+jwe4i Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 Don't you hate it when you place a cache near a school but on public land and it gets rejected because it is to close to a school, then while out caching today i go to search for a cache on a different schools grounds!!!!! Whats gives???? Guess this might be a thread for the fml website! Quote Link to comment
+moop Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 It all comes down to this paragraph near the top of Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines (which you agree to have read when submitting a cache). First and foremost please be advised there is no precedent for placing caches. This means that the past listing of a similar cache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the listing of a new cache. If a cache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the cache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated the cache is likely to be "grandfathered" and allowed to stand as is. Yes, it can be a little frustrating but dem's da rules. Quote Link to comment
+Touchstone Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 Whats gives???? I think moop hit the nail on the head, although I'll add there's probably an example out there for just about every Guideline violation possible. Shoot, there used to be caches in National Parks.....boy, were those the days Quote Link to comment
+jwe4i Posted December 28, 2009 Author Share Posted December 28, 2009 thanks for the clarity...its just frustrating...such is life! Quote Link to comment
+jwe4i Posted December 28, 2009 Author Share Posted December 28, 2009 thanks for the clarity...its just frustrating... Quote Link to comment
+WRASTRO Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 thanks for the clarity...its just frustrating... If you place a cache that is within the guidelines it will be published. If you have one that may cause questions from the reviewer you should be prepared to answer the questions so the cache can be published. Better yet you should anticipate the reviewer questions and answer them with notes to the reviewer bwfore the questions are asked. Quote Link to comment
+Team Idasam Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 (edited) It all comes down to this paragraph near the top of Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines (which you agree to have read when submitting a cache). First and foremost please be advised there is no precedent for placing caches. This means that the past listing of a similar cache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the listing of a new cache. If a cache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the cache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated the cache is likely to be "grandfathered" and allowed to stand as is. Yes, it can be a little frustrating but dem's da rules. Nah, it's all about who you know, or in the case of some cachers, who knows you and who likes you. I can't begin to tell you how many times that I've seen "certain" cachers in my area have their caches published when it's blatantly obvious that the cache in question is in violation of "the rules", while other cachers have been told nope, and that they need to move their cache somewhere else. I quit caching for a year because of crap like this. Cache publication can carry some politics. If Groundspeak was directly involved in publishing every cache, which would be nearly impossible, I believe that there would be a lot more consistency when enforcing the rules. But as most of you already know, the reviewers are volunteers, so there is naturally going to be some inconsistency. The reviewers are also cachers and a lot of them are naturally going to be friends with other cachers, so this results in bias in some cases. I've seen it, but I can't prove it. This is just the way it is. The only advice that I can give is to be nice to the reviewers, even if you don't want to. I've heard that it's a tough job. There's just no way for Groundspeak to employ all those people. Edited December 29, 2009 by Team Idasam Quote Link to comment
+DENelson83 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 If Groundspeak was directly involved in publishing every cache, which would be nearly impossible, I believe that there would be a lot more consistency when enforcing the rules. But as most of you already know, the reviewers are volunteers, so there is naturally going to be some inconsistency. Then the reviewers need a layer of coordination themselves. They should be communicating with one another. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.