Cache not published!

[themonkeybutt]

I made a mystery cache that took me over two hours to make. The reviewer said that it was 418 feet to close to another cache and that it can't be published unless there is a natural barrier.

There IS a natural barrier. It's called big Creek. You have to take a route that is 0.21 miles to get from one cache to another by taking a bridge. There is no other way except for wading through the creek full of high mud water and thick blackberry bushes.

 

I hope you guys can help me out!

 

TMB

Edited August 1, 2007 by themonkeybutt

[+StarBrand]

Did you explain that to the reviewer and include some photos of the area? Did you do that contacct via email and not just a new note on the listing page?

 

Still, it will be up to the reviewer in the end. Best you can do is ask for an exception.

[+Morgan's Marauders]

Did you tell the reviewer about the creek? 110 feet is pretty close! That's one side of the creek or the other.

[themonkeybutt]

No its not 110 feet away its 110 feet inside of 528 feet, sorry

[+gpsfun]

I made a mystery cache that took me over two hours to make. The reviewer said that it was 110 feet to close to another cache and that it can't be published unless there is a natural barrier.

There IS a natural barrier. It's called big Creek. You have to take a route that is 0.21 miles to get from one cache to another by taking a bridge. There is no other way except for wading through the creek full of high mud water and thick blackberry bushes.

 

I hope you guys can help me out!

 

TMB

I'll bet you will make more progress by providing this information directly to the reviewers via a reviewer note on the cache page. Currently the information you stated here is NOT on your cache page.

[+StarBrand]

BTW - you did check the box that says you read the guidelines - didn't you? So then you must have known that this might happen - right? Could have saved yourself a few hours of setup time.....

 

Sorry - just had to point that out.

[themonkeybutt]

and yes, i've done everything except for taking photos! (i dont really have a camera available)

[+Knight2000]

I understand both stances.

 

But i wonder, why didnt you check this before placing the cache? Just a quick email asking the reviewer.

[+Miragee]

Recently I wanted to place a new cache. I had found all the Traditional caches in the area, so I knew my location was more than 528' away from any other Traditional cache, but I didn't know about the Puzzle caches in the area. . .

 

I emailed my Reviewer and asked if there were any Puzzle caches, or Multi waypoints, I needed to be concerned about near those coordinates. There weren't, so I placed the cache.

 

In your situation, I think if you explain the topography of the area to the Reviewer, and send them some pictures of the creek and the other barriers between the caches, you will have a good chance of getting it Approved. Our local Reviewer is great, once things are explained . . . however, I did have to move a cache one time. In fact, I had to move it about 110 feet . . .

 

[+palmetto]

The reviewer disabled the cache and specifically asked you to EMAIL him. You posted a new reviewer note instead. You might try the contact method that the reviewer asked for.

 

Reviewer notes ARE NOT emailed to reviewers. They just sit on cache pages.

 

When a cache is initially submitted any reviewer note will be read with the listing. After that, use the contact method the reviewer requests.

[themonkeybutt]

Now, let me tell you a story of Bob and John some geocachers who went forth

 

the day that the hottest day of the year, to find Geocache that had been on their watch list for a long time. This geocache was deep in a forest. When they arrived, the first spot they looked was in a twisted tree.

 

"Either it has to be in the tree or somewhere under those rocks," said Bob. John replied, eyeing the burning hot rocks wearily. "Right."

 

They looked for a long time. Finally, John said, "Lets get some water." After turning over a rock Bob replied, "I agree."

 

Twisting his head around, John spotted a fresh stream. He walk over to

 

fill up his water bottle. He took a long drink and said. "Wow, this water makes me feel alive."

 

Sighing, John sat down leaning on a tree. He pulled out his GPS and starting playing with it. "Oh," he said. "My GPS isn't accurate because it was in battery save mode. That I'd better fix."

 

"Tweet," said a bird in the tree above him. "Tweet, tweet tweet!" "I love birds," said Bob. "Did I tell you when I went to

 

Weymouth, Massachusetts I saw a Red-necked Grebe?" "What the heck is a Red-necked Grebe?" asked John. "A type of duck," said Bob "It has a pretty cool nest."

 

"On topic now," said John. "Let's go look for the Geocache!" So, they went back to the

 

twisted old tree and the rocks. "Where do

 

on we look- Aghh! Sorry i got my tongue tied. What do we look on?" asked Bob. "How about under the

 

forest floor?" "Can I see what your GPS reads?" asked John. "No," said Bob. "The cell phone you have has a GPS. Use the features on your

 

only $200 phone." "Fine," said John pulling out his phone. "This phone is a nice piece of equiptment." "Mine was $500 it's so much better," said Bob under his breath. John said, ignoring Bob. "It reads that we are only a few feet away from the cache."

 

"Either in the tree or under the rocks," said Bob reading the hint. "What are we missing?" "I don't know," said John I just wish this GPS would point us in the right

 

section of the forest." "Yeah," Bob said. "This place isn't even

 

nice or fun!" "Let's just leave!" said John. "OK," said Bob, feeling defeated. "Fine."

 

That is how you find what the coordinates are (its a hard code)

 

I would have to redo the whole thing!

[+chuckwagon101]

I made a mystery cache that took me over two hours to make. The reviewer said that it was 110 feet to close to another cache and that it can't be published unless there is a natural barrier.

There IS a natural barrier. It's called big Creek. You have to take a route that is 0.21 miles to get from one cache to another by taking a bridge. There is no other way except for wading through the creek full of high mud water and thick blackberry bushes.

 

I hope you guys can help me out!

 

TMB

 

Call me when those blackberries get ripe! Mmmmmmmm...BlaaaacckBerrrrrries!

[+Let's Look Over Thayer]

I made a mystery cache that took me over two hours to make. The reviewer said that it was 110 feet to close to another cache and that it can't be published unless there is a natural barrier.

There IS a natural barrier. It's called big Creek. You have to take a route that is 0.21 miles to get from one cache to another by taking a bridge. There is no other way except for wading through the creek full of high mud water and thick blackberry bushes.

I've always taken the approach that the easier I make it for the reviewer to understand the situation, the more likely the reviewer will approve.

 

I've released a few caches that are less than 528 from to another cache. In every case, I've been very careful to explain to the reviewer why you can't travel in a straight line from one cache the other. (And I've always been careful to make sure that any path that a cacher can travel reasonably is longer than 528 feet.) I can't expect that the reviewer will know the local terrain (even though the most likely reviewer lives nearby.) I've never had to resort to photos but if it would help make the case, I would not hesitate to provide them.

 

So far, every case was been approved. (But there's always next time...)

[+Jeep_Dog]

It appears as if the Reviewer is playing by the rulebook and doing what they are supposed to do. It is up to you as the cache placer to demonstrate how your cache meets the guidelines.

 

If you believe that your cache may be questionable, you are encouraged to add a note to the cache page. For example, you could add an explanation in the “notes to reviewer” section such as: "The train tracks running through this park are inactive and have been converted to a rails-to-trails path." The reviewer will read the note and take the information into consideration. Rest assured that notes to reviewers will be removed before the caches are published. Most caches that are temporarily put on hold or archived are done so due to a lack of information. Having all the relevant information up front during the review process will help ensure a speedy listing.

 

It appears that your cache was put on hold since it was 110' from another cache. Your reviewer clearly pointed out the "barrier" part, so since you have way to "fix" the problem -

 

First please read the reviewer notes for an explanation. It is a common practice for the reviewers to place a cache on hold while they obtain additional details required for it to be published. A reviewer may temporarily disable a submission to provide time for the cache owner to make necessary changes to the cache placement or cache description. This doesn’t necessarily mean that it won’t be published. In order to ensure a prompt response when responding to a reviewer, please follow the contact instructions given by the reviewer in their note.

 

If you explain about the creek (and really the photo suggestion is the best way to quickly demonstrate your point!), and the Reviewer still does not agree that it meets the guidelines, then

 

If, after exchanging emails with the reviewer, you still feel your cache has been misjudged, your next option is to ask the volunteer to post the cache for all of the reviewers to see in their private discussion forum. Sometimes a second opinion from someone else who has seen a similar situation can help in suggesting a way for the cache to be published.

 

It is best to work through the process above (quoted from the guidelines) before bringing it up in the Forums. That's my opinion, and the order suggested in the guidelines -

 

Next, you should feel free to post a message in the “Geocaching Topics” section of the Groundspeak Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks. If the majority believes that it should be published, then Groundspeak administrators and volunteers may review the submission and your cache may be unarchived.

 

In my experience, if you are within the guidelines or demonstrate good cause as to why the cache is not within guidelines physically but still meets the intent and spirit of the guidelines, then eventually your cache will be published.

 

Thanks for placing a new cache, and good luck!

[+Moose Mob]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a one mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (inlcuding the one you are conflicting with). Can I be so bold to suggest you start working in a different (less saturated) part of town?

 

Edit: fat fingers

Edited August 1, 2007 by Moose Mob

[+StarBrand]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (inlcuding the one you are conflicting with). Can I be sop bold to suggest you start working in a different (less saturated) part of town?

Conflict with your own cache - I understand why there was no exception!!

[+CurmudgeonlyGal]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (including the one you are conflicting with).

 

 

I actually have tears from the laughter.

 

 

 

michelle

[+Knight2000]

Ummm. What was that story about?

 

I just dont understand what you were trying to say.

[+Deliveryguy428]

If this puzzle cache is so worth the placement, why not remove the other cache since you own it....

[+Mopar]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (including the one you are conflicting with).

 

 

I actually have tears from the laughter.

 

 

 

michelle

I gotta agree with CGal and the guy with the big horns. Sounds like if you tried to move it the proper distance away from your one other cache, you would probably then be too close to 2 other caches you own. Give the area a break, and try hiding one someplace else.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (including the one you are conflicting with).

 

I actually have tears from the laughter.

 

michelle

I am beyond laughter -- I am stunned!! In fact, I am stunned and by SEVERAL facts in this case, the capstone of which is that the OP is the owner of the conflicting cache. Sigh! Life is quite amazing!

[+Ambrosia]

And on top of it, the OP instead of being polite, respectful and deferential to the Reviewer, is acting like he feels he's entitled to an exception. That's really not a good angle to use on someone you're trying to convince to work with you.

[+chuckwagon101]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (including the one you are conflicting with).

 

I actually have tears from the laughter.

 

michelle

I am beyond laughter -- I am stunned!! In fact, I am stunned and by SEVERAL facts in this case, the capstone of which is that the OP is the owner of the conflicting cache. Sigh! Life is quite amazing!

 

I don't care how many caches you have placed per square mile..etc. etc. ........I STILL want a

heads-up when those Blackberries get ripe! Mmmmmmmm...Blackberry Cobbbbblerrrrrrrrr!

[Keystone]

... And the notes left on the cache page were just left today. You submitted the cache yesterday. There are many caches submitted yesterday that haven't had an initial review yet. So, congrats to the two California reviewers who have already posted to your cache page. They're fast, but apparently not fast enough.

[+Jeep_Dog]

... And the notes left on the cache page were just left today. You submitted the cache yesterday. There are many caches submitted yesterday that haven't had an initial review yet. So, congrats to the two California reviewers who have already posted to your cache page. They're fast, but apparently not fast enough.

 

Yeah, well Mr. Keystone, you should know that even 1 hour is too long. Get with the program, you volunteer Reviewers!!!! You act as if you have other jobs or something....

[+treasure_hunter]

Judging by what I have read, I think that if you work with the reviewer, you will be able to get this on published. You said that you must travel .21 mi to the next cache due to the creek.

 

Just ask nicely, and you will be amazed what a little time and patience will reward.... Trust me, I have had similar experiences.

 

Just my 0.02

[+flask]

it's often effective to explain all the circumstances to the reviewer UP FRONT. before you go to the trouble of placing the cache.

 

only once did i fail to produce the interesting information in time; i was too new and playing stealthy. in the end the reviewer decided that the cache was inappropriate because i knew it wouldn't be permanent. (in fact, i knew it would only be there eighteen months, which is within the guidelines.)

 

the geocaching community lost a really spiffy cache at a life-size marble sculpture of willard scott INSIDE A SILO on a working farm.

 

had i sold this better up front, i bet i could have sold it to the reviewer.

 

edit: forgot to say we're all so proud of you. carthago delenda est.

Edited August 2, 2007 by flask

[+briansnat]

I personally wouldn't consider a creek you can wade across a significant barrier.

[+BlueDeuce]

I personally wouldn't consider a creek you can wade across a significant barrier.

 

Pretty much what I was thinking. I've been at least two caches where I had to check both sides just to find ground zero. Count on heavy tree cover next to a creek.

[Mag Magician]

I'm honestly getting quite a kick out of these discussions. It seems the cache placer in question, is the cache placer in conflict, and has an argument with himself, rather than with the reviewer that has asked for clarification.

It seems to me, that the OP has an obligation to not only himself, but the volunteer reviewer, to either justify the placement of this saturation cache by acknowledging the godliness of the reviewer, or putting his tail between his legs and admitting that the reviewer knows the rules much better.

I have had many e-mail conversations between myself and my local cache reviewer, and have always bowed to the expertise of someone who holds such an esteemed position, that I would not take on for love nor money.

I love living in obscurity. (Well except for being a district rep for our provincial association)

[+The Herd]

acknowledging the godliness of the reviewer

 

 

That line right there made it all worth it!

Edited August 2, 2007 by The Herd

[+Prime Suspect]

I personally wouldn't consider a creek you can wade across a significant barrier.

But it's a creek filled with sharks - with freakin' laser beams on their head!

[bogleman]

I personally wouldn't consider a creek you can wade across a significant barrier.

But it's a creek filled with sharks - with freakin' laser beams on their head!

don't forget the turtles, they could poke out and bite ya

[+gypsyg8r]

But it's a creek filled with sharks - with freakin' laser beams on their head!

 

I freakin' love you mini-me.

 

Sorry, just couldn't resist!

[+Lacomo]

I personally wouldn't consider a creek you can wade across a significant barrier.

 

I agree. It would take more than a creek to keep me from going after a cache.

River maybe, creek No.

[+wandererrob]

and yes, i've done everything except for taking photos! (i dont really have a camera available)

 

Google maps satellite/aerial view? Assuming they have closer images of your area. Some areas don't. You could send them a link of the area with the 2 caches in question.

[+wandererrob]

I just looked at the area your cache is in and there are at least 30 caches in a one mile radius. Quite a few of them are yours (inlcuding the one you are conflicting with).

 

OK, that's actually funny!

[+mtn-man]

and yes, i've done everything except for taking photos! (i dont really have a camera available)

Google maps satellite/aerial view? Assuming they have closer images of your area. Some areas don't. You could send them a link of the area with the 2 caches in question.

Trust me. Google satellite doesn't help their case one bit.

My recommendation... move on.