Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 13
Wooden Cyclist

Rogue Reviewer?

Recommended Posts

Jiendo was pulled out 2 am saturday 11/7/09

That's a shame, because according to this thread and the cache logs there were dozens who would have rallied behind you to point out the errors in the way that this situation was handled. All they needed was a chance to see your masterpiece in place and take some pics, and maybe even sign the log! :lol:

 

Now all we have is he said she said.

 

There are already dozens who have seen it - they just didnt know they were looking at it.

 

I have noticed in the last few years a new breed of cacher, one who looks lightly and cries heavily.

They expect to find a cache within a few minutes of ariving to a cache location and then without even letting the gps settle down they are off to get on their computer and send out the complaints (never to the cache owner but to the reviewer who approved the cache)

 

I myself have looked for hours for certain caches while these same cachers come- look for a few minutes- get bored- and leave, while I remain until I can make the find, then these same cachers will immediately send me an email with the questions, what was it, where was it, how big was it, what color was it, how did you find it, do you think you can help me if I cant find it.

These are the same people who always make a huge deal about "how easy it was" when they do find a cache (usualy with a bunch of help) also do the most complaining when they cant find the cache.

 

I think this sport needs to take a step back into what I call old school caching (where a family goes ouyt to find some caches, enjoy their time together, and if a cache comes up that they cannot find, they simply move on to the next one with a smile on their face because it not always about the find but sometimes its more about the location.

 

I have yet to hear anyone mention the location that I chose for Jiendo ( the cool old railroad bridge now bike path ) only this crazy debate about whether or not they think there was really a cache hidden. I for one would rather go out and find some more caches rather than sit here typing away. 60 degrees and sunny in november in michigan lets go caching!!

 

As far as I am concerned this issue is over for me. Groundspeak has spoken and since this is their game we all need to play by their rules (even if it means we need to swallow our pride and move on) Not everyone is perfect we all make mistakes. Mistakes are made even by the ones in charge.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I would love to see the email that Groundspeak asked to not be made public.

 

It's one thing to read all these posts and another to know that Groundspeak asked to keep information regarding a hot issue private.

 

There IS something we all are being kept from. I would like to know all the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Groundspeak has spoken and since this is their game we all need to play by their rules

It's not Groundspeak's game it's their website (distinction). If the cache exists, publish it on one of the other cache listing sites.

Share this post


Link to post

2. How quickly the CO managed to check on it. This is a high terrain rated cache that the CO says should not be attempted while the river is flooded. However, in the 7 days prior to the CO checking this on Oct 4th there were approximately 2.5 inches of rain in the region, 1 inch of that in the 2 days prior. This seems like it would make the river higher than normal, although maybe not flooded. If this is the case, then the CO got the NM request, happened to be in the area and happened to have any necessaryu equipment to get over this river with him. All in one day? Seems unlikely, although possible.

 

Good points, jhauser42. The cache owner lives around five miles from the cache. October 4th was on a Sunday, so quick maintenance would be possible. As to the height of the river on that date, I have no idea, because I was not in Grand Rapids at the time, but I do know that in the spring it can be six or seven feet higher in many areas than its normal level.

 

Exactly! An inch or two wouldn't have made muc difference to SF, I believe he's quite adventurous and used to adverse conditions....I may be mistaken though!

 

Yes, but an inch or two of rain (4 inches in a week) would not raise the river an inch or two, but substantially more when you consider that all of the feeder streams and runoff would be pouring into it. It would probably raise it quite a bit and cause the current to be faster. That is certainly what happens here to rivers, streams, etc. that are only a couple of inches deep.

 

Again, as I do not KNOW what the conditions were or how the CO accesses this point I do not have any way to make a decision as to what happened. It just strikes me wrong that such a high terrain cache could be checked on that quickly. Is it possible? Of course. However, I do not find it likely.

 

Since I placed the cache and know where it is I can do the five minute drive over to the location and without even getting wet, see the cache from the bank of the river. Since emails come into my iPhone with a tone alerting me to new emails I had the info on the temporary hold only seconds after recieving the email.

 

Also the communications that I posted were the only ones that took place. Soon after posting them I did recieve one other email (which was requested to not be made public) and I am abiding by this request.

 

Believe me-Dont believe me, I dont care any more.

Like me-Dont like me, I dont care any more.

 

The fact is that I will not go through the money or the time to place another cache, since it will be quite some time before I loose this sour taste in my mouth from this incedent. I doubt that if I dont hide any more caches that the community will be effected at all, In a few months they wont even remember who I was.

 

Any other questions???

 

Yes.

 

You just said that you checked the cache placement from a distance. I have no problem with that. If you placed it you probably can see it fairly easily. However, in your maintenance log you said the log was blank and dry. How, from a distance, can you tell if the log is blank or dry?

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I dont understand why the CO doesnt just place a picture of the former cache. When replying to requests for a picture he claims he is done trying to prove the cache was there, yet is still defending it.

 

Another question I have is the CO says it took him more than a year and a half to make this cache. The cache was placed in October of 2007. The CO joined in April of 2007. So he would have been working on this cache for more than a year before becoming a geocacher? Why? That is something I also dont understand.

Share this post


Link to post

2. How quickly the CO managed to check on it. This is a high terrain rated cache that the CO says should not be attempted while the river is flooded. However, in the 7 days prior to the CO checking this on Oct 4th there were approximately 2.5 inches of rain in the region, 1 inch of that in the 2 days prior. This seems like it would make the river higher than normal, although maybe not flooded. If this is the case, then the CO got the NM request, happened to be in the area and happened to have any necessaryu equipment to get over this river with him. All in one day? Seems unlikely, although possible.

 

Good points, jhauser42. The cache owner lives around five miles from the cache. October 4th was on a Sunday, so quick maintenance would be possible. As to the height of the river on that date, I have no idea, because I was not in Grand Rapids at the time, but I do know that in the spring it can be six or seven feet higher in many areas than its normal level.

 

Exactly! An inch or two wouldn't have made muc difference to SF, I believe he's quite adventurous and used to adverse conditions....I may be mistaken though!

 

Yes, but an inch or two of rain (4 inches in a week) would not raise the river an inch or two, but substantially more when you consider that all of the feeder streams and runoff would be pouring into it. It would probably raise it quite a bit and cause the current to be faster. That is certainly what happens here to rivers, streams, etc. that are only a couple of inches deep.

 

Again, as I do not KNOW what the conditions were or how the CO accesses this point I do not have any way to make a decision as to what happened. It just strikes me wrong that such a high terrain cache could be checked on that quickly. Is it possible? Of course. However, I do not find it likely.

 

Since I placed the cache and know where it is I can do the five minute drive over to the location and without even getting wet, see the cache from the bank of the river. Since emails come into my iPhone with a tone alerting me to new emails I had the info on the temporary hold only seconds after recieving the email.

 

Also the communications that I posted were the only ones that took place. Soon after posting them I did recieve one other email (which was requested to not be made public) and I am abiding by this request.

 

Believe me-Dont believe me, I dont care any more.

Like me-Dont like me, I dont care any more.

 

The fact is that I will not go through the money or the time to place another cache, since it will be quite some time before I loose this sour taste in my mouth from this incedent. I doubt that if I dont hide any more caches that the community will be effected at all, In a few months they wont even remember who I was.

 

Any other questions???

 

Yes.

 

You just said that you checked the cache placement from a distance. I have no problem with that. If you placed it you probably can see it fairly easily. However, in your maintenance log you said the log was blank and dry. How, from a distance, can you tell if the log is blank or dry?

 

I didnt say that is what I did that day I simply said that is what I can do to check and see if the cache is still there. Climbing over the rail and reaching down to retrieve the cache is a simple job to check the logbook.

Share this post


Link to post

Holy crap!!

 

I don't think that you are supposed to say that. You know, the 'c' part.

Share this post


Link to post

Another question I have is the CO says it took him more than a year and a half to make this cache. The cache was placed in October of 2007. The CO joined in April of 2007. So he would have been working on this cache for more than a year before becoming a geocacher? Why? That is something I also dont understand.

 

It was briefly mentioned earlier in the thread that Superfly previously cached under a different name, TEAM DESERT EAGLE. (Member Since: Thursday, November 25, 2004)

 

edit: to add join date

Edited by allenite

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I dont understand why the CO doesnt just place a picture of the former cache. When replying to requests for a picture he claims he is done trying to prove the cache was there, yet is still defending it.

 

Another question I have is the CO says it took him more than a year and a half to make this cache. The cache was placed in October of 2007. The CO joined in April of 2007. So he would have been working on this cache for more than a year before becoming a geocacher? Why? That is something I also dont understand.

 

I will tell you why.

When I started caching I was TEAM DESERT EAGLE once I got married I changed my caching name to Super Fly and abandoned the 3000 plus finds to start all over with my new wife. I had scoped this spot out for quite a while before ever knowing I would change my profile name.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I dont understand why the CO doesnt just place a picture of the former cache. When replying to requests for a picture he claims he is done trying to prove the cache was there, yet is still defending it.

 

Another question I have is the CO says it took him more than a year and a half to make this cache. The cache was placed in October of 2007. The CO joined in April of 2007. So he would have been working on this cache for more than a year before becoming a geocacher? Why? That is something I also dont understand.

 

I am not defending anything just answereing questions.

Share this post


Link to post
once I got married I changed my caching name to Super Fly and abandoned the 3000 plus finds to start all over with my new wife.

Now that's love :)

Share this post


Link to post
once I got married I changed my caching name to Super Fly and abandoned the 3000 plus finds to start all over with my new wife.

Now that's love :)

 

Good point, On that note I am now reversing my decision to cache as Super Fly I will no longer use the Super Fly profile but I will simply be using TEAM DESERT EAGLE from now on due to some personal reasons.

 

Man it feels good to be back as TEAM DESERT EAGLE

Share this post


Link to post

Holy crap!!

 

I don't think that you are supposed to say that. You know, the 'c' part.

holy_carp.jpg Edited by knowschad

Share this post


Link to post
...I have yet to hear anyone mention the location that I chose for Jiendo ( the cool old railroad bridge now bike path ) only this crazy debate about whether or not they think there was really a cache hidden. I for one would rather go out and find some more caches rather than sit here typing away. ...
It's all well and good that the area was a nice place for a cache. However, if there was no cache placed it's still completely unacceptable.
You just said that you checked the cache placement from a distance. I have no problem with that. If you placed it you probably can see it fairly easily. However, in your maintenance log you said the log was blank and dry. How, from a distance, can you tell if the log is blank or dry?
Oops.

Share this post


Link to post
d831d177-7c9b-4c55-b5c0-0ea1410fd723.jpg

 

This one is probably photoshopped, it cant be real.

True. Nobody can really be that short.

Share this post


Link to post
...I have yet to hear anyone mention the location that I chose for Jiendo ( the cool old railroad bridge now bike path ) only this crazy debate about whether or not they think there was really a cache hidden. I for one would rather go out and find some more caches rather than sit here typing away. ...
It's all well and good that the area was a nice place for a cache. However, if there was no cache placed it's still completely unacceptable.
You just said that you checked the cache placement from a distance. I have no problem with that. If you placed it you probably can see it fairly easily. However, in your maintenance log you said the log was blank and dry. How, from a distance, can you tell if the log is blank or dry?
Oops.

 

Can you PROVE there was no cache? Then maybe you'd best remember the guidelines and stop calling the poster a liar? Bad enough TPTB already have, you have NO say since you know less than they did.

 

I also know less, but I'm not the one calling people out in public. That's not right and you should follow guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
d831d177-7c9b-4c55-b5c0-0ea1410fd723.jpg

 

This one is probably photoshopped, it cant be real.

True. Nobody can really be that short.

 

Hey, is that giant flyswatter TB still in there??

Share this post


Link to post
Obviously, your "fun" of listing a cache that is not really there at all is not the way the game of geocaching is supposed to go. Any further antics of this sort from you - under ANY username - will result in a long term loss of site privileges.

 

You can parse it anyway you want, but if I got a note from TPTB such as this one, everyone of my caches would be pulled, and none would ever be put out again. :)

 

The reviewer calls him a liar and a cheat, there is no other way to read this. Now the reviewer owes us an explanation of why he called him a liar and a cheat. I don't care about the "private company and can do what they want" argument. If they called someone a liar and a cheat, they should be expected to back it up or apologize. :angry::angry:

 

One thing is for sure someone is a liar, and it is either the CO or the Reviewer.

 

The reviewer called him a liar and a cheat, but the reviewer did it in a private email addressed to him. The reviewer may owe the CO an explanation of why he called him a liar and a cheat. But he certainly doesn't owe us such an explanation, since he never told us that the CO is a liar and a cheat.

 

If the CO is a liar and a cheat, the no explanation is needed. If the CO is not a liar and a cheat, then no explanation is going to help.

 

And personally, I think it would be inappropriate for the reviewer, or Groundspeak, to present their evidence in this forum. I guess if they do, the CO brought it on himself. But still, no matter how sure they are of their evidence, there's always a chance that they are mistaken. And to present such evidence in a public forum would create potential legal liability. I wouldn't do it if I owned the company.

 

Edited to add: Contrary to your final sentence, it is far from sure that either the CO or the Reviewer is a liar. It's entirely possible that both are telling the truth AS IT APPEARS TO THEM. Just because someone is wrong, that doesn't make him a liar.

Edited by GeoGeeBee

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

Share this post


Link to post

Sure glad the Forum performance problems were fixed before this one his the fan.

Share this post


Link to post
d831d177-7c9b-4c55-b5c0-0ea1410fd723.jpg

 

This one is probably photoshopped, it cant be real.

True. Nobody can really be that short.

 

Hey, is that giant flyswatter TB still in there??

 

No I dropped that off at an event a long time ago, but that was a cool TB

Share this post


Link to post
once I got married I changed my caching name to Super Fly and abandoned the 3000 plus finds to start all over with my new wife.

Now that's love :)

 

Good point, On that note I am now reversing my decision to cache as Super Fly I will no longer use the Super Fly profile but I will simply be using TEAM DESERT EAGLE from now on due to some personal reasons.

 

Man it feels good to be back as TEAM DESERT EAGLE

 

Was the name change also during the brief time period (about a year or so) where they wouldn't let you change usernames at all and you were forced to create a new username?

Share this post


Link to post
once I got married I changed my caching name to Super Fly and abandoned the 3000 plus finds to start all over with my new wife.

Now that's love :)

 

Good point, On that note I am now reversing my decision to cache as Super Fly I will no longer use the Super Fly profile but I will simply be using TEAM DESERT EAGLE from now on due to some personal reasons.

 

Man it feels good to be back as TEAM DESERT EAGLE

 

Was the name change also during the brief time period (about a year or so) where they wouldn't let you change usernames at all and you were forced to create a new username?

 

I am not sure, I started all over so that my new wife and I could experiance all these cool cache locations together.

Share this post


Link to post

It may be archived, but it is still out there. Nothing says the search doesn't continue.

 

We had one of these recently, where if a cache goes unfound for 5 minutes after publishing it is an enigma. So after a spate of DNFs we grouped up for a group hike. It still took the group an hour to find. We had a great time of it.

 

Form a group and go and find it. Good Luck.

Edited by Packanack

Share this post


Link to post
It may be archived, but it is still out there. Nothing says the search doesn't continue.

Nope. SuperFly says he removed it. And I for one am not prepared to call anyone a liar without evidence, SF or GS.

Share this post


Link to post

One thing that has struck me is how in heck would you get the stonework of a bridge like that clean enough for "poster putty" to adhere to?

 

This is a serious question by the way.

Share this post


Link to post

This one is probably photoshopped, it cant be real.

 

Now that is my kind of cache. One that even I might have been able to find.

 

And personally, I think it would be inappropriate for the reviewer, or Groundspeak, to present their evidence in this forum.

 

How about just an explanation of the policy that they use when they archive a cache after the owner reports that it is in place -- whether they bring their specific questions and concerns to the CO -- and whether that policy was followed.

 

Again, Nomex is a conscientious reviewer, Miss Jenn is probably a great person. The CO seems credible to me. So I don't think either side has anything to prove one way or the other. I am more than willing to attribute it to a communications breakdown and go on from there.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I mean I am not trying to be a smart a**, but according to this, this guy doesn't even exist anymore, infact, placed the cache and bailed. My cousin is just getting into caching and she travels to Africa several times a year, I might add this to her list of "IMPOSSIBILITIES", Nomex, TPTB, wanna verify it exists? I have no contact for the CO, maybe you do.

 

Um... Bolivia is not in Africa, and the cache would therefore remain on her list of "IMPOSSIBILITIES" until she decides to visit South America

 

<ducks and runs>

I know where Bolivia is, my reference was to Bittsen's reference to Ghana, where my cousins company does business, FORGIVE ME please for not being clearer.

Edited by Bergie Bunch

Share this post


Link to post
...I have yet to hear anyone mention the location that I chose for Jiendo ( the cool old railroad bridge now bike path ) only this crazy debate about whether or not they think there was really a cache hidden. I for one would rather go out and find some more caches rather than sit here typing away. ...
It's all well and good that the area was a nice place for a cache. However, if there was no cache placed it's still completely unacceptable.
You just said that you checked the cache placement from a distance. I have no problem with that. If you placed it you probably can see it fairly easily. However, in your maintenance log you said the log was blank and dry. How, from a distance, can you tell if the log is blank or dry?
Oops.
Can you PROVE there was no cache? Then maybe you'd best remember the guidelines and stop calling the poster a liar? Bad enough TPTB already have, you have NO say since you know less than they did.

 

I also know less, but I'm not the one calling people out in public. That's not right and you should follow guidelines.

You may wish to reread my post. It did not violate the forum guidelines.
The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

Alternatively, you could simply share a picture of the now archived cache. That would certainly show everyone that the cache was real.

 

BTW, you've been around a while. Do you remember when TPTB stated that obfoscating a word so it made it through the forum's filters was, indeed, a guideline violation?

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

More assumptions?

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

255 caches placed and you find 7 to try and pick apart nice job.

Well lets look at these one at a time.................

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

 

2) GCW3BP

Cache was also stolen ---------- Still dont see a problem

Share this post


Link to post
If Groundspeak feels reason to distrust something it can ask for proof, confidentially.

Apparently, based upon what we've seen so far, Groundspeak did feel a reason to distrust the physical existence of the aforementioned cache. Did they ask for proof? Or did they ask the cache owner to check his hide? Judging by the notes on the cache page, I'd have to vote for the latter. If all TPTB asked for was the owner to check his cache, Super Fly did everything in his power to satisfy the requests of TPTB. Is the archival of his cache a reasonable response in such a scenario?

 

I keep hoping someone from the Lily Pad will tell 'The Rest Of The Story".

 

But the crickets are getting louder... :)

 

One other minor point is that Keystone said that Super Fly had posted "part" of his exchanges with Groundspeak. Not sure how much, if anything, to read into that.

Yup. We don't know if the excluded part of the exchange was relevant, or just fluff.

Perhaps Keystone's post is the "keystone" to this incident.

Or, it could be naught but smoke and mirrors.

Of the two persons involved in the exchange, we've only heard from one.

His position is that he did all he was asked to do.

His position seems to match what was posted to the cache page.

Super Fly's claims may be true, or they may be a load of bunk.

Groundspeak could prove them to be bunk with a few pecks of their keyboard.

They've decided not to do this.

So, we're left to decide for ourselves which side of the story to believe.

I am mighty uncomfortable with the belief that Groundspeak was up to shenanigans.

I'd like to see their name cleared.

 

First, we don't know if any NMs or SBAs were posted to the cache page.

That's true. There could be a zillion NMs and SBAs on there that were deleted by Super Fly.

If I recall correctly, these deleted logs would still show up to a reviewer account.

So, my question to the reviewers is, were there any NMs or SBAs on this cache?

If there were, did the cache owner address each one before deleting them?

If a NM or SBA is addressed by the cache owner, is further action warranted?

If a local cacher posts an SBA on one of my hides because they couldn't find it and assumed it was missing, my response would be to check on it and post a maintenance visit to the cache page to remove the attribute. Personally, I would leave both the SBA and my response on the cache page, as I feel that those would be part of the cache's history, however we've all seen posters in these forums who say they would delete both notes once the cache was fixed. In either case, (logs left/logs deleted), is further action by Groundspeak warranted, or are we back to the 'faith' I spoke of earlier? If further action is taken, should it be taken based upon evidence, or should it be taken based upon presumption? Did Nomex have proof that the cache was bogus? If so, he ain't taking.

 

Second, we don't know that the cache was checked on.

So far we've seen no evidence that he did not.

This is back to the 'faith' part I touched on earlier.

(Note that I did not suggest 'blind' faith)

While it seems that Groundspeak is willing to call him a liar in public, I am not.

At least not without some evidence.

 

Groundspeak has a long history of not discussing these details in the forums.

Groundspeak also has a long history of doing the opposite.

How many times have we all seen a CO ranting and raving in the forums?

How many times have we all seen a reviewer step in and shed light on what was left out by the ranter?

 

According to him, they then archived the cache stating that it didn't exist. In my opinion, this disconnect is evidence that additional communications were made or that additional research was undertaken.

It's certainly possible. Another possibility is that there were no additional communications, and the CO did exactly what was asked of him. So far, that's the only side we've seen. If there is another side, how hard would it be for Nomex to step up and say so? Jenn's investigation could have been incredibly thorough, including flying into town, hiring a crack team of investigators, putting round the clock surveillance on both the cache and the owner. Or, it could've been nothing more than an e-mail exchange between her and the local reviewers who opined that the cache was bogus. We've got no evidence either way. What we do have is statements made by the CO, which have not been disputed or refuted by TPTB.

 

Groundspeak could clear this up.

 

They've decided not to. :angry:

 

Still, if the cache owner's timeline is accurate, it seems to me that the next logical step for the cache owner would be to take a picture of the cache and either send it to the reviewer or post it to this thread. Not doing so makes him look guilty of perpetrating a fraud on the caching community.

I would think that a logical process would involve the local reviewers asking for photographic evidence of the cache's existence. Did they ask? Not according to Super Fly. Not according to the posts on the cache page. The next step in the logic chain would be for Nomex to ask for photographic evidence. Did he ask? Not according to Super Fly. Not according to the posts on the cache page. What Nomex did ask for was a check on the cache. According to the only party in the incident willing to talk, the cache was checked on. Does Groundspeak have any evidence that this was not done? <more crickets>

 

Being called a liar is very serious to me.

If a local reviewer asked me for physical proof regarding the existence of one of my hides, I would provide it. It's not a big deal to me. I've met all of my local reviewers, and I know them to be honorable. If, on the other hand, a reviewer who didn't know me, didn't know my hide styles, and lived half a country away posted a publicly visible note on my cache page calling me a liar, that would infuriate me. I would wash my hands of this listing service altogether, until that reviewer was no longer acting in his capacity. I can assure you I would not still be pleading my case to Groundspeak, nor would I offer any further evidence. Assuming Super Fly is being truthful, (and I hope he's not), Groundspeak made their decision without the need for pesky things like evidence. That's not an audience I am willing to pander too.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

3) GC1NDY9

This one is my wifes cache ------- she was working 70 hours a week and did not have the time to gather coupons and replace the cache. Still not seeing the problem.

Share this post


Link to post

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

A lot of these examples remind me of caches by locals who I like a great deal. I have known a cacher with caches that remain unfound, who also archived some of them before they could be found -- there is absolutely no question that every one of his caches were in place. The puzzle reminds me of one I have seen locally - an aerial view where you can obtain coordinates on google earth and use your gpsr from there, albeit one with a more expansive view.

 

A lot of other COs tend to complain when caches turn up missing. Some believe other cachers have taken them. But I am not sure if I have ever before seen a reviewer edit an archive note and lock the cache. Although I am not prepared to make a psych diagnosis, even if all of of what you say is correct and local reviewers wanted to pass the matter on to an outsider, it does not indicate one way or the other if the cache was there. Its irrelevant. In all the examples given, I assume the cache was there.

 

Nor does it answer how Groundspeak was able to make a determination without bringing their specific concerns and questions to the CO (assuming that is what happened). That is the only thing of interest to me since it is a matter of the company's policy rather than trying to prove a negative. Which is why I will try to refrain from posting any more logs on this subject.

 

Edited to add to avoid contradicting my last statement: If this thread had devolved into discussions of the COs personality, previously archived caches, and the like, perhaps it is time to close it and move on. I did not know that being an easy going person was a requirement for placing a cache. How much more can be said unless Groundspeak is willing to step in and clarify their policy or practices?

Edited by Erickson

Share this post


Link to post

 

2) GCW3BP

Cache was also stolen ---------- Still dont see a problem

 

From the archive note-

 

"Now that my good friend tree toad seems to have a problem with me this one is now missing.

I had heard a rumor from one of his now close friends that he might start to steal my caches and now this one has come up missing.

Oh well I guess thats what happens when someone holds a useless grudge for a very petty reason.

Tree Toad strikes again.

Cache gone."

 

Oh yeah proof positive right there. I heard a rumor too, that you did't hide that cache that started this mess. Must be true if I heard it right?

 

You make assumptions as large as the one made against you.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

4) GC1N26K

This seems like you might have a problem with the reviewer???

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

5) GC1GG8V

The reason for the archiving was what was edited out!!!

Share this post


Link to post

4) GC1N26K

This seems like you might have a problem with the reviewer???

Seems you have a problem with the guideline that requires a gps to be used to find ANY cache. Since that is the reason you archived it.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

6) GC10A7D

My wife was accused of cheating on FTF when clearly her note said that she did not care to go down the trail even after the cache was published.

Share this post


Link to post
The reviewer called him a liar and a cheat, but the reviewer did it in a private email addressed to him.

Not quite. The reviewer called him a liar right on his cache page, for all the world to see.

Share this post


Link to post

5) GC1GG8V

The reason for the archiving was what was edited out!!!

Because everyone is out to get you and remove your perfectly logical, eloquent, level-headed remarks that you made when you archived it.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that I have taken great pride in crafting some of my caches (the ammo box took almost six months to build) and for those of you who have an opinion doubting whether or not I placed a cache I say since you dont know me.................

 

Opinions are like a** holes everyone has one.

And some of your caches are like the one that started this thread; most/some end in controversy...

 

Blamed someone for stealing this one.

 

Another blame game

 

Reviewer posted a note after cache was disabled for 6 months but he archived because he felt "pressure" to replace within two weeks.

 

How did this one get published, no GPS is supposed to be used?

 

Found twice in 3 days, then archived for no explained reason and the Reviewer edited the archive note.

 

...and/or a couple without any finds.

 

The Ball Box

 

Blamed finder for trashing area with no basis. No finds.

 

For those of you that say I can't judge from across the country, OF COURSE I CAN. I can read! I bet it's WORSE than any of us thinks.

 

He seems like an aggressive personality type that is quick to blame and take no blame upon himself.

 

Why is it that the reviewer needs to edit some of his archive notes? Is it because the hand picked experienced reviewer just has a bone to pick with ONE cacher in his area of responsibility? Or that he is rude and crude?

 

No wonder they wanted a third party to intervene, they are tired of dealing with you.

 

7) GC1B48B

City contacted me and told me to remove the cache after seeing pictures and video supplied by the neighbors of cachers destroying the cache location.

 

You might want to rethink trying to accuse me of wrong doing!!

Share this post


Link to post
Seems you have a problem with the guideline that requires a gps to be used to find ANY cache.

I wasn't aware of that guideline. Got a link?

I know there's something in the guidelines worded to the effect of, "A GRPr must be used to obtain the coordinates for any hide, but I didn't know Groundspeak requires that we use a GPSr to find the things. I know there will be many folks in here that would be sorely disappointed by such a guideline, as they take great personal pride in finding caches without modern, high tech gadgets.

Share this post


Link to post

 

6) GC10A7D

My wife was accused of cheating on FTF when clearly her note said that she did not care to go down the trail even after the cache was published.

Are you sure you want to stick to that reason as to why you archived it?

 

Because you wrote this, says nothing about FTF cheats.

 

From archive note-

"You all are sick and twisted who post discusting notes about this cache in the forums--For a family sport where are your minds---sick---sick---sick you are. When I wrote this cache page I never thought about the words as everyone else did. Once it was brought to my attention I have decided to end all of my caches and just stop caching all together."

Share this post


Link to post

5) GC1GG8V

The reason for the archiving was what was edited out!!!

Because everyone is out to get you and remove your perfectly logical, eloquent, level-headed remarks that you made when you archived it.

 

Have you got proof of something or do you get a kick out of trying to accuse someone with no knowledge of reality. Seems YOU'RE the aggressive one here.

Share this post


Link to post
Seems you have a problem with the guideline that requires a gps to be used to find ANY cache.
I wasn't aware of that guideline. Got a link?

I know there's something in the guidelines worded to the effect of, "A GRPr must be used to obtain the coordinates for any hide, but I didn't know Groundspeak requires that we use a GPSr to find the things. I know there will be many folks in here that would be sorely disappointed by such a guideline, as they take great personal pride in finding caches without modern, high tech gadgets.

The paragraph in question is:

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS. GPS usage is an essential element of geocaching. Therefore, although it is possible to find a cache without a GPS, the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions.

That last sentence means that there must be at least one stage of the hunt in which, if the seeker wishes, they can use their GPSr.

 

For example, a Traditional cache always allows this, because even if the listing says "the cache is on the statue in the middle of the square", you could choose to just follow the arrow.

 

For a Mystery cache, you can't just say "park near the above coordinates, walk along the path to the east, and the cache is behind the fifth tree on the right", because you're not using the accuracy of the GPS. It's OK for the placer to give that information as well as a GPS-based way to find the cache, but there has to be the option at least. In other words, your cache description can't be a pure letterbox hunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 13

×
×
  • Create New...