Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Trav'lin Two

? About The Cache Approvers

Recommended Posts

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :laughing: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

Share this post


Link to post

If they did they wouldn't remain reviewers for long. I know that many reviewers will ask another one to review a puzzle cache in their area that they might be interested in hunting.

 

Sure, if they wanted to abuse their positon they could, but if they did they'd be found out pretty quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name?

The approvers in my area do not. In fact, they are so scrupulous they often wait a few months to be sure they have forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd imagine the reviewers like to have fun geocaching like everyone else, cheating with the coords would take that away. I doubt there's any temptation at all--one of the reasons they were chosen in the first place. If you're one that would be tempted by that, I doubt you'd ever see that side of the process.

 

:laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

I've been working on my next puzzle cache for two months. (last night I finally poured the concrete for stage one) I'm not sure even I remember what the coordinates are!

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :laughing: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

Since you ask so tactfully :o I am posting to admit that I cheated on this puzzle cache. I knew the solution to the puzzle, and was FTF for this cache the next day when attending an event nearby.

 

Oh, you forgot to ask about giving away the coordinates to others. I get that one a lot, too. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :laughing: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

Here's the way this really works:

 

There is a vast network of hidden cages located all over the world. Each cage has a gate which can be opened remotely at the push of a button. Inside each cage is a specially trained monkey.

 

Each day, from their luxurious office suite located high atop the Space Needle in Seattle, the reviewers monitor newly submitted cache listings while sipping expensive beverages brought in daily from around the world. When a reviewer sees a new listing which they think would look nice appearing as a 'found' on their personal geocaching accounts, they push a button on their console, and somewhere on the planet, the gate of the cage located closest to the cache slides open. The specially trained 'cache monkey' (as they are known) rushes to the new cache, takes the best swag, and signs the log using the reviewer's personal caching name. Then the cache monkey returns to the cage, where he logs the find using the reviewer's personal caching name.

 

Back at the Space Needle, the reviewers high-five each other and meet with Jeremy to discuss which one of our premium membership fees will be used to buy the first round that night.

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :laughing: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

Here's the way this really works:

 

There is a vast network of hidden cages located all over the world. Each cage has a gate which can be opened remotely at the push of a button. Inside each cage is a specially trained monkey.

 

Each day, from their luxurious office suite located high atop the Space Needle in Seattle, the reviewers monitor newly submitted cache listings while sipping expensive beverages brought in daily from around the world. When a reviewer sees a new listing which they think would look nice appearing as a 'found' on their personal geocaching accounts, they push a button on their console, and somewhere on the planet, the gate of the cage located closest to the cache slides open. The specially trained 'cache monkey' (as they are known) rushes to the new cache, takes the best swag, and signs the log using the reviewer's personal caching name. Then the cache monkey returns to the cage, where he logs the find using the reviewer's personal caching name.

 

Back at the Space Needle, the reviewers high-five each other and meet with Jeremy to discuss which one of our premium membership fees will be used to buy the first round that night.

 

Hmmm... I always suspected, but never knew for sure. I told my wife I saw a monkey leaving the scene of a cache with a pen in his hand... but would she believe me? Noooooooo... of course not!!

Share this post


Link to post

I wub my cache monkey. She's so nice! I named her "CCCooperAgency."

Share this post


Link to post

um...I'd like to posit that this question was posed for :laughing: purposes only. The OP has been around long enough to know that what he/she suggests is not the case.

 

However, along the "cache monkey" lines of thought...I KNEW it!!! They fly, too. I keep hearing this weird cackle whenever I see them.

Share this post


Link to post

um...I'd like to posit that this question was posed for :laughing: purposes only. The OP has been around long enough to know that what he/she suggests is not the case.

 

However, along the "cache monkey" lines of thought...I KNEW it!!! They fly, too. I keep hearing this weird cackle whenever I see them.

 

Flying Cache Monkeys! I think we have a theme for a new Geocoin!

 

flyingmonkey4.jpg

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post

um...I'd like to posit that this question was posed for :laughing: purposes only. The OP has been around long enough to know that what he/she suggests is not the case.

 

However, along the "cache monkey" lines of thought...I KNEW it!!! They fly, too. I keep hearing this weird cackle whenever I see them.

 

Where do you think The Beatles got their inspiration for the song:

 

"Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Monkey"

Edited by BlueDeuce

Share this post


Link to post

Excuuse me do you haf a license for dat monkey?

 

Dude! Get your pentameter right.

 

It's:

 

"Dew yew ave a la-sonze feur zat meunkey." :laughing::lol:

Edited by Snoogans

Share this post


Link to post

Psst, I think you meant to quote this post

edited to acknowledge that the incorectly quoted above post has been corrected making this post irrelevant and unecesary.

Edited by wimseyguy

Share this post


Link to post

This explains what I saw when I went out to check on a cache:

 

MountainMonk.jpg

 

This must be Mtn-Man's PuppyMonkey :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :wub: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

Here's the way this really works:

 

There is a vast network of hidden cages located all over the world. Each cage has a gate which can be opened remotely at the push of a button. Inside each cage is a specially trained monkey.

 

Each day, from their luxurious office suite located high atop the Space Needle in Seattle, the reviewers monitor newly submitted cache listings while sipping expensive beverages brought in daily from around the world. When a reviewer sees a new listing which they think would look nice appearing as a 'found' on their personal geocaching accounts, they push a button on their console, and somewhere on the planet, the gate of the cage located closest to the cache slides open. The specially trained 'cache monkey' (as they are known) rushes to the new cache, takes the best swag, and signs the log using the reviewer's personal caching name. Then the cache monkey returns to the cage, where he logs the find using the reviewer's personal caching name.

 

Back at the Space Needle, the reviewers high-five each other and meet with Jeremy to discuss which one of our premium membership fees will be used to buy the first round that night.

*SPEEEEEEEEEW*

 

Aw, man... I really wanted that Mountain Dew. :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

I'd imagine the reviewers like to have fun geocaching like everyone else, cheating with the coords would take that away. I doubt there's any temptation at all--one of the reasons they were chosen in the first place. If you're one that would be tempted by that, I doubt you'd ever see that side of the process.

:anicute:

 

I agree 100% with Robert and with Briansnat. I am sure that reviewers have far better things to do than cheat on puzzle caches. And, from our own lives, here is a practical example of how we handle such matters. Sue and I are volunteer reviewers for Maryland DNR; we review all geocaches (from any listing service) and letterboxes placed in two local backcountry state parks for DNR to ensure that they comply with DNR guidelines and to allow entry of each cache and letterbox into a DNR database listing all caches in the parks. Sue happens to be a puzzle cache addict, while I hate puzzles. So far, at least two of the caches which we have been given for review for Maryland DNR approval have been puzzle caches. And, of course, the geocache application which the applicant sends to DNR includes the true (real) coordinates for each stage, including the final, because it is our job to go out in the woods and find each stage and ensure that it complies with DNR requirements. And thus, when such applications come in, we imediately go out and check all stages and give our recommendation to DNR administrators within 24 hours of submission of the cache approval form. Then, for the puzzle caches, Sue goes ahead and solves the puzzle on her own, because she is a puzzle nut and cannot resist any puzzle. And, at some point, well after the FTF finder has signed the logbook and filed their find online, and after Sue has solved the puzzle, we then file find log for the cache, noting that it was a reviewer find and does not count as an FTF (nor 2TF, 3TF etc.) but that Sue did solve the puzzle and we did find the cache container(s). This keeps everyone happy, and we still get to log a find for having solved the puzzle and having gone out into the woods to find any and all stages of the cache.

 

We also own some puzzle caches. We never worry about whether a reviewer might use their privileges to "peek" at final stage waypoint coordinates, and the possibilityt never even occurred to us until this thread appeared! And, if an occasional reviewer has a slightly easier time in solving a very difficult puzzle because they already have a good idea of what the correct answer should be, then that is the way that the chips fell, and God bless them! Even if that were to happen (and lets be realistic: it would likely happen only once in a million times), it would not bother us in the least.

Share this post


Link to post

Given some reviewers not ethical and others are. You give them the benifit of the doubt until their true nature comes out. Groundspeak can try to gage this when they take on a volunteer but nobody is perfect at it.

 

Some will cheat and some won't.

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :anicute: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

A little word called integrity I have a funny story about this same question but no need going off topic.

Share this post


Link to post

Given some reviewers not ethical and others are. You give them the benifit of the doubt until their true nature comes out. Groundspeak can try to gage this when they take on a volunteer but nobody is perfect at it.

 

Some will cheat and some won't.

 

If you have proof that some reviewers are not ethical, please submit your evidence to contact at geocaching or a reviewer that you do trust.

 

There are strict rules of behavior that reviewers must follow and if they are not doing so then appropriate action will be taken. Otherwise, courtesy would dictate that you do not make these accusations publicly.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

Is there anything left to see here? :anicute:

I could always post some song lyrics if you need an excuse to close it down. :wub::huh:

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :anicute: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

No.

 

And really, if this is the sort of thing you think of as "temptation" maybe it's time to put the GPS down for a while. :wub:

 

RJ

Share this post


Link to post

Who says that we even gave the correct coords to the approvers.

 

Since your reviewer is disabled and NEVER does a puzzle cache why bother to lie?

Share this post


Link to post

Who says that we even gave the correct coords to the approvers.

 

In case you aren't kidding....

 

It's a good idea to give the correct coords to the reviewers. Nice to have more than one opinion on safety and legal issues concerning a placement. From what I know, reviewers get perks and rewards from Groundspeak, so there's no incentive for them to "cheat" and go for FTFs, prizes, and pad their stats at the expense of cachers. And some puzzles are actually FUN to solve...

 

I haven't even talked about integrity yet. :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

Folks need to realize that once a cacher becomes a Reviewer, thier entire perspective towards the game changes. Since knowledge of the end point to a multi or puzzle is not a mystery, and the race is no longer challenging, FTF's are no longer a race. Sure, we get a few (traditional only) but that is because the folks that do race for them are not racing for these. I usually hang around the house for a couple hours or until the next day before I liesurely go to find them. Personaly, I get more satisfaction from watching a newbie get thier first FTF or to listen to the mutual harassment of seasoned cachers race to the FTF than I do by getting FTF on my list. I quit tracking my personal FTF's a long time ago.

 

/steps off soap box.

Share this post


Link to post

As a cache approver, they have access to all the coords to all multis and puzzle caches that they approve and publish. Soooo, the question is, do they take advantage of this knowledge under their real caching name? :anicute: Seems like a lot of temptation to me. Inquiring minds want to know.

No.

 

And really, if this is the sort of thing you think of as "temptation" maybe it's time to put the GPS down for a while. :wub:

 

RJ

 

RJ, very well put! Thank you for saying that!

Share this post


Link to post

Folks need to realize that once a cacher becomes a Reviewer, thier entire perspective towards the game changes.

 

Yep, it's like seeing hotdogs being made.

 

:anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

Folks need to realize that once a cacher becomes a Reviewer, thier entire perspective towards the game changes.

 

Yep, it's like seeing hotdogs being made.

 

:wub:

 

*snort*

 

I SO know what you mean.... :anicute:icon8.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, come on guys, don't get your fuzz up. As I was sitting here watching it snow, the thought just occurred to me and I was curious. I do believe the space needle bit tho.

Share this post


Link to post

Why would someone "cheat" on any cache? Perhaps they would do so for selfish reasons, perhaps they are into geocaching "for the numbers."

 

Now, consider the amount of effort a reviewer has to put into this activity. I would imagine that much of the spare time they have available is spent wrapped up with their reviewer duties, as opposed to going out and geocaching as much as they would like. Do you suppose they were selected as reveiwers because they are the types that are into this activity for selfish reasons or "for the numbers?" I would guess that they were selected since they understand and uphold the rules, and most likely demonstrated that they recognize there are certain intrinsic values in geocaching that they appreciate and enjoy. Some people are idealistic, or appreciate the smaller things in life, others see nothing but a race, or a competition; that is just a fact of life, and one type is not necessarily better than the other. I would wager reviewers tend to fall into the former category.

 

As such, I am willing to bet that "cheating" on a puzzle cache would never enter most reviewers' minds, since the type of person who is willing to donate their time as a volunteer are a bit more altruistic than you seem to give credence to their personalities.

 

There are some people involved in geocaching, reviewers and plain 'ole cachers alike, who see more than "numbers" in the activity. Either you see deeper intrinsic value and joys in it, or you cannot see past the numbers, FTF, or any other statistic that some seem to perceive boosts esteem.

 

My vote would be that reviewers do not "cheat" on puzzle caches. If there is a particular situation to which you refer, I would guess that the particular reviewer actually passed the listing to another reviewer for publishing.

Edited by Jeep_Dog

Share this post


Link to post

I think all the reviewers need to fess up and tell us the names of their monkeys.

Share this post


Link to post

Given some reviewers not ethical and others are. You give them the benifit of the doubt until their true nature comes out. Groundspeak can try to gage this when they take on a volunteer but nobody is perfect at it.

 

Some will cheat and some won't.

 

If you have proof that some reviewers are not ethical, please submit your evidence to contact at geocaching or a reviewer that you do trust.

 

There are strict rules of behavior that reviewers must follow and if they are not doing so then appropriate action will be taken. Otherwise, courtesy would dictate that you do not make these accusations publicly.

 

Thanks

 

You pose an interesting question. First given the controversy generated by many approvers and TPTB in their of work say in BC, or Utah regardless of which side is in the right my general statement is warranted. Second reviewers do not toe as strict of a line as you infer. The ethics they employ in their dealings both as reviewers and as individuals varies from people I would trust with my life to people that I don’t trust at all based on their actions. Third, I don’t sweep things under the carpet. If I did have specific knowledge of a wrong doing I am more than willing to call it out where it's appropriate. Since I do hear things from people I am not always at liberty to share their experience. However I do note it as an issue and keep it in mind. Strangely enough the mods in the forum don’t like when a general statment or even a specific (and true) accucation is made and hush it up quickly thus rewarding unethical behavior. Since I didn’t make anything more than a general and true statement your post is a prime example of how calling things out is flagged as undesirable and hushed.

 

I stand by my statement because sometimes courtesy and ethics clash and yes I can prove that as well. However thank you for the note that reviewers who do cheat should be reported.

Share this post


Link to post

I think all the reviewers need to fess up and tell us the names of their monkeys.

 

then they'd have to shoot you. :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

The monkeys? I'm not scared... I haven't met a monkey yet that has good aim!!

Share this post


Link to post
Strangely enough the mods in the forum don’t like when a general statment or even a specific (and true) accucation is made and hush it up quickly thus rewarding unethical behavior.

 

Strangely enough, the forum guidelines at the top of every forum page state, "Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated." An open forum is simply not the place to bring up issues like this. Personally, I do my best to make sure that when "I hear things from people" I take them to the proper channels. This open forum is not the place for third hand accusations, or even first hand for that matter.

 

Isn't that as much an issue of integrity as how a reviewer handles the information they are given?

 

Bret

Share this post


Link to post

I wub my cache monkey. She's so nice! I named her "CCCooperAgency."

 

We saw her today. Sue walked with Lynn and Mocadeki today in the early AM while they (Lynn and Carl) hunted a few of our backcountry caches, and then both Lynn and Carl came by our house to get fitted up with borrowed Tyvek protective bunny suits, powered respirators and portable radiation monitors for their stage three excursion at Psycho Urban Cache #9 (the one that ends at an abandoned nuclear reactor), all done while we traded cache gossip. We enjoyed much spending time with them, and even got some fotos of them in their protective suits!

Share this post


Link to post

I think all the reviewers need to fess up and tell us the names of their monkeys.

 

Michael Nesmith

michaeln.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I think all the reviewers need to fess up and tell us the names of their monkeys.

 

I have 2 monkeys, one named Jack, the other named George :anicute:

Share this post


Link to post

I wub my cache monkey. She's so nice! I named her "CCCooperAgency."

 

We saw her today. Sue walked with Lynn and Mocadeki today in the early AM while they (Lynn and Carl) hunted a few of our backcountry caches, and then both Lynn and Carl came by our house to get fitted up with borrowed Tyvek protective bunny suits, powered respirators and portable radiation monitors for their stage three excursion at Psycho Urban Cache #9 (the one that ends at an abandoned nuclear reactor), all done while we traded cache gossip. We enjoyed much spending time with them, and even got some fotos of them in their protective suits!

This is terrific news. I am glad to be able to log my "ghost find" without exposing myself to radiation hazards. I'm sure my monkey spelled my name right in the logbook. I sent her a new rubber stamp for Christmas.

 

Anyways, thanks for the cache. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it, had I been there.

Share this post


Link to post
Isn't that as much an issue of integrity as how a reviewer handles the information they are given?

 

Oh, I don't know, I'd say that would be having an opinion. Are we not allowed to have an opinion or are we just not allowed to express it?

 

I have to echo RK's assertion and I doubt anyone can dispute this. Unless, that is, no reviewer has ever been removed for unethical conduct.

Share this post


Link to post

The question posted by the OP was do they take advantage, not could they.

 

Saying they do shouldn't be an opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, I don't know, I'd say that would be having an opinion. Are we not allowed to have an opinion or are we just not allowed to express it?

 

I suppose everyone's entitled to an opinion..this is the Internet after all, but what does your opinion about someone's integrity do in an open forum? Does it solve the problem or does it bring your grievances to a resolution or does it just expose them to more speculation? If you want resolution then take them to the proper channels, if you're just looking to share second-hand information about someone's integrity then...well...in MY opinion, I already know all I need to know about your integrity.

 

There are proper channels for airing grievances--email addresses that have been given out over and over again. Those channels can actually do something about the problem and they have done something about them from time to time.

 

I have several puzzle/mystery/multi-caches and I have shared all the coordinates and puzzle answers with my reviewers. In my opinion (which is probably worth as much as anyone else's) I'm not worried about their integrity.

 

Bret

Share this post


Link to post
Strangely enough the mods in the forum don’t like when a general statment or even a specific (and true) accucation is made and hush it up quickly thus rewarding unethical behavior.

 

Strangely enough, the forum guidelines at the top of every forum page state, "Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated." An open forum is simply not the place to bring up issues like this. Personally, I do my best to make sure that when "I hear things from people" I take them to the proper channels. This open forum is not the place for third hand accusations, or even first hand for that matter.

 

Isn't that as much an issue of integrity as how a reviewer handles the information they are given?

 

Bret

 

This forum is exactly the place for an open discussion of all caching related issues. Including things like Do reviewers cheat, can they cheat, what happens if they cheat, how do you report them if they cheat and so on. The topic comes up about cachers and it's a fair topic in that case. I see no reason it's not a fair topic when it comes to reveiwers.

 

Oh and I gave two specific exampels that involved ethics to back up my general assertion that reviewers are a mixed bag, just like the pool of geocachers that they are drawn from. I did not state that they were right or wrong just that the issue of ethics came up.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×