Jump to content

Clarifying Proximity Guidelines


niraD

Recommended Posts

Many geocachers violate the proximity guidelines when hiding their first caches. Those who actually read the guidelines, but misunderstand them, can become particularly frustrated by the experience.

 

The guidelines need to balance brevity with completeness. If they are too long, then no one will read them. But there are a few points that I think could--and should--be clarified, without making the guidelines much longer. These are common points of misunderstanding that I've seen in recent forum discussions like these:

http://thegba.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4439

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=220549

  • The reviewers do hold to the 528ft/161m distance. Don't assume that it is "just a guideline" and that you'll be granted an exception.
  • Potential cache locations can conflict with existing locations that are "invisible". The physical stages of multi-caches and mystery/puzzle caches are not listed publicly, but your cache can still conflict with them.
  • To understand what the proximity guideline does and does not apply to, it helps to understand the information in this knowledgebase article: http://support.Groundspeak.com/Support/ind...kbarticleid=325
  • Reviewers can can check the availability of a location before a geocacher invests significant effort/expense in crafting a
    custom hide that is specific to a given location.

Many experienced geocachers are familiar with these points, but they aren't always obvious to new geocachers who read the guidelines without knowing the backstory.

Edited by niraD
Link to comment

Not really. After all, f the guidlines get cleared up, then people will have to find something new to complain about :) I've only placed one cache so far, but I read the guidlines first, and it was active about 24 hours after I submitted it, had no issues at all. And I think the main reason for that was that I *gasp!* read and understood the guidelines BEFORE submitting the cache! I think it comes down to too many new players are so anxcious to hide thier first cache that they either get ahead of themselves and submit it before really looking at the guidlines, or they might just think that their hide is special enough that the reviewer should give them a "pass" on the distance to another cache. Hopefully, if they have issues with their first hide, but get them cleared up and have an active cache, then they will remember those lessons and the next cache should be a breeze. Kind of a "learning on the job" kind of thing. Heck, i have a friend who got me into this thing, and he gave me some hints and pointers, which is probably a part of the reason my first hide went to swimmingly (pun intended... if you don't get it, check my hides :) ). Anyways, off to get hide number 2 going! I have the container ready to go, just need to find the perfect spot... out in the middle of nowhere... this could take a while.

Link to comment

<And I think the main reason for that was that I *gasp!* read and understood the guidelines BEFORE submitting the cache! >

 

Maybe you were lucky and didn't place it near an Invisible Cache (Part of a Multi-Cache)....that you have no way of knowing it was there...unless you ask the reviewer if your cache placement is ok before hand.

Link to comment

<And I think the main reason for that was that I *gasp!* read and understood the guidelines BEFORE submitting the cache! >

 

Maybe you were lucky and didn't place it near an Invisible Cache (Part of a Multi-Cache)....that you have no way of knowing it was there...unless you ask the reviewer if your cache placement is ok before hand.

 

Oh, that should not be a problem ... do the multis and mystery caches for a mile or so around you placement location. I thought everyone did that :) But seriously from comments Keystone has made and others that do that sort of work, the biggest problem is putting caches to close to traditionals that you can easily look up and find. One of niraD points was that newbies assume since it says "guideline" that 478 feet will work. I view more as a guideline for the reviewers in that if there is a solid reason it can be closer it can be, but otherwise it is 528 feet.

 

Jim

Link to comment

This suggestion doesn't seem very controversial...

 

If we could work in a Oregon/PN-40 slant, forum performance, website performance, TB mileage, GoogleEarth KML, PQ limits, cache ratings, or a deleted log, or a ALR I think we can raise the controversy quotient.

 

Jim

FTFY.

Link to comment

This suggestion doesn't seem very controversial...

 

If we could work in a Oregon/PN-40 slant, or a deleted log, or a ALR I think we can raise the controversy quotient.

 

Jim

 

The Oregon has a bigger screen, but is clearly inferior to the PN-40 in every other way :)

 

True about multis that you wouldn't know about, but unless you do them all, that's just a risk you run. My cache would have been wasted money if there had been one of those around, it's very specialized, but I took my chances since there weren't really any multis around. Basically, the way I see it, it doesn't matter how clear the guidelines are, there are always going to be complaints.

Link to comment

True about multis that you wouldn't know about, but unless you do them all, that's just a risk you run. My cache would have been wasted money if there had been one of those around, it's very specialized, but I took my chances since there weren't really any multis around. Basically, the way I see it, it doesn't matter how clear the guidelines are, there are always going to be complaints.

 

I agree that regardless, there will always be someone that thinks they are a special case.

 

But really, the really simple answer is to shoot your reviewer an email and he/she will let you know if you have a proximity issue. They won't give you the location of the multi/mystery that is causing the problem, but at least you know your clear. Many,most?, reviewers will hold a location if you start a cache page but don't submit it (ah, activate it?) and you let them know that your working on the cache they will hold the spot for you. I've done this a couple times and I must admit they seemed real happy to help out.

 

But Keystone and other reviewers have commented that the biggest issue with proximity is not the multis or mystery caches, it is the plain old traditional that everyone can see the co-ords. I think the issue is 496 feet is okay since it is only a guideline. I think niraD has it right, the emphasis needs to be the 528 foot guideline is more a rigid rule than a flexible guideline.

 

Jim

Link to comment

What seems confusing in the guidelines is that the proximity rules seem to apply to:

  • two physical caches
  • two physical waypoints of different multi- and mystery-caches

but there is no direct reference to:

  • a physical cache and a physical waypoint of another cache

 

I do suppose that they also apply to the third case.

Link to comment

This suggestion doesn't seem very controversial...

I've long since stopped paying attention to proximity guidlines and substitute my own.

 

1) Is it far enough away to prevent confusion for a find? Yes. You are good.

2) Does this spot need a cache? Yes? Place it.

3) Do I want to list it on GC.gom? Yes, is it 528' away from other GC.com caches? Yes? List.

 

If a multi, puzzle, etc. gets in the way? (It hasn't yet) I really would only care in the event of #1.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...