way into the cache reasonably correct.

 

Traditional Caches

 

This is the original cache type consisting of (at a bare minimum) a container and a logbook. The cache may be filled with objects for trade. Normally you'll find a Tupperware-style container, ammo box, or bucket filled with goodies, or smaller container ("microcache") too small to contain items except for a logbook. The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page are the exact location of the cache. A container with just an object or codeword for verification, and no logbook, generally, does not qualify as a traditional cache.

Link to comment
In my opinion (and I guess this is something else to see what everyone else thinks), what's the real difference in giving the coords to the library (keeping in mind that the cacher won't be told it's a library) and a code compared to giving coords to a crappy altoids container that has a paper with the same details on it?

 

Personally, I think your cache is just an offset cache and fits the guidelines as I've read them. But I'm not your reviewer, so I think if you want this cache to be listed you need to work with your reviewer. Your reviewer is not unlike a judge in that he interperates the guidelines the way judges interpret the law. Different judges may make very different rulings based on the same law. Heck, some people spend 20 years in prison for a crime that might have gotten them probation with another judge. Your reviewer and many others here have offered viable options and I don't see how any would detract from your cache. If you really want it listed just make the minor changes that you have been asked to make and you will see many happy geocachers finding your cache. And be glad you don't have 20 years in prison riding on the decision :drama: .

Well, now, I agree wholeheartedly with this assessment of the situation.

Link to comment
AZBliss02, good luck with your cache. I hope to see it approved. It sounds like a lot of fun and I will go look for it if I'm in the neighborhood. It's unfortunate that you had to be put through the wringer and devulge all of the details in the forums. Hopefully it only spoiled the fun for a small number of cachers. I'll be watching along with the others.

Because of reading this thread, if this cache gets approved, yes, I'll know where to start, and will not need my GPS, but if the cache had been approved without all this, I would not have known simply by reading the cache page where to start my search without using my GPS. Oh certainly, I could have taken more steps to look at more detailed maps, but I very seldom do. Those are like reading the hints, in my opinion, and I don't like reading the hints unless I'm stumped.

 

But even though I now know where to go to find this cache (if it ever gets approved), that will not lessen the fun of finding it. There isn't another cache in our area like it, and I look forward to finding this one.

Link to comment
There is no difference to coordinates to front of library and coordinates to a memorial plague.

 

I see a big difference. The cords to the plaque are sending you to a specific place, not a general one like a building.

Just as a memorial plaque is specific, so is this building. It's not 'just any building.' I don't understand this analogy.

Link to comment

Did I not read that the dewey decimal number would be the name of the cache? I think most cachers would figure that out. Apparently, the reviewer thought so also.

I'm not stupid, but I wouldn't have figured out that the number was a Dewey Decimal number just by reading the number in the cache title.

Link to comment
There is no difference to coordinates to front of library and coordinates to a memorial plague.

 

ROFL! The frog plague must have been memorable, since I remember reading about that one!

 

Thanks Pip for your quote, I would have missed that otherwise.

 

But even though I now know where to go to find this cache (if it ever gets approved), that will not lessen the fun of finding it. There isn't another cache in our area like it, and I look forward to finding this one.

 

I will put it on my watchlist so that I can enjoy reading the logs.

Link to comment
If any local cacher clicks on a map link, they will know its at the library. With that information, it is very likely that they would be able to find it. That is sufficient reason why this cache doesn't pass muster, in my opinion.

I AM a local for this cache, and you've hit on something that I think is very important.

 

IF ANY LOCAL CACHER CLICKS ON A MAP LINK

 

How is this any different than a hint? You have a choice as to whether to click on that or not. We all know that some hints tell you exactly where the cache is located and/or what it looks like. I hate hints like that, and for that reason, most times won't read a hint unless I'm really stumped.

 

If you look at the cache page as it stands, the little map will NOT tell you it's a library, or even be detailed enough to tell you what street it's on. As I said before, I am a local cacher for this cache, and I would NOT know it was the library without clicking on a map and clicking a few more times to zoom in on the location.

 

Let me tell you about the very first cache I ever found. I didn't have a GPS. The cache was located in a cemetery. I was familiar with this cemetery and knew that there were very few places a cache could be hidden. I clicked on one of the map links and kept zooming in until I had localized an area of the cemetery where the cache was. Now that I knew the general area, I looked at the hint. The hint was obvious. "In the green over white." It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the cache was in a bush or tree that was over a tombstone with the name "White" on it. Didn't take me long to find the cache at all. Link

 

My point? UNLESS you click on one of the map links, and then click some more to zoom in, you will NOT know this cache is located at the library, even if you are a local. Unless of course, you have the Dewey Decimal System always at the ready in your head when you see its numbers. :drama:

Link to comment
How would you know? I don't think you're a local of this area. I'm not trying to say they're dumb, but there are a number of places in the area that the map shows, I don't think it would be an automatic thing for everyone. Besides, we're only talking about like 5, maybe 10 cachers that are local to the area.

 

AZBliss02

Obviously, I'm making assumptions. I assume that cachers are relatively intelligent and that they have a basic knowledge of their town. This knowledge would include the location of the public library.

Do you know the coordinates of YOUR local library? :drama:

Link to comment

I know that I have come to this discussion late, and that the process is mostly complete. But, like many cachers, I cannot resist adding my two cents.

 

First, sadly, I believe this will only cement the belief that the vast majority of geocachers appear to have that the reviewers do not listen to the rest of us, that they feel that their opinions are "better" than ours. This is likely the IDEAL example of an appeal, and it seems quite clear that it is to be rejected, yet not one reviewer has posted an explanation that has managed to convince the majority of the others on this thread that they are correct. That's sad. I believe earlier posts are correct - it's all about saving face at this point. sigh. sadly, as perfectly as this thread has been conducted, I believe it has decreased my enthusiasm for this sport. the psychologist in me (before you ask, I have a PhD in psych) just shakes its heads and walks away; the cacher in me cries. I may have only been caching for 7 months, but it is something that I've loved doing. I know that the next time I go out, I will enjoy it less. NOT because of AZBliss's appeal, but because of what appears to be a complete dismissal of our opinions by TPTB. I must put this aside, or I will end up quitting.

 

BUT, before I desist, I must ask for help/clarification. Keystone hinted at this, but I did not understand his reply. I'm betting that many many of you could explain it for me. Why are mystery caches held to such a different criteria? I know of several dozen (traditional) caches that have literally included information with the park's name (and, trust me, I've found some micros in neighborhood "parks" that were barely large enough for the swing set - we never bothered with a GPS), the name of the statue in the park, what trail to take to get to the statue, whether the micro is on the front/back/left/right, etc etc etc. I've seen ones like this that have been approved in 2006. They just were given low difficulty ratings. I always just assumed they were mostly placed for the numbers hounds. You do not even have to be a local to find these without a GPS (and, if the GPS is to be all that important, then why all the links to every mapping program ever designed, right on every cache page???). Clearly, in a rational mind, at least some finders will use their GPS. Others will not, but I'm certain that every cache has had the possibliity of being found by someone without a GPS. Anyway, I'll stop the ramble -- why are mystery caches singled out?

 

(I'm not trying to start a rant or to vent, I just honestly do not know, and cannot find it in the cache placing guidelines where it explains the distinction as to why a higher standard is applied for them)

 

Finally, if the tally is still on-going at any level - I clearly believe the cache is fine as is. I wish a cache like that could appear in my area. Our best is a webcam cache in a library.

 

edit: hmm, apparently "right" has a t in it

Edited by Beffums
Link to comment
OK, I'm lost. How does this tell you where the cache is? And how is it different from some of the traditional caches I've seen that have enough information in the description or title to find without a GPS -or- even looking at a map?

Puzzles and Traditional caches are like apples and oranges on this point. With a traditional cache, by definition, I can leave my PDA or cache page printout at home, enter the waypoint into my GPS, and go find the container that's located at the posted coordinates. I have the option of using a GPS to find the cache.

Now I am really confused. The portion of the guidelines which mentions the GPS-usage requirement does not talk about a specific cache type. (BTW: We should keep in mind that the mystery type is not only for puzzle caches, but also for caches which do not fit into one of the other categories - in early times it was called "unknown" which was more concise.)

 

Moreover, you wrote in a posting above that it suffices that at least one stage of a cache can be approached by GPS-usage. Previous examples made clear that this stage need not be the final stage of the cache and need not be a stage of a multi-cache where a micro is hidden - it can be a virtual stage (e.g. a plaque as well).

 

Concluding this means that if a traditional cache at the entrance of a library or a comparable building is approvable because a GPS can be used to navigate to the cache, the same must hold true for a multi-cache or a mystery cache who includes the entrance as a virtual stage (in the present case not even the information what is located at the given coordinates is given away in contrast to many traditional caches).

 

It appears rather absurd to me that a traditional cache hidden at the entrance of the library (and mentioning this fact in the description) is in accordance with the guidelines as you interpret them while a mystery cache with the same given coordinates and less information should violate the guidelines. The option to use the GPS exists in both cases as the way to approach the building is the same in both variants.

 

Could you please come up with a more logical argument? I still do not fully understand what is the real intent of the portion or the guidelines about the GPS-usage. So I am not able to suggest a modified formulation.

 

Cezanne

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

It has boiled down to this...the baloney flag has been raised. It's going to be noticed because it is waving. It's either going to get saluted or cut down. If not this time, then the next time, or the time after that.

There's a problem, where's that tire repair kit?

 

This may be all it took, so see you soon, maybe. :drama:

 

Edit:punctuation

Edited by cachew nut
Link to comment
Concluding this means that if a traditional cache at the entrance of a library or a comparable building is approvable because a GPS can be used to navigate to the cache, the same must hold true for a multi-cache or a mystery cache who includes the entrance as a virtual stage (in the present case not even the information what is located at the given coordinates is given away in contrast to many traditional caches).

 

It appears rather absurd to me that a traditional cache hidden at the entrance of the library (and mentioning this fact in the description) is in accordance with the guidelines as you interpret them while a mystery cache with the same given coordinates and less information should violate the guidelines. The option to use the GPS exists in both cases as the way to approach the building is the same in both variants.

 

Yep.

 

At this point, I think stubborness is going to be the only winner. :drama:

Link to comment
Concluding this means that if a traditional cache at the entrance of a library or a comparable building is approvable because a GPS can be used to navigate to the cache, the same must hold true for a multi-cache or a mystery cache who includes the entrance as a virtual stage (in the present case not even the information what is located at the given coordinates is given away in contrast to many traditional caches).

The flaw in this argument is that the posted coordinates are not a "virtual stage" (quoting you) but rather a "general point of reference" (quoting the cache owner). A sign with numbers on it that help determine the cache location would be a virtual clue. The front door of the library means nothing more than the back door of the library. It is analogous to the parking coordinates for a cache in a large park that has several parking lots from which a cache could be approached.

Link to comment
But even though I now know where to go to find this cache (if it ever gets approved), that will not lessen the fun of finding it. There isn't another cache in our area like it, and I look forward to finding this one.

Hi Pip,

 

As we've found geocaches in the past together and I knew you lived near this one, when this issue first came up in the Reviewers Forum I thought of you as the prototypical geocacher who would just like to see a new cache to find in your home area. :drama: Yes, it got caught up in the listing guidelines and yes, people can differ in their interpretation of what the guidelines mean. But hopefully you'll have that cache to find sometime soon! Either the appeal will be denied and the owner will modify the cache as discussed above, or the appeal will be successful and you can hunt for it as-is. Both alternatives are preferable to the cache remaining unpublished. Believe it or not, cache reviewers *like* to list new caches for nice people like you to find. :blink: Thanks for your contributions from a local perspective.

Link to comment

Thanks, Keystone. I, too, look forward to finding this cache, one way or another. :blink: Following my contributions to this thread, I received an e-mail from AZBliss02, expressing his sadness that I now know 'too much' about this cache, but I assured him that it makes no difference to me if I do. He has added several quality caches in our cache-starved area, not just 'caches,' and I always enjoy finding them. I enjoy the 'easy' ones as well as the more difficult, because I have a way of making the hard ones easy and the easy ones hard. So those difficulty ratings? Don't mean nuttin' to me. :drama:

Link to comment
Thanks, Keystone. I, too, look forward to finding this cache, one way or another. :blink: Following my contributions to this thread, I received an e-mail from AZBliss02, expressing his sadness that I now know 'too much' about this cache, but I assured him that it makes no difference to me if I do. He has added several quality caches in our cache-starved area, not just 'caches,' and I always enjoy finding them. I enjoy the 'easy' ones as well as the more difficult, because I have a way of making the hard ones easy and the easy ones hard. So those difficulty ratings? Don't mean nuttin' to me. :drama:

It was your own choice to venture over to the dark side. You could have stayed in the off-topic forum and remained blissfully ignorant of the cache's secrets. Maybe I should've warned you. So, don't go there. It is a scary place.

Link to comment
Thanks, Keystone.  I, too, look forward to finding this cache, one way or another.  :blink:  Following my contributions to this thread, I received an e-mail from AZBliss02, expressing his sadness that I now know 'too much' about this cache, but I assured him that it makes no difference to me if I do.  He has added several quality caches in our cache-starved area, not just 'caches,' and I always enjoy finding them.  I enjoy the 'easy' ones as well as the more difficult, because I have a way of making the hard ones easy and the easy ones hard.  So those difficulty ratings?  Don't mean nuttin' to me.  :drama:

It was your own choice to venture over to the dark side. You could have stayed in the off-topic forum and remained blissfully ignorant of the cache's secrets. Maybe I should've warned you. So, don't go there. It is a scary place.

:blink:

 

Yeah. How quickly I forgot. :blink:

Link to comment

Now I am really confused.

Please don't be confused, cezanne. The cache was submitted as a Mystery cache, and not a traditional cache. I posted the entire guideline for Mystery caches several posts above, but here are the important parts, you can read the whole thing above.

 

Mystery or Puzzle Caches

 

The information needed to solve the puzzle must be available to the general caching community and should be solvable from the information provided on the cache listing.

 

Unless a good reason otherwise can be provided, the posted coordinates should be no more than 1-2 miles away from the true cache location.

 

I think you are becoming confused because that is the object of steering the post away from the facts. All the talk of virtual stages, and virtual clues, and front doors, and back doors, and numbers on doors, and parking coordinates, and parking lots, are meant to confuse you and make you lose your focus on what really matters.

 

Edit: forgot to add virtual clues

Edited by cachew nut
Link to comment

I'm not quite understanding the purpose behind quoting the general guideline for puzzle caches. That is not at issue here. It's a Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle cache.

 

The relevant guideline at issue, since we're several pages into the thread, is the following (emphasis added in bold):

 

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types

 

{snip}

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. If time allows take several reading at different times over a few days and average the results. This will help you achieve greater accuracy on your coordinates. 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.

 

Thanks for the opportunity to recap.

Link to comment
Concluding this means that if a traditional cache at the entrance of a library or a comparable building is approvable because a GPS can be used to navigate to the cache, the same must hold true for a multi-cache or a mystery cache who includes the entrance as a virtual stage (in the present case not even the information what is located at the given coordinates is given away in contrast to many traditional caches).

The flaw in this argument is that the posted coordinates are not a "virtual stage" (quoting you) but rather a "general point of reference" (quoting the cache owner). A sign with numbers on it that help determine the cache location would be a virtual clue. The front door of the library means nothing more than the back door of the library. It is analogous to the parking coordinates for a cache in a large park that has several parking lots from which a cache could be approached.

You know, I keep reading this over and over, and I still don't see anything that convinces me that this cache doesn't follow the guidelines. You're right, the back door could have just as easily been used as the starting point for finding this cache. The hider just chose the front door.

 

I guess I don't see how this differs from my recently archived (by me, due to repeated muggling) letterbox hybrid. I gave coordinates for a starting point, which is in a cemetery and anyone could find by looking at a map and using the wording in the cache listing. From that point on, even if you used your GPS to find the starting point, no GPS is needed to find the cache. You only need it to get yourself started. You must use other directions and clues to find the cache.

 

Yes, mine was a letterbox hybrid and not a mystery cache, but they both list coordinates as the starting point. Isn't that the point of listing coordinates? To get you at least to a starting point to find a cache?

 

If the argument is that you can use maps to find the starting point, by looking at a map which denotes the library on it (which AZBliss02 has said only shows up on one map link out of the nine possible), I think we've presented more than enough evidence to prove that you can do that with innumerable cache listings.

 

I want to see the other side of this, I really do! I just can't. Sorry!

Link to comment
I'm not quite understanding the purpose behind quoting the general guideline for puzzle caches. That is not at issue here. It's a Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle cache.

 

The relevant guideline at issue, since we're several pages into the thread, is the following (emphasis added in bold):

 

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types

 

{snip}

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. If time allows take several reading at different times over a few days and average the results. This will help you achieve greater accuracy on your coordinates. 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.

 

Thanks for the opportunity to recap.

haven't the majority of the responses to this thread stated that we believe this cache does exactly that? Can any reviewer explain in a way that we understand how this doesn't? We're not trying to beat a dead horse. This point is simply crucial to any cache any of us might ever place anywhere - what do reviewers think constitutes "an integral part".

 

and, the reason for the confusion is your post, where you claimed tht these things were apples and oranges, and said that the same rules do not apply to traditional caches and to mystery caches. Maybe we've all misunderstood what you meant, but that's why we're confused. maybe just re-explain that post and we'll understand?

Link to comment
All the talk of virtual stages, and front doors, and back doors, and numbers on doors, and parking coordinates, and parking lots, are meant to confuse you and make you lose your focus on what really matters.

 

what really matters?

 

I won't reiterate the dissenting points of view. (BTW, there have been several opinions on the side of not approving the cache without changes.) It's been an interesting debate. But I think we're getting overly dramatic here.

 

Regardless of how things end up, I believe the arguments have been sound enough on both sides that no one should say the final decision is "baloney." That's offensive to the people that have very logical stances, on EITHER side of the aisle.

 

Though I fall on the side of not approving as is, if it does get published I'll congratulate AZBliss02 on a good appeal. I won't call his cache, OR his opinion, baloney.

Edited by Googling Hrpty Hrrs
Link to comment

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. If time allows take several reading at different times over a few days and average the results. This will help you achieve greater accuracy on your coordinates. 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.

 

Thanks for the opportunity to recap.

Recap this then:

 

One can *always* find a cache without a GPS, as you, Walden Run, Web-ling and others have proven. The distinction is that a mere mortal like myself, who can barely find a cache *with* a GPS, needs to have the option of using a GPS somewhere along the way as an integral element of the hunt. We can't say that you HAVE to use a GPS somewhere along the way, just that you can if you want to.

 

People have already stated that they would use a GPS to get to the coordinates of this cache. They would be posted at the top of the cache page. That would fulfill the Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types.

 

I'm not quite understanding the purpose behind quoting the general guideline for puzzle caches.  That is not at issue here.  It's a Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle cache.

 

You don't fool me, you understand. It was you quoting general guidelines. See your quote:

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types (snip) 

 

I posted from the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines that you claim to have helped write. I quoted the page titled Guidelines for Cache Listings, Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines

Guidelines last updated November 2, 2005 Mystery or Puzzle Caches

 

Are you going to tell me about virtual parking lots now?

Link to comment

AZBliss02 - I'm sorry. after 6 pages of civil discussion, it appears that my post has triggered (sp?) a descent. I sincerely apologize, as that was not my intent. I do support your claim, and am willing to say that there are two points of view on this, but like one of the recent posts, I just can't see the other point of view, and no one's explained it in a way that makes sense to me (or, obviously, to several others). I hope that YOU at least reach a point where you are content with the process.

 

Maybe we are all cynical. Maybe there really is an appeals process here that is legitimate. Maybe. Maybe at the end, regardless of the decision, it will at least be explained in a manner that makes sense to the majority (I know I know - this isn't a democracy; but if we don't understand decisions, then cachers will become dissatisfied. so, it really IS in the best interests of the site to at least explain WHY to us in a way that we can understand. clearly, a number of people still are not understanding the logic being applied here).

Link to comment

The guideline does not state that the option to use a GPS is required to be intregal (although you can and most will use a GPS on this cache)- it says that the option to use GPS Coordinates must be intregal to the cache.

 

Without the coordinates I cant even narrow it down to the northern or southern hemisphere- let alone figure out which particular library in which particular town the cache is located, and that is assumiing I was able to figure out based on 3 numbers, a dot, and 3 more numbers that it IS a library. (lets be real here- how many people are going to look at 256.145 and right away jump to "Oh, It's the Dewey Decimal system!")

 

Yes, a person could possibly look up the location on a map and figure out it is a library, but you would have to have the COORDINATES to do so.

 

We have already seen the entire cache listing with everything but the coordinates and I know there is no way I could find it the way it is. If the coordinates were there I probably could. IMHO, that means that the coordinates MUST be an intregal part of the cache.

Link to comment

I think it makes sense to have a way to make the guideline a bit less subjective. I like Docapi's test - read the page without the coordinates - could you find the cache? If it said the cache is in the XYZ branch of the ABC city library you could find it without the coordinates. But the page doesn't say that. I think the coordinates are integral to finding this cache. However the volunteer approvers might find this too easy and clear cut. They have had years of experience interpreting what constituted "Wowness" for virtual caches, but they no longer can exercise their judgement skills approving virtual caches, They may want a broad guideline like this one to allow them to continue to show off their skills in interpretation of guidelines the rest of us can't understand. :drama:

Link to comment
The front door of the library means nothing more than the back door of the library.  It is analogous to the parking coordinates for a cache in a large park that has several parking lots from which a cache could be approached.

There is only ONE parking lot at this library... I wonder, what would be the difference between coords to the front door (which just might be putting the cacher closer to the actual cache) and coords to the ONLY parking lot intended for this building? If it's the only parking lot available from which to approach this cache, would that qualify? Just a curious thought, it's late here and I'm tired so it may not even make any sense. :(

 

AZBliss02

Link to comment
I'm not quite understanding the purpose behind quoting the general guideline for puzzle caches.  That is not at issue here.  It's a Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle cache.

 

You don't fool me, you understand. It was you quoting general guidelines. See your quote:

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types (snip) 

 

I posted from the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines that you claim to have helped write. I quoted the page titled Guidelines for Cache Listings, Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines

Guidelines last updated November 2, 2005 Mystery or Puzzle Caches

I've been noticing this breakdown in communication between cachew and Keystone and I think it has just be mentioned over and over in so many different ways that both sides are just very confused about what's going on.

 

Cachew, while I am very thankful for you being involved with this thread and especially being one of my greatest supporters, I actually do see what Keystone is trying to say. And while it's been said like this in a round-a-bout way, let me try to give the full reasoning here.

 

Cachew Nut is extremely accurate in quoting the cache description/guideline for a Mystery/Puzzle/Whatever cache.

At the same time, Keystone is extremely accurate in quoting the general cache placement guidelines for all cache types, even more so than Cachew Nut.

 

You see, even though my cache does in fact (and I don't think there's been any argument) meet the guideline/description for a Mystery Cache, ALL caches (regardless of race, ethnicity, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, gender, sex, sexual orientation, age or disability) :P MUST fit within the general cache guidelines first and foremost.

 

Unfortunately for all of us, that's where we're not in agreeance. :(

 

So I hope that clears everything up. And if I'm wrong on that attempt to clarify... well... too bad, haha. kidding kidding. I really gotta go to bed.

 

Night All,

AZBliss02

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 6
×
×
  • Create New...