Vigilante Guideline Enforcement

[+Rockin Roddy]

I have a cache at the local zoo. It's screwed into a tree. *Gasp* Oh my, Vandalism! The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Like you, I had help, the zoo director helped me choose the spot, one of this maintance guys screwed it into the tree and life is good. I'm not posting that on the cache page. Instead the cache page is about a zoo cache. Not the screws.

 

Great...all one would need to mention is that this was placed with the help and permission of the zoo...actually ADDS to the description if you ask me!

 

Not sure what you think of as cache police, but if calling attention to caches placed against guidelines is bad, so be it. Doing what is best for the sport should be on the minds of every cacher. Since we police ourselves, it would only seem right to report caches in question (after trying to contact the owner of course) to a reviewer.

 

That doesan't mean I'm going out to find these hides, but I'm not going to ignore them if I find them either. And if I do find them, I'll log them as a find!

[+Renegade Knight]

....Not sure what you think of as cache police, but if calling attention to caches placed against guidelines is bad, so be it. ...

 

Thats the crux. Actually placed against guidelines as opposed to "I think it's against guideliens but I'm not sure because I haven't actually done any legwork to figure it out. but since I'm a guidelines lawyer I'm reporting it anyway, even though I also know it's been reviewed by a reviewer who knows more than I do, and even though I know the cache onwer already said they were covered by listing it to begin with, after all I'm the big fish in this pond and my word is gold."

 

Doing the work to be real cache police doing actual useful work, would involve working up more of a sweat than those kind of wannabes are willing to do. They normally want to be taken as an expert on the subject and have the world jump at their word. Some reivewers actually do. When you question their assumptions, it's a personal challenge of their authority.

 

Maybe you have different experience with these kind of people, but mine has not been good when I encounter them.

[+Renegade Knight]

I have a cache at the local zoo. It's screwed into a tree. *Gasp* Oh my, Vandalism! The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Like you, I had help, the zoo director helped me choose the spot, one of this maintance guys screwed it into the tree and life is good. I'm not posting that on the cache page. Instead the cache page is about a zoo cache. Not the screws.

 

Great...all one would need to mention is that this was placed with the help and permission of the zoo...actually ADDS to the description if you ask me!...

 

Another angle for you. If you called the zoo, you would likely get a person who doesn't know about that cache, let alone the permission. Even if you do, do the home work you may find that you are on the wrong trail and be led astray. Not because there is no permission but because a cache is so trivial in the scheme of things for running a zoo that the director may not have seen fit to let anyone know but the maintance person who helped set it up. Every time I check on the cache if I'm not accompanied by the director, I'm introducting new staff to geocaching.

[+Rockin Roddy]

All the more reason to add the information to the cache page maybe??

[+Rockin Roddy]

....Not sure what you think of as cache police, but if calling attention to caches placed against guidelines is bad, so be it. ...

 

Thats the crux. Actually placed against guidelines as opposed to "I think it's against guideliens but I'm not sure because I haven't actually done any legwork to figure it out. but since I'm a guidelines lawyer I'm reporting it anyway, even though I also know it's been reviewed by a reviewer who knows more than I do, and even though I know the cache onwer already said they were covered by listing it to begin with, after all I'm the big fish in this pond and my word is gold."

 

Doing the work to be real cache police doing actual useful work, would involve working up more of a sweat than those kind of wannabes are willing to do. They normally want to be taken as an expert on the subject and have the world jump at their word. Some reivewers actually do. When you question their assumptions, it's a personal challenge of their authority.

 

Maybe you have different experience with these kind of people, but mine has not been good when I encounter them.

 

So asking questions is the way to go? After that...what? Should I go to the landowner and ask if permission was given (if the cache owner won't answer that question)? My next move is to go to the reviewer. If the owner doesn't answer, what else is there?

 

It's funny how you tout that "checked box" argument as if all that place caches have read the guidelines let alone understand them. If I had placed a cache I knew was against guidelines, I'm surely not going to give that info to the reviewer (so how would the reviewer know unless told???)...but I'm surely going to check the box saying it was placed all proper and legit!

 

Sure, someone could easily lie on the cache page as well. Seeing the info listed on the cache page tells me this person worked through the process and is likely to have followed guidelines. Seeing that permission was given and placement was with the help of zoo officials looks sooo much better than a checked box IMHO.

 

Yes, the person who reported the caches in the OP was going about it all wrong, questions should be asked!

[+thedeadpirate]

To pull this closer to the origninal question, what is the appropriate way to handle what appears to be guideline violations?

 

The OP states that the hide method he used did in fact violate the guidelines. I don't think he had a problem with it being brought to his attention. As a result, he changed the hide to conform to the guidelines.

 

The question I think he wanted answered is two-fold.

 

1. Is the cache page the appropriate venue for hashing all this out?

 

2. How would you deal with a similar situation?

 

To answer the first question, I think a nice note on the cache page would have been appropriate. I think contacting the cache owner via email would have been better, but there is nothing wrong with stating your concern in a note on the cache page. In this case I think the General would have been justified in posting a SBA. However, the note I read on the OP's cache page was more of a high-n-mighty, holier-than-thou attitude. Had the General been a little more diplomatic, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

As fare as how I would handle it as the cache owner? I would have contacted the General privately in email. Since the OP agreed that the hide did violate the guidelines, I would have assured the General that I would changed the hide, thank him for his input and be about my business. These things do have the potential to get out of hand quickly. Continuing to feed into the General's power trip just encourages more of the same behavior.

 

The cache page is not the place to hash stuff like this out. In fact, I have seen reviewers step in and put a stop to stuff like this before.

 

I have learned in life that it is never a good idea to respond in writing when I am mad. I try to allow myself at least a few minutes to calm down so that I can compose a thoughtful, diplomatic response. You will find that you can often short circuit this type of behavior with a few carefully chosen words.

[+Renegade Knight]

...So asking questions is the way to go? After that...what? Should I go to the landowner and ask if permission was given (if the cache owner won't answer that question)? My next move is to go to the reviewer. If the owner doesn't answer, what else is there?

 

It's funny how you tout that "checked box" argument as if all that place caches have read the guidelines let alone understand them. If I had placed a cache I knew was against guidelines, I'm surely not going to give that info to the reviewer (so how would the reviewer know unless told???)...but I'm surely going to check the box saying it was placed all proper and legit!...

 

In the end you either give your fellow cacher the benefit of the doubt and get on with life, or you believe that all people fall short of your trust and act accordingly.

 

I do not fell the need to waste my time submitting to the geocaching equivalent of a lie detector test just to make people who don't trust me feel better about trusting me.

 

As for the check box, If you don't believe that people meant it or at least had the best of intentions when they checked it, then nothing else is going to help either.

[+Renegade Knight]

To pull this closer to the origninal question, what is the appropriate way to handle what appears to be guideline violations?...

 

First you wait until you know for a fact there is a problem. If you are asking your self, "Is this a problem" then that means you have some doubt. Give the owner that benefit. If you are being yelled at by an irate mob of drunken Irish because the cache has no beer in it, then you would have no doubt that there is a problem and you would also have a very clear idea about what to do about it.

[+Harry Dolphin]

To pull this closer to the origninal question, what is the appropriate way to handle what appears to be guideline violations?

 

The OP states that the hide method he used did in fact violate the guidelines. I don't think he had a problem with it being brought to his attention. As a result, he changed the hide to conform to the guidelines.

 

The question I think he wanted answered is two-fold.

 

1. Is the cache page the appropriate venue for hashing all this out?

 

2. How would you deal with a similar situation?

 

Hmm.. What I read was that he thought that some might consider it a violation of guidelines. Not that he definitely agreed.

We had a nice brouhaha on a cache page concerning nesting vultures. Moderator/reviewer suggested bringing the discussion to the fora. But no one has said anything about the fox den near another nearby cache.

 

2. How would you deal with a similar situation?

Generally, I ignore them. IMHO, the person in question is an obnoxious boor, and deliberately being malicious!

I did report one where the clue at the first stage said "Hope you brought a shovel". Final was buried in the sand.

Okay, I could probably name a hundred caches that seem to be definitely in violation of the guidelines. (That would be about 8% of my finds). Spray paint on a tree. Magic marker on a rock and an observation tower. A cup hook inside a hollow (but live) tree. But I'm not the cache police. And I'm not about to make friends and influence people by reporting what I perceive to be cache guideline violations. (Though, there are others here who would.)

The cache in question was not an egregious violaton. The vigilante chose to make an issue of what a vigilante thought might be a possible violation. Is it buried? The cacheowner went out of his way to change it so that not even an anal-retentive vigilante could possible question the hide.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

Personal experience has shown us that contacting the cache owner isnt a good option. We had a chance for a FTF on one cache that was hidden inside of something. To get to it, you had to jump over a fence, with no trespassing signs on it, climb aboard something that had do not climb signs on it. And you had to do this within site of a police station. I posted a note politely expressing my concerns on this cache and was told by the owner (not quite so politely) that violating the regulations was half the fun of this cache. The cache was found many times before it got archived. We went after another cache that was in a habitat sensitive area and you had to leave the path in order to get to the cache, against all the posted signs. I contacted the reviewer about my concerns over that cache. He or she contacted the owner and it was dealt with. Currently there are 2 caches on private property (HOA common area) that you have to go past large no trespassing signs to get to. We opted not to go for these caches and posted a note on the cache page about it. So far, the cache owners havent responded and other cachers are going after those caches. I debated contacting the reviewer about them but I was hesitant to bother him or her. I wasnt sure how well my complaints would be received.

[+thedeadpirate]

In this particular case, which is what I was confining my comments to, the hide was in violation of the guidelines. Not intentionally though. The way the OP understood the guidelines at the time of the hide, he thought he was hiding the cache properly. But after the General's note and upon reading the Sage One thread, the OP became convinced that the hide was in violation. (If I do not properly understand what I read, please correct me)

 

So in this particular case, the General was technically correct to bring it to the cache owner's attention. His attitude in his first note and subsequent notes was improper, but he was correct in his assessment of this particular hide.

 

With that understanding, he should have contacted the owner privately in email since I would give the owner the benefit of the doubt that he didn't know it was in violation. The tactful thing would have been to contact the owner privately. But to answer question number 1, a cordial note would also be proper and even a SBA would not have been out of line.

 

However, the subsequent notes were uncalled for as the General should not have communicated further on the cache page. The cache page is not the place to hash out these issues. Email or the forums is a better venue.

 

As to the second question, in this particular situation, I would have thanked him for his input, changed the hide and gone about my business simply because I realized that my hide did need to be changed.

 

I think the OP took the high ground. He didn’t stoop to the other guy’s level. He fixed the cache, posted a note stating it had been fixed, and then asked everyone to take the discussion to the forums. I think the OP handled it as well as he could.

 

***edited an incorrect assumption***

Edited August 30, 2007 by GeoBain

[+Renegade Knight]

Personal experience has shown us that contacting the cache owner isnt a good option. ...

 

It's the right thing to do. The right thing is seldom the most fun.

[+BlueDeuce]

Personal experience has shown us that contacting the cache owner isnt a good option. ...

 

It's the right thing to do. The right thing is seldom the most fun.

 

I don't think gc.com guidelines should always first be a discussion between a finder and the hider.

 

Take your concern to a reviewer and let them decide if it's worth investigating or addressing.

 

 

Edited to add 'always first'.

Edited August 30, 2007 by BlueDeuce

[+Bulldograce]

Humm....

 

So what has been done to cull the behavior of "Gen Santa Ana 2" ?

 

It's is obvious that the powers that be are indeed monitor this thread, as logs have been "purged" after the fact.

 

What is the protocol? Is there a protocol to remove, banish, or punish a user?

[+Mudfrog]

Humm....

 

So what has been done to cull the behavior of "Gen Santa Ana 2" ?

 

It's is obvious that the powers that be are indeed monitor this thread, as logs have been "purged" after the fact.

 

What is the protocol? Is there a protocol to remove, banish, or punish a user?

 

Actually it isn't obvious as i'm taking it that the cache owners themselves are the ones who probably purged the logs. I also highly doubt that TPTB would intervene on a small matter like this.

[+Renegade Knight]

Humm....

 

So what has been done to cull the behavior of "Gen Santa Ana 2" ?

 

It's is obvious that the powers that be are indeed monitor this thread, as logs have been "purged" after the fact.

 

What is the protocol? Is there a protocol to remove, banish, or punish a user?

 

Typically unsportsmanlike behavior gets you banned. False SBA's, Stealing Caches and the like are bannable offenses at some threshold.

[+Renegade Knight]

Personal experience has shown us that contacting the cache owner isnt a good option. ...

 

It's the right thing to do. The right thing is seldom the most fun.

 

I don't think gc.com guidelines should always first be a discussion between a finder and the hider.

 

Take your concern to a reviewer and let them decide if it's worth investigating or addressing.

 

 

Edited to add 'always first'.

 

Why wouldn't you go to the authority on that cache? That's the owner. Not this site. Per the TOS of this site the cache owner remains responsible for the cache. It doesn't hurt they also own it.

[+benh57]

Humm....

 

So what has been done to cull the behavior of "Gen Santa Ana 2" ?

 

It's is obvious that the powers that be are indeed monitor this thread, as logs have been "purged" after the fact.

 

What is the protocol? Is there a protocol to remove, banish, or punish a user?

 

Typically unsportsmanlike behavior gets you banned. False SBA's, Stealing Caches and the like are bannable offenses at some threshold.

 

Being unkind though, is not an offense. TPTB do not police niceness as they have stated in the past. Gen Santa Ana's SBAs may have been considered 'rude', but were not false.

[+BlueDeuce]

Why wouldn't you go to the authority on that cache? That's the owner. Not this site. Per the TOS of this site the cache owner remains responsible for the cache. It doesn't hurt they also own it.

 

This site sets and enforces the guidelines. The reviewer knows more about the cache than I do. They have more experience and a better understanding of the many aspects of why a cache may or may not be approved.

 

If I suspect a cache is outside guidelines I'll go to some who has authority to decide if I am correct or not and has the authority to require the cache owner to comply. It's not my job to negotiate the guidelines of this site with the cache owner.

 

When I see a cache that I think needs to be archived immediately I send an email to the reviewer outlining the situation and they address the issue with the owner. Deciding whether or nor a cache is within guidelines is what the reviewer is supposed to be doing. I'll let them do their job.

 

 

then/than

Edited August 30, 2007 by BlueDeuce

[+Rockin Roddy]

I'm inclined to go with BD's answer! I agree that I'm not the one who should be deciding what is what guidelines wise. I might contact the owner, but if no response, I'm not going to give the owner the benefit of the doubt...if you don't answer my questioning of the cache, you probably placed it against guidelines. (and yes, in my case, the owner has answered all emails up until and including the one which asked about the guidelines...just didn't address the question).

 

You can go on feeling that everyone out there caching has the good of caching in general in mind and would follow guidelines, I've seen personally how people will act when they think no one is watching (golf course...ask me about the "cart paths only" week we just went through). While some caches are so minutely beyond the guidelines I'd not waste my time on reporting them, some could be damaging to our sport and I WILL report them. Since I'm not in this to be the most popular, it's not going to hurt my feelings if someone who couldn't follow guidelines (and potentially hurt our sport) doesn't like me anymore!

 

Seeings some cachers wouldn't even follow guidelines (rules or laws) when searching a cache, (trespass anyone???) how can I just openly trust all who place a hide?

[+DudleyGrunt]

I found a cache recently that was located on library grounds directly adjacent to a middle school and attached to one of those big green electrical boxes. To add to all this, the log was soaking wet because it wasn't actually in a sealed container.

 

Any of those qualities could be considered outside the guidelines, but my biggest concern was the proximity to the school. It wasn't just adjacent to some rear field, but was directly across from a side entrance and parking lot. Luckily, school was not in session yet, so I went ahead and made the find.

 

Afterward, I sent the owner an e-mail expressing my concerns in a respectful manner. I will wait and see if any changes are made before considering any further actions.

 

Dave

[+Renegade Knight]

...This site sets and enforces the guidelines. The reviewer knows more about the cache than I do. They have more experience and a better understanding of the many aspects of why a cache may or may not be approved.

 

If I suspect a cache is outside guidelines I'll go to some who has authority to decide if I am correct or not and has the authority to require the cache owner to comply. It's not my job to negotiate the guidelines of this site with the cache owner.

 

When I see a cache that I think needs to be archived immediately I send an email to the reviewer outlining the situation and they address the issue with the owner. Deciding whether or nor a cache is within guidelines is what the reviewer is supposed to be doing. I'll let them do their job.

 

 

then/than

To summarize, The two people who are experts are the reviewer and the owner leaving finders in a position of secong guessing both.

 

When you go to the reviewer you are going over the head of the only person in a position to actually do anything about the cache. The reviewer can't fix the cache. They can list or unlist the cache page. The cache remains in place.

 

Pick a cache any cache. There is one owner, one reviewer for that cache and many many finders. By and large finders should stick to finding. However when a problem is a clear and present danger to caching they should go to the person responsibile. That's the person who can fix the cache itself.

 

It sounds like we won't agree on the issue, but we should agree on the facts.

This site publishes cache pages and hosts find logs, but is not responsible for the cache.

Owners own the cache are the ones responsible for the cache and any issues created by it. They are the ones responsible for fixing any actual cache issues.

Approvers and Owners know the most about any one cache. Finders know the least on any one cache.

The experts were already involved before the cache was listed.

 

After that it's fuzzy.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I agree that I'm not the one who should be deciding what is what guidelines wise....

 

The thing is that you are deciding what is what guidelines wise as soon as you email anybody about anything that you are concerned about guideline wise.

[+Renegade Knight]

....Being unkind though, is not an offense. TPTB do not police niceness as they have stated in the past. Gen Santa Ana's SBAs may have been considered 'rude', but were not false.

 

Mine was a generic comment. You can be banned for false SBAs and otherwise making a nuicance of yourself. The General may be rude but being rude and right doesn't get you banned.

[+BlueDeuce]

It sounds like we won't agree on the issue, but we should agree on the facts.

This site publishes cache pages and hosts find logs, but is not responsible for the cache.

Owners own the cache are the ones responsible for the cache and any issues created by it. They are the ones responsible for fixing any actual cache issues.

Approvers and Owners know the most about any one cache. Finders know the least on any one cache.

The experts were already involved before the cache was listed.

 

After that it's fuzzy.

 

I generally agree but with a couple exceptions

 

Approvers and Owners know the most about any one cache. Finders know the least on any one cache.

A finder may know more about the cache, such as the location, and knows that the cache is in violation. (Not every owner knowingly places an invalid cache.)

 

The experts were already involved before the cache was listed.

When that is true there are rarely cache violation issues.

Edited August 30, 2007 by BlueDeuce

[+Miragee]

Last night I found a cleverly-hidden cache that is "technically" against the guidelines. I enjoyed the hide and it is not hurting anything. It has been in place for more than two years. I would not say anything to either the cache owner or our local Reviewer, nor will I give away the hiding technique in my log. Any action to change the hide would lessen the fun for future seekers.

 

I sure hope the "General" doesn't come down this way.

[+Renegade Knight]

...

The experts were already involved before the cache was listed.

When that is true there are rarely cache violation issues.

 

The reviewer and owner may not be as expert as is possible, but when that cache is listed there is nobody else who between them know the guidelines and cache better. Not even a finder with better laurals to rest on.

[+Renegade Knight]

Last night I found a cleverly-hidden cache that is "technically" against the guidelines. I enjoyed the hide and it is not hurting anything....

 

That' why the guidelines are not rules. To allow for the flexability for good hides that meet the spirit of geocaching. Another thing that is factored into the cache placement and approval that finders who report things often second guess.

 

The general would be doing caching a disservice.

[+Road Rabbit]

From the Forum Guidelines:

 

"Sock Puppet accounts will not be allowed. A sock puppet is an account made on an internet message board by a person who already has an account for the purpose of posting anonymously. Use your own account for posting personal opinions. Posts from known sock puppet accounts will be deleted and both the puppet and actual account may be banned from using the services of Groundspeak."

 

General Santa Ana 2, in the interest of following the rules and guidelines, I call on you to turn yourself in and surrender your account. As a confessed Sock Puppet, you should have no other recourse.

[+Kacky]

There have been instances of Maine caches being removed that didn't violate any guidelines. The person just didn't like the cache, or the hider or both.

Edited August 31, 2007 by Kacky

[+LewisClan77]

I have a cache on my watchlist, and I got an e-mail just a few minutes ago...

 

Location: California, United States

Gen Santa Ana 2 couldn't find Return of the living dead (Unknown Cache) at

8/30/2007

 

Log Date: 8/30/2007

My Explorist 500 fell out of my pocket while doing the caches out here today.

If anyone finds plaese contact me.

 

Hopefully he won't find it and will not be able to pull his antics anymore

[JASTA 11]

I have to laugh!

 

That would be some justice! What comes around, goes around. What a creep.

Edited August 31, 2007 by JASTA 11

[+Renegade Knight]

Poetic Justice.