Jump to content

Can Reviewers Look At Caches That Haven't Even Been Submitted?


Cache Liberation Front

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I frequently set up my cache pages way, way in advance of actually publishing them. When I create them I simply leave the box unchecked which states: "Yes, this cache is currently active. New listings: If you want to work on this listing before it is reviewed, uncheck this box. Reviewers will only see the listing when it is checked." That seems pretty self-explanatory to me, reviewers won't see the cache til I activate it.

 

Yet I just noticed today that Hemlock has looked at two of my caches today that have never been submitted and the active box has always been left unchecked.

 

Am I being stalked? I frequently use this "inactive" function to play with cache page ideas, to see how my puzzles will actually look, etc., and the caches are by NO means ready for any scrutiny, public or private. Now I'm a bit concerned about continuing this practice.

 

Thoughts?

 

Mr. Wisearse.

Link to comment

Could be he was just checking on cache listings that havn't been activated yet to make sure they were not forgotten about for cleanup purposes. I do the same thing however I do it a few weeks in advance. I don't think you're being stalked though.:anibad:

Link to comment

Sure. A reviewer can see any cache listing, published or not. The unchecked box just means it won't show up in the review queue.

 

Gotcha, thanks for the speedy reply.

 

If that's the case, however, perhaps you can edit the text a bit to unsubmitted caches. My cache page states, in red and even italicized up top, "The reviewers will not see this listing until you activate it." And as we've seen, that's not the case, my audit log shows they have seen it, :anibad:

 

Best,

Mr. Wisearse.

Link to comment

Jeremy's to-do list:

 

1. Contact Porsche dealer about trading up.

2. Achieve world domination through subversive religion masquerading as science.

.

.

.

.

99. Revise the "History of Geocaching" page.

100. Modify the new cache form's explanatory note about reviewers not being able to see the cache page if the box is not checked.

Link to comment

Jeremy's to-do list:

 

1. Contact Porsche dealer about trading up.

2. Achieve world domination through subversive religion masquerading as science.

.

.

.

.

99. Revise the "History of Geocaching" page.

100. Modify the new cache form's explanatory note about reviewers not being able to see the cache page if the box is not checked.

 

I thought Jeremy only had a three-phase business plan, consisting of:

 

1. Collect underpants

2. ???

3. Profit!

 

southc.jpg

Link to comment

If I don't hide it within a period of time, will it get "cleaned up"?

 

I hope not! I've got several in the "in the works" stage, and hate to see them disappear. I've had some in the works for as long as two months.

 

Personally I don't mind having the reviews see them early. That way if he/she spots something that won't work or be approved, I learn of it as soon as possible and can correct it.

Link to comment

If I don't hide it within a period of time, will it get "cleaned up"?

 

I hope not! I've got several in the "in the works" stage, and hate to see them disappear. I've had some in the works for as long as two months.

 

Personally I don't mind having the reviews see them early. That way if he/she spots something that won't work or be approved, I learn of it as soon as possible and can correct it.

I had one in the works for much longer than a couple months (GCMX6A) - it just got approved and it didn't come out on the weekly notification. A new cache just created became GCTNJJ, so you can tell that cache waypoint is real old.

 

What are the criteria for being included in the weekly notification?

Link to comment

What are the criteria for being included in the weekly notification?

I believe it's based on the "cache placed" date for published caches.

Yes. I've forgotten to update the date, and it doesn't show up. And even if you change the date, it still doesn't show up. You have to have the reviewer "do his magic" to get it to show int he new cache list.

Link to comment

I've had one since June of 2004 that still hasn't been submitted into the queue.

 

It was all finished and ready to hide, but when I went to place the actual container I saw a large homeless camp about 100 yards further in the woods (this was going to be a night cache in the woods behind a Dave and Busters). I didn't want people searching that close to a homeless camp at night I decided to re-do it for another location.

 

Unfortunately, it was complicated to set up the first time, so until I get some free time it will sit unpublished.

 

It actually did get published once on accident. I saw the email that it had been published, freaked out because nothing was actually in place, sent my approver a note, and he put it back to the unpublished condition for me.

Link to comment

What are the criteria for being included in the weekly notification?

I believe it's based on the "cache placed" date for published caches.

What's the range of dates for an email received 7 hours ago?

 

For example, here's my notification:

 

From: Geocaching Notify Bot <notify.EPPY@geocaching.com> Mailed-By: geocaching.com

 

To: caderoux@gmail.com

Date: Mar 2, 2006 2:17 AM

Subject: Geocaching.com Weekly Cache Notification

 

Greetings from Geocaching.com,

 

Recent caches in your area...

 

2/24/2006 (Louisiana)

AUDUBON'S VINEYARD by mausdad

(Traditional Cache) (GCTK61) (2.45 mi/3.94 km SW)

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=352101

 

2/26/2006 (Louisiana)

CAT TAle'S by mausdad

(Traditional Cache) (GCTMD3) (5.07 mi/8.16 km N)

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=353281

 

My cache was set as "placed" 2/27 prior to ever enabling and approving, and approved just prior to GCTMD3. I assume it should show up next week only if the cutoff for March 2 emails was 2/26.

Link to comment

Am I being stalked? I frequently use this "inactive" function to play with cache page ideas, to see how my puzzles will actually look, etc., and the caches are by NO means ready for any scrutiny, public or private. Now I'm a bit concerned about continuing this practice.

 

Thoughts?

The reviewer probably knows you know the difference between enabled/disabled and won't enable and approve the listing so I wouldn't worry about it. Unless you're not keeping your mad bomber manifesto there I don't see a issue <_<.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...