Jump to content

Problems Getting A Cache Reviewed


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Ok I recently spent a good 30 hours, and basicly a 4 day weekend setting up 5 caches... One of which is a mamoth 17 stage mutli.

 

Now the problem is I can't get any of them reviewed and heres why.

 

Firstly on the 17 stage multi, which is goes from a point A to B and does not backtrack on itself, I listed the stage 10 as a stand alone cache.

The reviewer Is saying I cannot do this, and NOWHERE on the guideline page is it listed that this cannot be done. I can understand how creating a single inside of a multi could get out of hand. But this is a 17 stage multi, and basicly this one is about half way through.... Now hold on here, let me get a few more things out before you all form your opinions....http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

A- The guideline page is firstly just that, a GUIDELINE page and not a RULES page, and the Page itself is quite clear on that... I quote from it " there is no precedent for placing caches ", and it is quite clear about this.

 

B- and also another line "This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline" - I read this page MANY times before placing these caches, taking the time to etch containers, magnets, and paint, and the page is clear that these are guidelines! Not appoving my entire set of caches because ONE cache is 20meters too close to my final ( and I OWN that cache, Im not smothering another cachers space) . - Let me explain this. Firstly my final is a larger container for the city, and I wonder how long before a muggler discovers just by chance, even though it is well camo'd. So I placed another cache 120 meters away called " You worked so hard" which is Super camo'd and theres no way both will be missing. I have offered to move this one even, but HE WONT APPROVE MY CACHES.

 

C- The arbitrary distance is just a guideline and is only a guideline and NOT a rule, and is to prevent cache saturation. Well A) the other cahce in the area is MINE, and :) I was quite clear that one of the reasons I placed stage 10 as a single and another single near the final was to prevent cache saturation, not create it.

Also my Micro 22 is a container that can only have this home... It is down an entire different strech of park, and is at the limit of it even, I cant go any farther that way, Id be on private property.

 

As the multi is so long, using google earth or even the recent google maps that the site had, it would appear to another cacher that in the those areas there are NO cahces when indeed there are, and putting singles here not only prevented cache saturation, but fustration from another user going through all the trouble to create a cache and then have a reviewer tell you its near a final of a cache you have never even done.

 

D-The one single in the multi was also to HELP the community not hurt it. It was there so someone could call it a day and feel they accomplished something, or for someone who doesnt like multi's to be able to still enjoy the area, and on top of that as I pointed out in point C to prevent cache saturation. Also if any of the multi-stages are missing at least you could find something in the area. With a multi of this size I expected stages to get muggled here and there, especailly in a city park. I created all of this for the community and I feel so cheated by this reviewer.

 

 

I really need the communitys help on this one. I really feel cheated, I spent alot of time and money even putting this all together. I dont understand how a single reviewer can inflict his version of what are clearly guidelines and not rules. I think I understood the guidelines very well and I think the problem is I understood them as just that, guidelines.

 

I need everyone elses opinion on this and there help. I really don't even want to geocache anymore after dealing with this VOLUNTEER reviewer on a site I PAYED to use. And he even had the never to tell me he doesnt care how long I spent on building it and linked me back to the GUIDELINE page 100 times, even after I had quoted the page to him....

 

Please help.. Zahadoom.. Disgruntled Geocachers...

 

Here are the listings.. Im not sure if you can see them.

 

GCWAMF - The Etobicoke Nile

GCWAP6 - The Little Nile

GCWAN6 - I call him Micro 22

GCWAP0 - You've worked so hard

and this one..... GCWANQ - Etobicoke Secret Green - which btw he didnt have a problem with but also didnt publish it.

 

Im also including an the email I sent to him the first time after he rejected my caches.

 

 

 

--This message was sent through http://www.geocaching.com --

 

-- Copy of email sent to Cache-tech --

Yes Hi, Im writing you in regards to some caches that I have placed, and I am

concerned about the reviewed comments and concerns. Alot of time and effort went

into this set.

 

Firstly I have reviewed all your comments and concerns, and I have gone over

the Guidelines page Many times before placing this set.

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

Here are my concerns. Firstly the page clearly states that these are ONLY

guidelines.

 

GCWAMF - The Etobicoke Nile

- With this one you have no concerns but were not happy with stage 10

which I set up to be able to be logged on its own, the set will currently not

work without this stage. And steps were taken to ensure that someone could not

start the multi from this point, but they could just do only it if they dont

like multi's.

 

GCWAP6 - The Little Nile

- This was the stage 10 that I set up to be logged on its own.

Firstly I have read the guidelines and NOWHERE does it say that you cannot do

this, after spending so much time on these and etching the containers and

setting up the clues this is a heartbreaker. My intentions were that people

could call it a day and stop here and if any of the stages were missing that

they could do something at the site instead of coming all the way out here and

getting stuck... Also I have logged other singles that are part of a larger

multi's before, I would be happy to never do this again, but I would please ask

that you let this one through.

 

GCWAN6 - I call him Micro 22

- I realize that this one is just under the guidline requested space

between caches, but the guideline page talks about Cache Saturation, there are

no other caches in this area and the other one that is, is mine. Im not crowding

any other caches and this container is already painted and placed and fits

perfectly into his little home. I would ask that you please allow this one.

 

GCWAP0 - You've worked so hard

- I realize this one is also slightly close to the final stage of my

multi. 2 reasons I placed this here. Firstly I would hate for someone to do the

entire multi and the final to be missing, since this hide is extremely camoed,

this one is ensure there is Always something at the end to find.

Also I placed this here to Ensure that there isnt cache saturation in this

area. Another user who hasnt completed The etobicoke nile might think this area

contains no Caches - especially if using Google Earth. This ensures no one else

places in this area... If you are still not satisfyed with this, This one is

moveable. But I would rather not, it is a great hide.

 

I went through alot of trouble to these all up and I also ensured that I

followed the guidelines, I know I went alittle under on a few distances but the

site itself said that this is ONLY a guideline and that there are and I quote

"there is no precedent for placing caches".

Especially the fact that I have a single in a 17 stage multi, I can find

NO-Where on the site that said that was a NO-No, and I think that is definatly

something that should be pointed out for other users and future reference.

I can understand how someone could get out of hand putting all sorts of singles

in a multi with something like that or even putting a single in a small multi,

but this is a 17 stage one and I think I have made clear why It was placed like

this.

I really hope that you publish the set also because I spent a good 30 hours

setting this all up this weekend and have no time to change the sites themself

until Saturday.

Thanks again, and I please hope you publish them, have been enjoying the site.

Edited by zahadoom
Link to comment

It is possible that because of all the time and energy you have spent on this, that you don't have an accurate perspective on how the reviewers do their job. Otherwise we'd all be out there placing 17-stage multi's. Better luck next time.

Link to comment

I'm going to try to help here a bit...you seem to have a few problems with your cache(s) but I think I can help with one.

 

Can you make the first 10 stages into one multi, and the last 7 into another puzzle cache? That would let someone stop at 10 and still log it. Plus, that final stage would have the coords for the first stage of the second multi-puzzle cache.

 

As far as cache stages too close...you'll have to change them to fit the guidelines to make it work.

 

Hope this helps...

Link to comment

I'm going to try to help here a bit...you seem to have a few problems with your cache(s) but I think I can help with one.

 

Can you make the first 10 stages into one multi, and the last 7 into another puzzle cache? That would let someone stop at 10 and still log it. Plus, that final stage would have the coords for the first stage of the second multi-puzzle cache.

 

As far as cache stages too close...you'll have to change them to fit the guidelines to make it work.

 

Hope this helps...

 

Hi, wow thanks for the quick responces so far...

 

Yeah I thought if I have to, I could split the Major multi into 2 separte ones, but really why should I have to, its still going to be the same cache.

 

I should add some of his side of the story but its just more of the same. He did send me this today..

 

Log Date: 5/31/2006

Hi,

 

This cache can be listed, but the other 3 to close or as a stage of this cache

cannot be listed. I review caches to the listing guidelines and not the amount

of work, if you have any questions on the guidlelines, you can email me or ask

in the forums. I try to make as many accomidations as I can and I do use the

guidelines as that, guidelines, but I do not see any reason to bend the

guidelines here. Let me know if you want this cache listed.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Volunteer

 

Also to the other guy, I don't think I RIPPED the reviewer one in my EMAIL at all? And Id really like to know where I did. Also Appeal? Yeah you send him an email back, and I even included it in the post to all of you.

 

I understand why the guidelines are there, but they are clearly posted AS guidelines and not rules, and even so I think I stayed within the quidelines still, even though I might have cut it short 20-40meters on 2 of them, and NOWHERE is there a guideline about a single in a multi....

Link to comment

One question- Did you appeal your caches to the appeals e-mail like the guidelines suggested before you came in here to rip your local reviewer apart?

 

Oh my god, how did I miss that email appeals@geocaching.com. !! Thanks I guess I have to go email them now too... But really what do the rest of you think?

Link to comment

Why don't you just change the cache so that it conforms to the guidelines? You post a cache that you admit does not conform and get your panties in a bunch when the reviewer shoots it down.

 

Am I the only one who has the problem with the word GUIDELINE over RULES? I understood them AS GUIDELINES, do you understand how that can be interpreted??

Link to comment

Why don't you just change the cache so that it conforms to the guidelines? You post a cache that you admit does not conform and get your panties in a bunch when the reviewer shoots it down.

 

Am I the only one who has the problem with the word GUIDELINE over RULES? I understood them AS GUIDELINES, do you understand how that can be interpreted??

 

If you knew your cache would not fit within the GUIDELINES when you submitted it, maybe you should have asked first instead of assuming your interpretation of the GUIDELINES was acceptable? Would have saved you a lot of trouble...

Edited by Stunod
Link to comment

I can understand that you are frustrated, but try to work with the reviewer to compromise as much as possible. They usually have fairly good reasons for objecting to things, and if not, hopefully a few friendly emails back and forth will sort things out.

 

If not, try not to get too upset as it happens sometimes, and just remember that for the next time before you go to too much trouble with etchings etc, you can ask your local reviewer for input as you are starting to formulate your cache and before things get "set in stone" for you, so to speak.

Good luck!

Link to comment

 

Also to the other guy, I don't think I RIPPED the reviewer one in my EMAIL at all? And Id really like to know where I did.

Right in the title.

Problems Getting A Cache Reviewed

Reviewers with too much power! And misunderstanding of GUIDELINES

Why don't you just change the cache so that it conforms to the guidelines? You post a cache that you admit does not conform and get your panties in a bunch when the reviewer shoots it down.

 

Am I the only one who has the problem with the word GUIDELINE over RULES? I understood them AS GUIDELINES, do you understand how that can be interpreted??

So, why should they be bent for you, and not the next guy? or the guy after? Heck, since they are not rules, why not let everyone bend them as they see fit.

Since there are really no rules to follow, do away with the reviewers and let us bend review our own caches.

 

Back to munchin' my popcorn.

Link to comment

Dude, 17 stages is too many for a multi. Take a deep breath and scale it back a bit.

 

Well it was done like this on purpose. I have seen alot of multi in the city, where people will drive from stage to stage, This was meant to be a walk through a city trail. The stages are 80% magnetic strips that are camoed acording to where they are stuck and are mostly right on the trail and should be quick finds.

 

Id have to say after setting it up, I dont think Id ever do one that long again, but I after I started, and finished it, I was commited to maintaining it.

But the reviewer doesnt have a really have a problem with the 17 stager or the fact its 17 stages, its the other singles that were placed nearby.

 

I dont have a problem, if they want to say you CANT do these things, then well POST it. But this one is already placed, it's not encroaching on anyone elses cache by my own if anything.

And I can't stress enough how all everything was done to HELP the community, not hurt it.

 

Ok you guys tell me what is the difference between a multi with a single IN it, and 2 multis. And B, I think the Saturation statements are quite clear on why they exsit, and I dont think its possible in that area to accidently log the WRONG cache or B encroached on other caches. That is all that guideline is for, and one is 20m too close to the final ( and its at the LIMIT of the park, and is DOWN an entire different FENCED OFF trail.

 

The other one is 40m too close to the final but is in the OPPOSITE direction of the other one, there is empassble creek between these.... that is only passable by a bridged area... You could never mix the 2 up...

Edited by zahadoom
Link to comment

 

Id have to say after setting it up, I dont think Id ever do one that long again, but I after I started, and finished it, I was commited to maintaining it.

 

 

That is my point.

 

You also seem to believe that because it's a guideline, then they HAVE to let you do whatever you want. You seem to be obsessing on that. It's still THEIR guideline. They get to decide.

Link to comment

One question- Did you appeal your caches to the appeals e-mail like the guidelines suggested before you came in here to rip your local reviewer apart?

 

Oh my god, how did I miss that email appeals@geocaching.com. !! Thanks I guess I have to go email them now too... But really what do the rest of you think?

 

Well, since you asked what I think....

 

1) It doesn't matter how much time, effort or money goes into the hide, the guidelines still apply.

2) A 17-stage multi in general is really too much. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are rare. One of the best caches I've ever done was a puzzle cache with that many or more parts to it.

3) I hope you are setting the seekers' expectations by letting them know how involved this cache is.

4) Don't be disappointed when your 17-stage multi doesn't get a lot of visits. In general, mutlis get fewer visits than traditional caches. When word gets around that your cache has 17 stages, it may even be less popular.

Link to comment

Why don't you just change the cache so that it conforms to the guidelines? You post a cache that you admit does not conform and get your panties in a bunch when the reviewer shoots it down.

 

Am I the only one who has the problem with the word GUIDELINE over RULES? I understood them AS GUIDELINES, do you understand how that can be interpreted??

 

Yes they are guidelines and there is a level of flexibility, but there has to be a compelling reason for the guidelines to be waived. Because a cache hider just didn't feel like conforming isn't a good enough reason

Link to comment

It really doesn't matter if they are firm rules or guidelines, because the reviewer is the one who must interprete them, not you, and his word is law. I would try moving the singles to comply with the guidelines, and even removing one if I had to, since that seems to be the stopper.

Between your GPS error and the finders GPS error they could concievably find, say, stage 16 of the multi while looking for a single and it would let them bypass the first 15 stages, not fair. :)

 

BTW, B5 rocked. :)

Link to comment

 

Well, since you asked what I think....

 

1) It doesn't matter how much time, effort or money goes into the hide, the guidelines still apply.

2) A 17-stage multi in general is really too much. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are rare. One of the best caches I've ever done was a puzzle cache with that many or more parts to it.

3) I hope you are setting the seekers' expectations by letting them know how involved this cache is.

4) Don't be disappointed when your 17-stage multi doesn't get a lot of visits. In general, mutlis get fewer visits than traditional caches. When word gets around that your cache has 17 stages, it may even be less popular.

 

3- Yes, Ive indicated right on the Cache page that its 17 stages, significant hike, over 9km if you do the entire thing, and is listed at a difficulty 5.

 

4- Other other reason theres a single in the Middle of it, near one of alternate parking spots, and why there is a single near the end. I have read alot of peoples review, and I know that there are people out there who dont like mulits, and so they can enjoy the area and just do the single.

Link to comment

It really doesn't matter if they are firm rules or guidelines, because the reviewer is the one who must interprete them, not you, and his word is law. I would try moving the singles to comply with the guidelines, and even removing one if I had to, since that seems to be the stopper.

Between your GPS error and the finders GPS error they could concievably find, say, stage 16 of the multi while looking for a single and it would let them bypass the first 15 stages, not fair. :)

 

BTW, B5 rocked. :)

 

OK you know what, Im going to write back to the reviewer one more time about each of the caches before I even email the appels guys, because in all honesty it WOULD be impossible with error even, to log the wrong cache on ANY stage of this multi or ANY of the singles, 100% impossible, unless your GPS was off my over 100m and you were reading the WRONG cache page and clues.

 

Maybe I just havent justifyed it like you guys are saying. He's never been to the area...

Link to comment

 

BTW, B5 rocked. :)

 

Oh I forgot, Yeah it did, and with my Name its always easy to find the real fans as they are the only ones who know what it means.... And about the shadows.... :)

 

Oh one more thing EVERYONE...

 

From hes responce, hes not willing to budge Haveing a Single in a Mulit.. I can understand how this could get out of hand, but like the page said "there is no precedent for placing caches" I think if they want to set one they should do it after mine. :D

Link to comment

and is listed at a difficulty 5.

Difficulty 5?

What specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment is needed to locate the cache once you get to the waypoint?

 

Well from your post it sound to me like your quoting me Difficulty setting requirements/guidelines or maybe rules who knows, but one thing I do know Is I dont see them posted up there.. I would love to know them..... Now im going to search in the forums to see, but really if the community has come up with such standards they should post them....

 

In my posting, I listed it difficulty 5 and even posted my reasoning for this as, due to the amount of stages, and lenght of hike that would be required I set it at a level 5. And that was clearly posted on the page.

 

I would have definaltly adjusted it, according to the logs.

Link to comment

and is listed at a difficulty 5.

Difficulty 5?

What specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment is needed to locate the cache once you get to the waypoint?

 

Well from your post it sound to me like your quoting me Difficulty setting requirements/guidelines or maybe rules who knows, but one thing I do know Is I dont see them posted up there.. I would love to know them..... Now im going to search in the forums to see, but really if the community has come up with such standards they should post them....

 

In my posting, I listed it difficulty 5 and even posted my reasoning for this as, due to the amount of stages, and lenght of hike that would be required I set it at a level 5. And that was clearly posted on the page.

 

I would have definaltly adjusted it, according to the logs.

There was a link to the rating system on the cache submission form right where you entered the ratings.

Link to comment

There was a link to the rating system on the cache submission form right where you entered the ratings.

Also when you go to the rating system page, you can just click "Rate Cache" without filling it out and it will give an English description of what each rating means. It will also give a bogus rating (because you didn't fill out the form), but it is a quick way to see what each rating means.
Link to comment

and is listed at a difficulty 5.

Difficulty 5?

What specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment is needed to locate the cache once you get to the waypoint?

 

Well from your post it sound to me like your quoting me Difficulty setting requirements/guidelines or maybe rules who knows, but one thing I do know Is I dont see them posted up there.. I would love to know them..... Now im going to search in the forums to see, but really if the community has come up with such standards they should post them....

 

In my posting, I listed it difficulty 5 and even posted my reasoning for this as, due to the amount of stages, and lenght of hike that would be required I set it at a level 5. And that was clearly posted on the page.

 

I would have definaltly adjusted it, according to the logs.

 

When you type in the information for your cache and it asks for difficulty and terrain ratings, there is a link to find out what your cache rates. A 5 rating means specail equipment or other hard core expertise is needed, not just a long hike.

Link to comment

I'm not sure if my question was answered. How many miles?

 

3- Yes, Ive indicated right on the Cache page that its 17 stages, significant hike, over 9km if you do the entire thing, and is listed at a difficulty 5.

 

9km = about 5.5 miles

Link to comment

I'm not sure if my question was answered. How many miles?

 

3- Yes, Ive indicated right on the Cache page that its 17 stages, significant hike, over 9km if you do the entire thing, and is listed at a difficulty 5.

 

9km = about 5.5 miles

Ooh, thanks. My brain isn't sifting through the posts well enough. :)

Link to comment

I think my biggest problem with this 17-step multi is that you are basically blocking 5.5 miles of trail with a cache that almost no one is going to go for. If it is a good place to go, it would be nice if you left some room for a cache or two that would bring more people to the area.

Link to comment

The first cache I did, a few years ago, was a four stage multi through an abandoned Rockefeller estate, including stages at a boat house, stables, rail station, and the mansion itself. What I didn't take into account was that it was now part of Ft Bragg, even though the area was open to the public. It was never approved. I asked TPTB on Bragg for permission, but they never returned my e-mails. It's too bad, because it would have been a great cache, but rules are rules. If I'd have checked the rules and/or asked if they'd make an exception before I did the work, it'd have saved me a lot of time. So I guess what I'm saying is I feel your pain, but the reviewer was just doing his job properly.

Link to comment

Can you converrt your current Cache #10 into just a multi waypoint and then 512 feet away put a traditional cache, call it 10A if will?

 

Now, to get side tracked a bit. Many people have already told you that this won't be found too much. I just faced a similar problem.

 

I just set out a big multi cache. It is approximately 1.5 miles of bushwhacking with 2 mild climbs.

 

I knew right out that it wasn't going to be found much, so I encouraged others to find it by laying out 5 more caches along the loop, I added a climb of about 200 feet (which you can do by itself), a puzzle whose coordinates are found in the logbook of the mulit, another puzzle and of course the hopefully non-tedious micro in the woods (which I located near the parking coordinates for those who just want a bit of caching today.)

 

This was all done to support the landowners's letterbox-hybrid as part of a promotion they are doing.

 

So by doing the full loop they can get 6 found it logs.

 

My one mistake was that the regular puzzle is just too hard. That seems to be keeping people away from the loop, at least that what I hear over beers! People don't want to grab 5 caches when they know 6 are in the woods.

 

Paul

Link to comment

I can't really give much advice about getting your cache approved the way it is, but I have to agree with others that 17 stages is so long! A lot of people around here, if they have a bunch of caches along a trail, make them into a series of caches with a bonus. I realize that's probably not practical to change to that now but maybe in the future....

 

OT, by the way, I love the eating popcorn icon!

Link to comment

1) You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

2) You can bend the guidelines anyway you like. Your reviewer has the final say.

3) You can't argue with city hall.

4) I've never heard of a regular cache as part of a multi. This seems to be the major hang-up. Regular caches that you have to find to get clues to a different mystery cache, yes.

5) I've done a fourteen stage mystery cache. It took me nine months! And it ended with a micro. Great fun! And it has had eleven finds in two years.

6) Never say never. Or TBSS. Oh, well. Continue on with your life.

7) I've never seen the reviewers change their mind after discussion in the fora.

8) Be open. Work with your reviewer. Make changes as necessary. They make the final decision.

Link to comment

My impression:

Your defense begins with, "I'm not violating RULES, I'm violating GUIDELINES, " and then proceeds to say, "my intentions in violating these guidelines is to help the caching community," and then reminds us that it's guidelines, not rules..........

 

What's NOT relevant here is how different individuals "feel" about a 17 stage cache....... and I, personally, would just avoid it, but you're entitled to do a multi of that length...... but you aren't entitled to re-write the rules guidelines, and you aren't entitled to make your own exceptions to the distance regulation.

 

My best advice would be to make shorter caches out of it, and re-design it within the guidelines. I do appreciate your enthusiasm and your effort, and it seems a shame that you couldn't make that same effort in support of the geocaching regulations. Why test the limits? edit: I just went back and re-read, and my impression is now that you have no idea how to read a guideline and don't understand what guideline means, and assumed that it meant "write your own rules." Doesn't guideline mean:

A statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action: guidelines for the completion of tax returns.
? Edited by Robespierre
Link to comment

...and one is 20m too close to the final ( and its at the LIMIT of the park, and is DOWN an entire different FENCED OFF trail.

 

The other one is 40m too close to the final but is in the OPPOSITE direction of the other one, there is empassble creek between these.... that is only passable by a bridged area... You could never mix the 2 up...

These are points that you need to pass on to the reviewer. If the only way between the caches is longer than 528 feet, then exceptions can be made (such as having to walk down to the only bridge and back). So show the reviewer what is route(s) between the caches and that it takes the extra distance to travel between them.

 

I will disagree with others saying 17 stages are TOO many. For some yes, others no. But don't expect a lot of finds.

 

Also, with more experience with hiding caches, you'll find that the guidelines are pretty firmly fixed... (or just read a lot of past threads...)

Link to comment

I'm going to toss my $0.02 in here as well.

 

If I were you, the first thing I would do is split your multi into two seperate multi's, so you can keep everything just like it is. Name them in series (long walk #1 and long walk #2, whatever) Really, one long multi, with a 'breakpoint' in the middle. No big deal other than it isn't what you had originally planned (and what you seem to refuse to move from) Plus, if one stage of the whole shootin' match goes missing, the other half of the 'multi' is still findable on it's own. Or, if you've really got your heart set on making it so you have to do it all in order, put bogus coords on the first stage of the second group, list that group as a puzzle, and put the coordinates for that set on your final stage of the first one.

 

So far, you've only had one *traditional* cache listed, and it's been out for less than a month. A 17 stage multi (as one cache or two) is going to take a LOT of maintenance, and thus far you have no track record of being able to maintain caches well. Quite frankly, if you suck at it, a 17 stage multi is going to create a lot of geolitter. (I'm not saying that's the case, just saying) I'm not saying the enthusiasm's not cool or anything, but you might want to think about pulling on the reins just a bit. Maybe a 17-stager is a little ambitious for your first multi-hide?

 

And I will agree with everyone else, the listing guidelines are just that; guidelines. Which you should follow before placing/submitting a cache. If for some reason, you're trying to bend a guideline, you need to tell the reviewer EVERYTHING that might help him/her with the job. Remember, they're volunteers. They don't need to take carp from you because you didn't read the directions.

 

And on that note, coming to the forums and whining about how some evil reviewer is ruining your enjoyment of geocaching doesn't really help your case with the forum regulars. Seems like it's a regular occurance anymore though, someone comes in complaining about the horrible reviewers we've got here and how lousy they do their job.....and then the truth comes out about how many guidelines were broken by their hides. At least you admitted that part from the very beginning.

Link to comment
This was meant to be a walk through a city trail. The stages are 80% magnetic strips that are camoed acording to where they are stuck and are mostly right on the trail and should be quick finds.

 

Hey, I've done one like that before! That's actually a great idea, although I will say that the one I did had all sorts of maintaince problems. You may find yourself humping out there more than you'ld like.

 

Since it has 17 stages you shouldn't have any problems just eliminating one or two of the problem stages. Make sure the final isn't too close to anything and you're golden. Since they're stickers you should be able to move them easily - just do that.

 

Suggestion. Make two multis starting from either end of the walk, with two end caches in the middle. Suppose for argument that the walk is north/south, have one start point in the North, one in the South. Since you have 5 miles to work with, you can put the two physical caches in the middle, seperated by 0.1 mile. If you find some stickers fall in problematic places, just move 'em a bit.

 

You won't get anywhere fighting with your reviewer. Trust me on that. The proximity rule is rarely bent because otherwise it would get bent all the time - certainly you can see how that sort of thing works. It sounds like you have lots of room to work with - go fix it instead of bitch'n.

 

BTW, another thing that works is getting some tin and some metal stamps from the hardware store. You wind up with tags similar to those used by arborists. Quite durable, they can be slipped around a tree branch or fence post with wire and are very unlikely to be muggled. Weatherproof too.

Link to comment

7) I've never seen the reviewers change their mind after discussion in the fora.

 

Actually, there was that one time with the library cache that wasn't approved, but after long discussion in here the decision was reversed and the cache was listed. That was a very special case, the way the guidelines were worded came into play, the intent of those guidelines was involved, and there was a LOT of back and forth. So yes, it has happened. It most likely won't in this case, but it has in the past.

Link to comment

7) I've never seen the reviewers change their mind after discussion in the fora.

 

Actually, there was that one time with the library cache that wasn't approved, but after long discussion in here the decision was reversed and the cache was listed. That was a very special case, the way the guidelines were worded came into play, the intent of those guidelines was involved, and there was a LOT of back and forth. So yes, it has happened. It most likely won't in this case, but it has in the past.

I'm thinking that I've seen it happen 3 times? I've been in here for a few years, so I'm not sure.

Link to comment

Am I the only person that emails my local reviewer BEFORE moving forward on a cache that pushes the guidelines?

 

I've done that 3 times now. Saved myself a bit of work on the first 2 by politely being told my idea could not be published and am working on the 3rd as it could be worked in a way to conform. Boy does it make it easier to do this stuff when you have a good relation with the reviewer instead of adversarial one.

Link to comment
:(
As my kids will attest, I do say, "Entertainment is where you find it!"

 

Now, with that said... so many places to comment / contribute (?) ...

 

The guideline page is firstly just that, a GUIDELINE page and not a RULES page

For our purposes they're rules. I'm sure that they used the word "guidelines" so that the reviewers would have a little flexibility. I have personally (and recently) been a benificiary of a little flexibility. More later.

 

One question- Did you appeal your caches to the appeals e-mail like the guidelines suggested before you came in here to rip your local reviewer apart?

I have appealed to the published address and never received a response. Ultimately I altered my cache to address the reviewers objections, even though I felt that they weren't valid. I got the cache published, which was the whole point of the exercise. That said, I'm sure that the contact address gets tons of mail and either: 1/ My appeal got lost in the noise; or 2/ It was decided to let the reviewer's decision stand and they just didn't bother to inform me of the ruling. I've met most of the folks at Groundspeak and they're a great bunch! I'm opting for #1.

 

Dude, 17 stages is too many for a multi. Take a deep breath and scale it back a bit.

Don't believe it. I just published a 13-stage puzzle/multi. The first 12 stages puzzle/multi are individual caches in their own rights. The keys (for me) were to make each stage able to stand on its own. Just want to go for one or two? Great - go for it! Second, proximity and difficulty of each "stage" make it possible to complete the entire series in a day or two.

 

I can understand that you are frustrated, but try to work with the reviewer to compromise as much as possible.
This is one of the best pieces of advice you'll ever get if you plan on placing more caches! Give him or her as much information as possible. Send pictures if required.

 

I'd have to say after setting it up, I dont think Id ever do one that long again

Would you not do it because of the amount of work involved in setting it up or because of the "problems" you're having getting it published? Having placed several multis and two long cache series I fully understand if it's the former. I recently (this week!) posted a 13-stage multi where each stage is a puzzle cache unto itself. It wasn't easy. It's published. I'm still "debugging" it (with the help of many friendly and understanding cachers). The amount of work to devise the puzzles and build caches around them is tremendous. I'm asking myself "What made me think this was a good idea?!?" If the latter I suggest you stick to simpler caches.

 

But the reviewer doesnt have a really have a problem with the 17 stager or the fact its 17 stages, its the other singles that were placed nearby.

I just (yesterday!) asked my local reviewer for a clarification on this specific question. If you place a multi, no waypoint of your multi or the its final location can be within 1/10 mile of any waypoint or final of any other cache. Waypoints within a single multi are not subject to this rule. So, if you post a multi with 3 waypoints that are within, say, 100 yards of one another, those waypoints do not fail the 1/10 proximity rule. If any of your waypoints are within 1/10 of any other cache's waypoints (even if you own the other cache!) or final location, the proximity rule applies. (I just had this happen where the "other" cache was mine... Why I asked for specific clarification.)

 

But this one is already placed
Yeah, I had that problem too. It was a pain to go out and move four of the 13 caches in the series and then rework the puzzles. I did it and got them published.

 

It would be nice if we ordinary users had a tool to warn us that our cache location or one of our waypoints was encroaching. It wouldn't need to give details. Just a simple "Yep, that an A-Ok location," or a "Sorry. You're too close to another waypoint or cache. Your cache (waypoint) needs to be moved at least nnn feet in *some general direction*."

 

I think my biggest problem with this 17-step multi is that you are basically blocking 5.5 miles of trail with a cache that almost no one is going to go for. If it is a good place to go, it would be nice if you left some room for a cache or two that would bring more people to the area.
I agree completely. During my recent effort I placed an ammo can in a cute little park, ideally suited for such a hide. Unfortunately there was one waypoint, part of a nine-stage multi, located in the park. The size of the park (relatively small) effectively locks it from having any other cache or waypoint placed within it. (I've hunted and found the conflicting nine-stage multi - That's how I knew this park was here. It was just that it was three years ago and I didn't recall the waypoint here. I moved my ammo can to a different park.)

 

I hope you plan to have a REALLY BIG container with some high quality swag, because you send people down this 17 cache hike with a micro or McJunk, you will catch a lot of you know what for it.
Another GREAT tip! I make it a point to include special FTF and STF prizes in all my (non-micro) caches... And for finals in a complex multi or series I make the swag extra special. A few McToys for the kids but some nicer stuff for the grownups. Typical FTF would be a $5 Starbucks card or a geocoin. STF might be a $1 scratchoff ticket. Just today someone won $5!

 

I think that the bottom line here is that you'll do best if you work with your reviewer and try to see his or her point of view. To set up a 17-stage multi and put the effort that you obviously have into it, you clearly have an abundance of imagination and creativity. Put those attributes to work and mold your cache to fit within the guidelines (as interpreted by your local reviewer). I've fudged a waypoint by as little as 0.001' to get outside the 1/10 mile limit. We're talking about roughly 8 feet. Most GPS receivers aren't accurate to that degree.

 

As regards my latest effort, A Baker's Dozen, my reviewer let one misstep slide for me. One of my virtual waypoints was within a couple of hundred feet of another cache's virtual waypoint. Because both were virtual (and, I hope, because I've been so quick to act on other "problems" with the series) I got by with it. The location of my waypoint was pretty extraordinary and that may also have had some influence. Whatever the reason, I'm working with my reviewers and getting my caches published... Which, as I think I mentioned, is the whole point of the exercise.

 

Good luck with your cache!

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 3
×
×
  • Create New...