Is it always this hard to get a geocache approved?

[+themeecer]

Hi, and thanks for your questions. It's always fine to ask whether others are having similar experiences. Consistency among reviewers is always a challenge, and with many of the guidelines, we are given a fair amount of discretion.

 

Since I can see the unpublished caches, as well as the deleted pre-publication notes on the published caches, I thought I'd respond with additional information and observations.

 

1) I couldn't get my Up in a Holler 1 cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bc-5db5d2007406 unarchived, even though I was the original owner, so I had to make a second one right on the spot of the old one. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...b5-4021b38ebe23 I hated that the old 'finds' won't be connected to these newer ones, even though it is the same geocache.

Groundspeak has asked us not to unarchive caches that have been archived for a long time. A couple of months is OK; a couple of years, not so much so.

 

2) Our town here is very small and with the distance restraints it doesn't allow for many caches to be placed here. I placed two micros in one day. I had to archive http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...22-c4b64437cfbc in order to keep my other one: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...75-f19790e822c2 I have been to other cache areas that have 3 caches right on top of each other.

The caches were submitted 206 feet apart. Even in very cache dense areas, we strive to stay close to the 528 foot minimum. Reviewers do have a lot of discretion; I published one today in a cemetery that was 480 feet from a cache in a neighboring park. But, I haven't seen any exceptions granted at a distance of 200 feet. If it happens, it's either grandfathered from a long time ago, or the owner moved a cache after publication, or the reviewer missed it, or the caches qualify for an exception based on a physical barrier like a cliff or river. I didn't see a basis for an exception here.

 

As an alternative, consider featuring one of the two spots as a virtual waypoint in a multicache. Virtual stages of multis are exempt from the 528 foot guideline. Have the cacher collect information from signs, etc., at that spot, which help determine the coords for a physical cache hidden a safe distance away.

3) I had to try a couple of times to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...63-241bd861eb18 I originally stated it was next to a creek not on private property.

You submitted the cache May 4th; the reviewer asked two questions on May 5th; you replied the same day and the cache was published by the end of the day on May 5th. What's the problem? Both of the reviewer's observations were valid questions. The cache was close to private property, and caches with a one-star terrain rating ought to be wheelchair accessible.

 

4) And the past couple of days I have been trying to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...05-4c3d807d33e7 It is on public land that my donations paid for. I was actually the vice president and president for the associational youth rallies that developed this land. Because there is an old railway up on a hill past a creek, I can't place a geocache on this land.

The cache coordinates look to be about 40 feet from the tracks. Our minimum is 150 feet unless the hider can demonstrate a basis to overcome that presumption. Either move your cache 100 feet, or show that the cache isn't on the right of way and is physically separated from the right of way so folks don't trespass there. Permission from the park is a good way to demonstrate this.

 

I try to place geocaches that I would personally like to find. I want to bring people to areas they would have never seen otherwise. But if it continues to be this difficult to get them placed I'll eventually lose interest.

The vast majority of geocaches are published on the first review with no back and forth. They meet the guidelines. We LOVE publishing caches that meet the guidelines. And when they don't, we are happy to work with the owners to get them compliant. I encourage you to keep hiding caches, but with an eye on the guidelines.

 

 

Thank you for the response Keystone; I really appreciate it. I guess I should have made some of these concerns multiple threads. The first one was more me questioning why we have the guideline of not being able to unarchive geocaches we have owned in the past that we replace in the same spot, not criticizing the reviewer who prevented it.

 

 

On the 4th one I guess I should have posted a picture showing the very steep hill, trees, and creek separating the cache area from the railroad.

[+OReviewer]

On the 4th one I guess I should have posted a picture showing the very steep hill, trees, and creek separating the cache area from the railroad.

Not stating whether it will change anything but I know as a reviewer, pictures have made a couple of reviews a LOT easier.

[+themeecer]

I want to thank the ones who have come here to post constructive posts. Some of you read what I wrote and didn't go off on tangents and personal attacks.

 

 

To the others ... apparently you have somebody's ear or maybe you took the suggestion of sending them cookies.

 

How can a post like this remain in this discussion:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your note and your admitted self-imposed limitations (i.e., the fact that you state that you will only place geocaches in your own (admittedly small) town and nowhere else) I never once said this. I said there are some places where I would like to bring people to see in my small town. I have geocaches placed in the county as well. You and others keep harping on this point., and based upon the sheer number of complaints which you have cited, this all suggests to me that you may have a bit of a sense of entitlement and have a concomitant habit of always harping on the negative instead of appreciating the things you do like. I hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on you, but you did ask for my opinion, so here goes: it has been my personal observation in life that when someone has as many complaints as do you, and sounds as helpless and victimized as do you, and sounds as unhappy as do you, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major attitude problem, namely, a sense of entitlement along with a lack of gratitude and appreciation, and also inability to let go of things and move on with grace and ease.

 

While ones defending me like this are deleted:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your overall reply, this all suggests to us that you don't hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on this guy, but in fact relish it. I has been our personal observation in life that when someone makes these sorts of personal attacks, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major problem of undisclosed origin.

 

But thanks anyway for the pseudo-clinical and unwarranted analysis of his character.

 

I am a big boy and can take the personal attacks; I've been getting them my entire life. These have been stepped up now that people have the ability to cower behind a computer screen. I do take issue with the elitism the top poster displayed that went unchecked and the deletion of the second post that defended me. They used identical words and tone and only one gets a slap on the hand.

[Keystone]

I don't recall receiving a "report this post" message about Vinny's post. We react to post reports but apart from that we try and let the community moderate the threads to the extent possible.

 

Now that you have alerted the moderating team, we are contacting Vinny's pharmacist immediately.

 

Meanwhile, let's return to the discussion of the cache review process. Thanks.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Groundspeak has asked us not to unarchive caches that have been archived for a long time. A couple of months is OK; a couple of years, not so much so. ...

 

Good information.

[+Renegade Knight]

...On the 4th one I guess I should have posted a picture showing the very steep hill, trees, and creek separating the cache area from the railroad.

 

When Rail Roads were given their right of way it went so many feet from the tracks on either side. Since it was based on the tracks, the creek and hillside don't matter and could be RR property.

 

The Rail Roads existed before a lot of our current traditions regarding real estate came into being. Plus since it was direct congressional authoirty that granted the Right of Way, they likely disregarded some of those rules entirly.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I don't recall receiving a "report this post" message about Vinny's post. We react to post reports but apart from that we try and let the community moderate the threads to the extent possible.

 

Now that you have alerted the moderating team, we are contacting Vinny's pharmacist immediately.

 

Meanwhile, let's return to the discussion of the cache review process. Thanks.

Oh no! Have I been a bad boy? Am I in trouble again? Are the Men in Black going to show up at my front door again with that strange electronical device? Are they gonna aim it at me again? Are they gonna take me away again in their long black car with the government plates? Am I gonna be remanded again? Am I gonna be flown by unmarked jet again to that cold damp stone cell in that strange gray prison in the Andean mountains of Ecuador?

Edited May 23, 2008 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+Quiggle]

On the 4th one I guess I should have posted a picture showing the very steep hill, trees, and creek separating the cache area from the railroad.

Don't post it to the thread, send it to your reviewer who has the ability to publish your cache. From the maps, it appears as if your cache is nearly right at the tracks, not separated from it as you are suggesting. Without visiting the site, that's all we typically have to go on (the maps and satellite view). If you go back to my post, as well as posts made by others in the thread, it is being stressed that communication goes a long way in getting a cache listed or not.

Edited May 23, 2008 by Quiggle

[+themeecer]

The Rail Roads existed before a lot of our current traditions regarding real estate came into being. Plus since it was direct congressional authoirty that granted the Right of Way, they likely disregarded some of those rules entirly.

 

Grrrrrr .. don't get me started. hehe

[+Quiggle]

Be sure you e-mail your reviewer about the railroad cache. Since it was archived they may not see your reviewer note. The new location should be okay, but please do send that e-mail to allow IronHorseReviewer to look at it.

[+Renegade Knight]

Be sure you e-mail your reviewer about the railroad cache. Since it was archived they may not see your reviewer note. The new location should be okay, but please do send that e-mail to allow IronHorseReviewer to look at it.

 

Irony at it's best.

[+Quiggle]

Be sure you e-mail your reviewer about the railroad cache. Since it was archived they may not see your reviewer note. The new location should be okay, but please do send that e-mail to allow IronHorseReviewer to look at it.

Irony at it's best.

Fun, eh?

[+Michael]

I want to thank the ones who have come here to post constructive posts. Some of you read what I wrote and didn't go off on tangents and personal attacks.

 

 

To the others ... apparently you have somebody's ear or maybe you took the suggestion of sending them cookies.

 

How can a post like this remain in this discussion:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your note and your admitted self-imposed limitations (i.e., the fact that you state that you will only place geocaches in your own (admittedly small) town and nowhere else) I never once said this. I said there are some places where I would like to bring people to see in my small town. I have geocaches placed in the county as well. You and others keep harping on this point., and based upon the sheer number of complaints which you have cited, this all suggests to me that you may have a bit of a sense of entitlement and have a concomitant habit of always harping on the negative instead of appreciating the things you do like. I hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on you, but you did ask for my opinion, so here goes: it has been my personal observation in life that when someone has as many complaints as do you, and sounds as helpless and victimized as do you, and sounds as unhappy as do you, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major attitude problem, namely, a sense of entitlement along with a lack of gratitude and appreciation, and also inability to let go of things and move on with grace and ease.

 

While ones defending me like this are deleted:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your overall reply, this all suggests to us that you don't hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on this guy, but in fact relish it. I has been our personal observation in life that when someone makes these sorts of personal attacks, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major problem of undisclosed origin.

 

But thanks anyway for the pseudo-clinical and unwarranted analysis of his character.

 

I am a big boy and can take the personal attacks; I've been getting them my entire life. These have been stepped up now that people have the ability to cower behind a computer screen. I do take issue with the elitism the top poster displayed that went unchecked and the deletion of the second post that defended me. They used identical words and tone and only one gets a slap on the hand.

 

The post you are referring to is still there. "http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...t&p=3483687" The copy of the post was removed because the poster insulted someone. The support post you are talking about is still there.

 

FYI did you contact appeals@geocaching.com? Did they give you any recommendations and did you follow them?

Edited May 24, 2008 by Michael

[+russellvt]

Be sure you e-mail your reviewer about the railroad cache. Since it was archived they may not see your reviewer note. The new location should be okay, but please do send that e-mail to allow IronHorseReviewer to look at it.

Irony at it's best.

Fun, eh?

*spew*

 

 

Monitor cleanup, aisle three...

 

In all seriousness, thanks to all the Moderators for dropping in and clarifying the process as-seen from your side! For me, it was/is very helpful to hear directly from you (along with a few lurkers, I'm sure).

[+SixDogTeam]

I want to thank the ones who have come here to post constructive posts. Some of you read what I wrote and didn't go off on tangents and personal attacks.

 

 

To the others ... apparently you have somebody's ear or maybe you took the suggestion of sending them cookies.

 

How can a post like this remain in this discussion:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your note and your admitted self-imposed limitations (i.e., the fact that you state that you will only place geocaches in your own (admittedly small) town and nowhere else) I never once said this. I said there are some places where I would like to bring people to see in my small town. I have geocaches placed in the county as well. You and others keep harping on this point., and based upon the sheer number of complaints which you have cited, this all suggests to me that you may have a bit of a sense of entitlement and have a concomitant habit of always harping on the negative instead of appreciating the things you do like. I hate to get all "spiritual" land metaphysical on you, but you did ask for my opinion, so here goes: it has been my personal observation in life that when someone has as many complaints as do you, and sounds as helpless and victimized as do you, and sounds as unhappy as do you, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major attitude problem, namely, a sense of entitlement along with a lack of gratitude and appreciation, and also inability to let go of things and move on with grace and ease.

 

While ones defending me like this are deleted:

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your overall reply, this all suggests to us that you don't hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on this guy, but in fact relish it. I has been our personal observation in life that when someone makes these sorts of personal attacks, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major problem of undisclosed origin.

 

But thanks anyway for the pseudo-clinical and unwarranted analysis of his character.

 

I am a big boy and can take the personal attacks; I've been getting them my entire life. These have been stepped up now that people have the ability to cower behind a computer screen. I do take issue with the elitism the top poster displayed that went unchecked and the deletion of the second post that defended me. They used identical words and tone and only one gets a slap on the hand.

 

The post you are referring to is still there. "http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...t&p=3483687" The copy of the post was removed because the poster insulted someone. The support post you are talking about is still there.

 

FYI did you contact appeals@geocaching.com? Did they give you any recommendations and did you follow them?

 

Michael, respectfully, what Meecer is saying is that a poster made a personal attack on his character (the first post he quotes). The link you provide leads to that post (the attack). Then another poster(the second post he quotes) attacks the attacker for flaming. That is the support post that is gone. Or have I got it wrong?

[+briansnat]

On the 4th one I guess I should have posted a picture showing the very steep hill, trees, and creek separating the cache area from the railroad.

 

That is key. Any time you are submitting a cache that might appear to the reviewer to violate the guidelines, provide as much information as possible with your submission. Once you create your page click on the map and nearest cache links and you'll see what the reviewer sees.

 

If the RR tracks were converted to a trail, mention that. If the area shows to be a naval base on the map, mention that the base was decommissioned and sold to the town and turned into a park. If it is on obvious private property make sure you mention that you have permission from the owner. If you have caches 200 feet apart, but one is at the top of a 100 foot cliff and the other is at the bottom be sure to note that. If its 300 miles from your home mention that it's near your parents house, and you visit every month.

 

Including photos, news articles, websites or anything else you can to back up your argument. The more info you can provide ahead of time the better.

 

Do this and you will eliminate most delays in publishing. Reviewers are geocachers too. They want to publish your cache. It's not like they look at a listing and try to figure out ways to decline it. Make it easy on them and

your cache will be published 99 percent of the time without delay.

Edited May 24, 2008 by briansnat

[+blb9556]

Let me first say I realize the reviewers for our caches are volunteers. They do a great job and have been very timely with their work. They have also been very polite when they have not allowed my geocaches. However, I am finding that every geocache I try to place gets flagged even though I leave detail in the reviewer's notes. Is this common practice?

 

 

Some examples:

 

 

1) I couldn't get my Up in a Holler 1 cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bc-5db5d2007406 unarchived, even though I was the original owner, so I had to make a second one right on the spot of the old one. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...b5-4021b38ebe23 I hated that the old 'finds' won't be connected to these newer ones, even though it is the same geocache.

 

 

2) Our town here is very small and with the distance restraints it doesn't allow for many caches to be placed here. I placed two micros in one day. I had to archive http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...22-c4b64437cfbc in order to keep my other one: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...75-f19790e822c2 I have been to other cache areas that have 3 caches right on top of each other.

 

 

3) I had to try a couple of times to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...63-241bd861eb18 I originally stated it was next to a creek not on private property.

 

 

4) And the past couple of days I have been trying to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...05-4c3d807d33e7 It is on public land that my donations paid for. I was actually the vice president and president for the associational youth rallies that developed this land. Because there is an old railway up on a hill past a creek, I can't place a geocache on this land.

 

 

I try to place geocaches that I would personally like to find. I want to bring people to areas they would have never seen otherwise. But if it continues to be this difficult to get them placed I'll eventually lose interest.

 

 

What have your experiences been like? Is this normal?

 

Ahhhh!!! Here comes another topic like the argument between Keystone and I. For #1 I wanted a cache unarchived but now I have to make a new listing. I sent an email and got no reply!

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Ahhhh!!! Here comes another topic like the argument between Keystone and I. For #1 I wanted a cache unarchived but now I have to make a new listing. I sent an email and got no reply!

If he told you to make a new listing then you got your reply!

[+Team Tigger International]

Let me first say I realize the reviewers for our caches are volunteers. They do a great job and have been very timely with their work. They have also been very polite when they have not allowed my geocaches. However, I am finding that every geocache I try to place gets flagged even though I leave detail in the reviewer's notes. Is this common practice?

 

Some examples:

 

1) I couldn't get my Up in a Holler 1 cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bc-5db5d2007406 unarchived, even though I was the original owner, so I had to make a second one right on the spot of the old one. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...b5-4021b38ebe23 I hated that the old 'finds' won't be connected to these newer ones, even though it is the same geocache.

 

2) Our town here is very small and with the distance restraints it doesn't allow for many caches to be placed here. I placed two micros in one day. I had to archive http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...22-c4b64437cfbc in order to keep my other one: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...75-f19790e822c2 I have been to other cache areas that have 3 caches right on top of each other.

 

3) I had to try a couple of times to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...63-241bd861eb18 I originally stated it was next to a creek not on private property.

 

4) And the past couple of days I have been trying to get this one listed: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...05-4c3d807d33e7 It is on public land that my donations paid for. I was actually the vice president and president for the associational youth rallies that developed this land. Because there is an old railway up on a hill past a creek, I can't place a geocache on this land.

 

I try to place geocaches that I would personally like to find. I want to bring people to areas they would have never seen otherwise. But if it continues to be this difficult to get them placed I'll eventually lose interest.

 

What have your experiences been like? Is this normal?

Ahem... I am offering my opinion and experience here only because you have asked for it, but I am warning you that you will not like what I have to say! Here goes:

 

First, you should be aware, if you are not already, that the vast majority of the links which you have provided for cache listing pages are useless to us, because the caches have not yet been published, and thus cannot be viewed.

 

Next, in several cases, you fail entirely to tell us the exact reasons cited by the reviewer(s) in refusing to publish your placements, and instead you usually simply offer vague and unsettling statements along the lines that you tried to get the cache in question listed, and that the reviewer nixed it. You have failed entirely to tell us what issues were raised and how you addressed them or if you even tried to address them.

 

Moving on, to ask your question about my experiences, no, although Sue and I have successfully placed about 35 caches, many of them extreme terrain caches or insanely difficult high-terrain caches, and in fact, despite the fact that I have placed such extreme caches in four states (two on the east coast, and two in the upper Rockies), the summary fact is that we have successfully placed (and seen published) 35 caches in five states across the USA, with our cache placements reviewed by a total of eight different reviewers across the country, and have never had one submitted cache listing refused by any of the eight reviewers; I should qualify that statement by iterating that for a very few of the really extreme caches, I needed to tweak the listing page or the rules for prospective finders before the reviewer would publish the cache, and in one case, I needed to prove to the reviewer that a railroad line shown on his/her map as intersecting the cache site was in fact an abandoned and obsolete railway that had long ago been removed and paved over, but that was all accomplished easily and in quick order.

 

Overall, judging from the overall tone of your note and your admitted self-imposed limitations (i.e., the fact that you state that you will only place geocaches in your own (admittedly small) town and nowhere else), and based upon the sheer number of complaints which you have cited, this all suggests to me that you may have a bit of a sense of entitlement and have a concomitant habit of always harping on the negative instead of appreciating the things you do like. I hate to get all "spiritual" and metaphysical on you, but you did ask for my opinion, so here goes: it has been my personal observation in life that when someone has as many complaints as do you, and sounds as helpless and victimized as do you, and sounds as unhappy as do you, there is usually a lot more to the story, and there is usually a rather major attitude problem, namely, a sense of entitlement along with a lack of gratitude and appreciation, and also inability to let go of things and move on with grace and ease.

 

How ever do you get approval for caches in 5 states and moreover how do you prove they are not vacation caches ? You must have some kind of special pull or something .

 

Star

[Keystone]

How ever do you get approval for caches in 5 states and moreover how do you prove they are not vacation caches ? You must have some kind of special pull or something .

 

Star

Have you ever looked at a map of the eastern U.S.? I recommend that you look at Western Maryland's position. Vinny is capable of maintaining a cache in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania just by taking a drive.

 

As for his caches in Idaho and Wyoming, these were submitted with detailed maintenance plans. There is no "rule against vacation caches" -- just a guideline about placing caches that the hider cannot maintain. I list caches weekly for people who say "I visit my parents here regularly and they will watch the cache between my visits." Vinny's cases are a bit more... extreme, so the maintenance plans are likewise more verbose. I cannot think of any geocacher who gives MORE detail to the reviewers than Vinny.

 

That is how you get caches listed. Not by having "special pull."

[+Too Tall John]

That is how you get caches listed. Not by having "special pull."

Actually, from what you are saying, anyone can have the same "special pull."

 

... By providing their reviewer with as much info as possible about the cache when they submit it for review.

 

To answer the broader question: We have a new reviewer in NH, and I've been very happy with his work. The first cache I submitted after he began, I got an email within 30 mins apologizing that he was going to hold publication until the next morning so nobody got themselves killed going after FTF at midnight. I'd have been happy if the cache was published any time within the next week & told him so. My latest cache, he needed to clarify a detail with other reviewers before publishing it. Again, he promptly emailed me, saying it might take a couple days to get a response. I don't think it took an hour before the cache was published, and he shared some very positive feedback about the cache from the other reviewers.

 

So, bravo and thanks to NH Zamboni, and to the reviewers who responded in a matter of minutes rather than days!

[Neos2]

I cannot think of any geocacher who gives MORE detail to the reviewers than Vinny.

Just going by his forum posts, I can't either.

[+Quiggle]

I cannot think of any geocacher who gives MORE detail to the reviewers than Vinny.

Just going by his forum posts, I can't either.

Being the lucky reviewer for Vinny's home state, I'm still downloading his last set of reviewer notes for a cache he placed over 2 weeks ago! I can't do anything while they load!

[+mtn-man]

I cannot think of any geocacher who gives MORE detail to the reviewers than Vinny.

Just going by his forum posts, I can't either.

Being the lucky reviewer for Vinny's home state, I'm still downloading his last set of reviewer notes for a cache he placed over 2 weeks ago! I can't do anything while they load!

Today I consider myself...

 

the luckiest man...

 

on the face of the earth.

 

(mtn-man, Former Maryland Reviewer)

[+Renegade Knight]

...How ever do you get approval for caches in 5 states...

 

Back East you can't swing a cat wthout hitting 6 states. Just tossing a cache out the window for a park and grab can involve 3 states.