How do reviewers check misterys?

[+DeepButi]

Just discovered a curious Mistery on an area I planned to go:

 

No coordinates anywhere, no puzzle to solve, no data or calculus involved. Nothing. Only a description of the place, a couple of spoiler pictures and a hint (related also to description of place).

 

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.

 

I cannot see this cache as guide compliant.

 

And then I stared thinking ... how can reviewers check this kind of thing, or in fact any Mistery? I assume they don't ask for puzzle solutions (this would prevent themselfs from caching interesting Multies).

 

So, it must be just a matter of trusting submissions without really being able to check they are ok. Hard work for reviewers, really .

[+simpjkee]

Wow thanks for shout out in your sig line

 

Have other people found the cache? Maybe the spoiler pics are part of the puzzle? Maybe the description is part of the puzzle? Maybe the cache page HTML coding is part of the puzzle? Some puzzles aren't straight forward math problems or cipher codes, etc.

 

When a puzzle cache is submitted, the submitter is supposed to add the coordinates to the final cache and any physical stages along the way, on the cache page as a hidden waypoint under the 'additional waypoints' section. I don't think that the reviewers actually have to solve the puzzle or know how the puzzle is solved to publish it. I have not explained how my puzzle caches are solved to the reviewer when I submitted them.

[+SUp3rFM & Cruella]

Think you skipped this part of the Guidelines:

 

At times a cache may meet the listing requirements for the site but the reviewers, as experienced cachers, may see additional concerns that you as a cache placer may not have noticed. As a courtesy, the reviewer may bring additional concerns about cache placement to your attention and offer suggestions before posting. But as the cache owner you are responsible for placement and care of your cache. Note: Exceptions to the listing guidelines may occasionally be made depending on the novel nature and merits of a cache. If you have a cache idea you believe is novel, contact Groundspeak before placing and reporting it on the Geocaching.com web site.

 

The bold text answers your questions, I believe.

 

Hard work? Nah. It's a fun work.

[+DeepButi]

Wow thanks for shout out in your sig line

Ta muchly. I really loved it when I saw it.

 

Have other people found the cache? Maybe the spoiler pics are part of the puzzle? Maybe the description is part of the puzzle? Maybe the cache page HTML coding is part of the puzzle? Some puzzles aren't straight forward math problems or cipher codes, etc.

Yes, two finds since published (couple of months, mountain area).

Yes, I know about strange puzzles, I have done several myself. It's clear both from description AND logs that there is nothing more than going there and looking for the spoiles pictures and description.

I'm waiting e-mail confirmation from CO ... but I will bet there are no coordinates to get.

 

When a puzzle cache is submitted, the submitter is supposed to add the coordinates to the final cache and any physical stages along the way, on the cache page as a hidden waypoint under the 'additional waypoints' section. I don't think that the reviewers actually have to solve the puzzle or know how the puzzle is solved to publish it. I have not explained how my puzzle caches are solved to the reviewer when I submitted them.

Yes, I know that. I submited a couple of Misterys myself.

 

 

SUp3rFM & Cruella,

fun work ... It has to be or I'm sure you would all get crazy!!!

 

Really, you must be special people!

 

___________

 

Will try to find the cache soon!

[+Von-Horst]

Presumably you need to use a GPSr to find the location the description, hint and spoiler pictures refer to.

[+Mom-n-Andy]

I'm betting that the coordinates or information leading to the coordinates are hidden in the pictures, the page source code, or in the description itself. What geocache is it?

[GermanSailor]

Only a description of the place, a couple of spoiler pictures and a hint (related also to description of place).

Have you:

 

- checked the spoiler pics for hidden clues (Exif, Steganography)

- checked that there is no white text somewhere? Sometimes this is used to hide something!

- What is the difficulty rating? Maybe the gag is, that there is no code, it's just plain coordinates.

 

So many possibilities!

 

GermanSailor

[+Harry Dolphin]

- What is the difficulty rating? Maybe the gag is, that there is no code, it's just plain coordinates.

 

Yeah. I even found one of those. Coords for the cache were 6 feet from the puzzle coords...

 

To OP: Some people have accused me of hiding 'where's the puzzle? puzzle caches'. There are lots of interesting ways to hide the puzzles!!

[+keehotee]

Only a description of the place, a couple of spoiler pictures and a hint (related also to description of place).

Have you:

 

- checked the spoiler pics for hidden clues (Exif, Steganography)

- checked that there is no white text somewhere? Sometimes this is used to hide something!

- What is the difficulty rating? Maybe the gag is, that there is no code, it's just plain coordinates.

 

So many possibilities!

 

GermanSailor

 

Although I know of several caches that have used it, the last I heard steganography was not permitted as it required the downloading and installing of third party software to get at the data. I had a cache knocked back for precisely that reason. Can anybody confirm whether this is still the case?

[+WatchDog2020]

My reviewer requires you tell them how to solve the puzzle etc.

[+Mom-n-Andy]

Only a description of the place, a couple of spoiler pictures and a hint (related also to description of place).

Have you:

 

- checked the spoiler pics for hidden clues (Exif, Steganography)

- checked that there is no white text somewhere? Sometimes this is used to hide something!

- What is the difficulty rating? Maybe the gag is, that there is no code, it's just plain coordinates.

 

So many possibilities!

 

GermanSailor

 

Although I know of several caches that have used it, the last I heard steganography was not permitted as it required the downloading and installing of third party software to get at the data. I had a cache knocked back for precisely that reason. Can anybody confirm whether this is still the case?

 

Steganography just means hidden writing. There are many ways to do this that do not involve software other than what comes on your Mac or PC. For example: Hidden text

Edited April 9, 2010 by Mom-n-Andy

[+DeepButi]

... thanks to all. Yes, I know there are lots of ways to hidden coordinates, white text, inside the pictures, etc etc I have found several of them.

 

I e-mailed CO asking to confirm there are/are not coordinates somewhere/somehow. Not asking any kind of clue, simply want to confirm there are coordinates. I'm waiting for an answer (and maybe I lose my bet ).

 

Mom-n-Andy, I'm not asking for clues to solve the puzle. I didn't post the GC number because it's in Catalan and I doubt it's of any help, but if you want to check ... GC22EHW. Let's make it clear: I do not want any help on solving it. That was not my OP intention. I never asked anyone but COs for clues (and only after trying hard!, I love solving hard puzles).

 

I was just curious about how reviewers can deal with Misterys complexities. There are so much unknown info that seems hard to me to be able to identify problems.

 

Thks

[+Mom-n-Andy]

... thanks to all. Yes, I know there are lots of ways to hidden coordinates, white text, inside the pictures, etc etc I have found several of them.

 

I e-mailed CO asking to confirm there are/are not coordinates somewhere/somehow. Not asking any kind of clue, simply want to confirm there are coordinates. I'm waiting for an answer (and maybe I lose my bet ).

 

Mom-n-Andy, I'm not asking for clues to solve the puzle. I didn't post the GC number because it's in Catalan and I doubt it's of any help, but if you want to check ... GC22EHW. Let's make it clear: I do not want any help on solving it. That was not my OP intention. I never asked anyone but COs for clues (and only after trying hard!, I love solving hard puzles).

 

I was just curious about how reviewers can deal with Misterys complexities. There are so much unknown info that seems hard to me to be able to identify problems.

 

Thks

 

Our local reviewer has stated that he/she does not scrutinize the actual puzzle. He/she does require that the actual final coordinates be specified so that they can be checked for compliance with the .1 mile rule. And the content of the cache page is reviewed for compliance with the guidelines.

[+rjb43nh]

Never assume there's no puzzle to solve just because you don't see it. Puzzles can be obvious or just plain evil. For instance, this puzzle cache of mine is simple (that doesn't translate to obvious) and cachers are solving it. Absolutely nothing is hidden as one of the hints states.

 

I get quite a few emails on my puzzle caches and freely give hints after the cacher has described what they have tried to solve the puzzle. Just "give me a hint" doesn't cut it, I like to see that some effort is going into solving the puzzle, even if it is in the wrong direction.

[+briansnat]

And then I stared thinking ... how can reviewers check this kind of thing, or in fact any Mistery? I assume they don't ask for puzzle solutions (this would prevent themselfs from caching interesting Multies).

 

So, it must be just a matter of trusting submissions without really being able to check they are ok. Hard work for reviewers, really

 

When someone submits a mystery cache they are required to supply the actual cache coordinates as an additional waypoint. The reviewers then do their usual checks based on the actual cache location.

[+DeepButi]

When someone submits a mystery cache they are required to supply the actual cache coordinates as an additional waypoint. The reviewers then do their usual checks based on the actual cache location.

Thanks briansnat.

So, no check is done at all on the "puzzle/whatever" part itself. That's what I was guessing can lead to a lot of problems if trying to check.

 

PS. CO e-mailed confirming no coordinates. Just follow description of path and find the place where the spoiler pictures where taken. My bet was correct.

 

Thks

[+NotThePainter]

Although I know of several caches that have used it, the last I heard steganography was not permitted as it required the downloading and installing of third party software to get at the data. I had a cache knocked back for precisely that reason. Can anybody confirm whether this is still the case?

 

Steganography is of course permitted. Just don't use any forms of it that require a download, that's all. :- ) And yes, one of my puzzles does just that. And no, obviously, I can't tell you which one. You just need to use an unusual form of it.

 

Paul

Edited April 9, 2010 by NotThePainter

[+Prime Suspect]

When someone submits a mystery cache they are required to supply the actual cache coordinates as an additional waypoint. The reviewers then do their usual checks based on the actual cache location.

Thanks briansnat.

So, no check is done at all on the "puzzle/whatever" part itself.

He didn't say that. He told you what they did, not what they don't do.

 

PS. CO e-mailed confirming no coordinates. Just follow description of path and find the place where the spoiler pictures where taken. My bet was correct.

If that's true, it should be reported. That's not a valid puzzle.

[+dfx]

If that's true, it should be reported. That's not a valid puzzle.

i wouldn't say that, i've come across a few puzzle caches and even multis where you had to figure out the cache location via some other means without ever having any coordinates for the cache. i don't see how that's invalid, as long as the CO still submits the coords of the actual cache to the reviewers.

[+rjb43nh]

Prime Suspect-"If that's true, it should be reported. That's not a valid puzzle."

Puzzle Guidelines-"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location. Unless a good reason otherwise can be provided, the posted coordinates should be no more than 1-2 miles (2-3 km) away from the true cache location. .... If you choose to submit a cache of this type please give as much detailed information as possible to the reviewer when you submit the cache. Report the coordinates for the actual cache location and any other relevant stages or clues using the "Additional Waypoints" feature. The reviewer may still need more information before publishing the cache.

According to the above quoted guidelines the CO is required to give coordinates to a general reference point, in the case of the cache being discussed ( GC22EHW), I see parking and one additional waypoint so there's no problem there. The photos are 'clues' to how to get to the final from this reference point and although they are visual rather than numeric they apparently will get you to the cache as 3 cachers have found it.

 

I see nothing to indicate that this cache is outside the guidelines. As long as the CO has provided the exact cache location to the reviewer so there will be no question about violating the proximity rule, he has done all that is required. I have found quite a few caches like this where you have to match a photo to a location once you get there to find the cache or you have to walk so many paces from a certain landmark toward some object.

[+Prime Suspect]

Prime Suspect-"If that's true, it should be reported. That's not a valid puzzle."

Puzzle Guidelines-"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location. Unless a good reason otherwise can be provided, the posted coordinates should be no more than 1-2 miles (2-3 km) away from the true cache location. .... If you choose to submit a cache of this type please give as much detailed information as possible to the reviewer when you submit the cache. Report the coordinates for the actual cache location and any other relevant stages or clues using the "Additional Waypoints" feature. The reviewer may still need more information before publishing the cache.

According to the above quoted guidelines the CO is required to give coordinates to a general reference point, in the case of the cache being discussed ( GC22EHW), I see parking and one additional waypoint so there's no problem there. The photos are 'clues' to how to get to the final from this reference point and although they are visual rather than numeric they apparently will get you to the cache as 3 cachers have found it.

 

I see nothing to indicate that this cache is outside the guidelines. As long as the CO has provided the exact cache location to the reviewer so there will be no question about violating the proximity rule, he has done all that is required. I have found quite a few caches like this where you have to match a photo to a location once you get there to find the cache or you have to walk so many paces from a certain landmark toward some object.

 

It's invalid because it fails the "use of accurate GPS coordinates" guideline. "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."

[+Vater_Araignee]

PS. CO e-mailed confirming no coordinates. Just follow description of path and find the place where the spoiler pictures where taken. My bet was correct.

If that's true, it should be reported. That's not a valid puzzle.

It would be an offset and those still fit in the category, so it should not be reported.

[+rjb43nh]

Prime Suspect-"It's invalid because it fails the "use of accurate GPS coordinates" guideline. "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.""

Ah, but a GPS is required to get to the reference point and that is all that is required by the guidelines. Re-read the portion of the guidelines I quoted and you'll see that is correct.

[+Prime Suspect]

Prime Suspect-"It's invalid because it fails the "use of accurate GPS coordinates" guideline. "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.""

Ah, but a GPS is required to get to the reference point and that is all that is required by the guidelines. Re-read the portion of the guidelines I quoted and you'll see that is correct.

That's debatable, since the coordinates are just leading you to a general area. You don't need to be at a specific point. You could move them 100 feet in multiple directions, and it wouldn't make much difference. In my book, this still fails the "use of ACCURATE GPS coordinates" test.

[+rjb43nh]

Prime suspect-"That's debatable, since the coordinates are just leading you to a general area. ..."

You really have to read the correct section of the guidelines. The section I have quoted is for puzzle type caches and it is very specific when it says:

 

"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point"

 

For proof check out the “Picture This” series (#1-#18) in Maine that gets you to the general area then you have to use a photo to find the exact location where it was taken to find the cache. I've done most of these plus many others similar ones in different states. Are you saying all these caches are not legit? If your interpretation were correct it would invalidate countless puzzle caches.

[Keystone]

The cache given as an example in this thread doesn't seem to comply with the listing guidelines because there is no meaningful opportunity to use GPS. General coordinates for the parking lot doesn't count. It would be silly of me to even take my GPS out of the car.

 

General coordinates for a random clearing in the woods, a quarter mile from the trailhead, from which the geocacher can spot the rocks and trees shown in the photo on the cache page? That's different. I have the option of using my GPS receiver in a meaningful way to go to those coordinates.

 

As for reviewing mystery/puzzle caches, I will look on the page to see if there's a plausible puzzle. If I see a Sudoku grid or math formula or a series of odd pictures, I'm done with that part of the review. If I don't understand how one finds the cache coordinates, I will ask.

 

Just this week, I worked with a cache owner who started off with just a photo and parking coordinates. Once he added a cool puzzle that resolved to the coordinates for where the photo was taken, I was happy to publish his cache.

[+HockeyPuck]

Prime suspect-"That's debatable, since the coordinates are just leading you to a general area. ..."

You really have to read the correct section of the guidelines. The section I have quoted is for puzzle type caches and it is very specific when it says:

 

"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point"

 

 

RJB43, as one of NH's most frustratingly enjoyable mystery hiders I completely respect your opinion however feel your bolded quote is taken out of context. Continuing the train of thought states: For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point, such as a nearby parking location. Unless a good reason otherwise can be provided, the posted coordinates should be no more than 1-2 miles (2-3 km) away from the true cache location. This allows the cache to show up on the proper vicinity searches and to keep the mileage of trackables that find their way into the cache reasonably correct.

 

My interpretaion is the 'general reference point' is the posted, false coordinates shown on the cache page and not a generic location of the cache.

 

To play devil's advocate I also agree with Prime's side of the argument and the guideline that states: the option of using accurate GPS coordinates as an integral part of the cache hunt must be demonstrated for all physical cache submissions..

 

I interpret this statement intending to use your GPSr to find a reference point, potentially a trailhead kiosk, stone or some other reference marker intended to be found with more than the yellow pages or a generic map (IMO a parking lot would not qualify as 'accurate GPS coordiantes'). The term 'accurate GPS coordinates' is a broad term that does not specifically mean ground zero of the hide however a GPS (with accurate coordinates) should be incorperated somewhere in the seek process.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Although I know of several caches that have used it, the last I heard steganography was not permitted as it required the downloading and installing of third party software to get at the data. I had a cache knocked back for precisely that reason. Can anybody confirm whether this is still the case?

 

Steganography is of course permitted. Just don't use any forms of it that require a download, that's all. :- ) And yes, one of my puzzles does just that. And no, obviously, I can't tell you which one. You just need to use an unusual form of it.

 

Paul

 

I was actually going to mention that specific form of stenography which I discover by solving the puzzle you're talking about. Since you've posted here in this thread I'll refrain and let anyone interested in learning more about stenography to do some web searching to learn about it's various forms. I've since solved another puzzle cache which used a very similar technique.

 

The requirement about software downloads is a bit fuzzy. Technically, there are lots of different puzzles which can be solved "by hand" but are just a lot easier if you can find the right application to help. Some of those applications are commercial products (Photoshop, for example) while other could potentially contain malicious code. Using an application such as an image viewer to examine a jpg that has been uploaded to the gc.com site as part of the cache page description isn't really much different than using a browser to view a web page. In both cases, both an application and data are downloaded to your computer.

[+Coldgears]

On a somewhat related note. I noticed a mystery cache in my area has posted the final coords as a waypoint. Isn't the only person able to see that supposed to be the reviewer? Saves me the trouble of figuring out the puzzle though ...

 

GC1JQJJ

[NH Zamboni]

On a somewhat related note. I noticed a mystery cache in my area has posted the final coords as a waypoint. Isn't the only person able to see that supposed to be the reviewer? Saves me the trouble of figuring out the puzzle though ...

 

GC1JQJJ

 

Coldgears,

 

Congratulations on a quick and easy solve. I have taken the liberty of editing the cache page making the waypoint visible to only the cache owner and site administrators and let both the cache owner and reviewer know of my intervention. Thanks for your honesty, I look forward to your 'found it' log entry.

 

-Z

[knowschad]

On a somewhat related note. I noticed a mystery cache in my area has posted the final coords as a waypoint. Isn't the only person able to see that supposed to be the reviewer? Saves me the trouble of figuring out the puzzle though ...

 

GC1JQJJ

 

Bragging in Groundspeak's forums is not "recommended".

[+Coldgears]

On a somewhat related note. I noticed a mystery cache in my area has posted the final coords as a waypoint. Isn't the only person able to see that supposed to be the reviewer? Saves me the trouble of figuring out the puzzle though ...

 

GC1JQJJ

 

Bragging in Groundspeak's forums is not "recommended".

I didn't break the rules! I was looking at some local puzzles because I was bored and wanted to have a few done for the weekend... It's not my fault that the final coords were there... My log can't be deleted can it?

[+Prime Suspect]

Prime suspect-"That's debatable, since the coordinates are just leading you to a general area. ..."

You really have to read the correct section of the guidelines. The section I have quoted is for puzzle type caches and it is very specific when it says:

 

"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point"

 

For proof check out the “Picture This” series (#1-#18) in Maine that gets you to the general area then you have to use a photo to find the exact location where it was taken to find the cache. I've done most of these plus many others similar ones in different states. Are you saying all these caches are not legit? If your interpretation were correct it would invalidate countless puzzle caches.

The bolded text doesn't mean what you think it means. It's just saying that puzzle caches usually have bogus posted coordinates, usually within 2 miles of the actual cache location. They may or may not have any actual relationship to the cache itself. It in no way means that puzzle caches don't have to demonstrate the use of accurate GPS coordinates. After all, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. This isn't letterboxing or shutterspotting.

 

As for your example caches, they're meaningless. Please read the "no precedent" section of the guidelines: "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."

[+Too Tall John]

Prime suspect-"That's debatable, since the coordinates are just leading you to a general area. ..."

You really have to read the correct section of the guidelines. The section I have quoted is for puzzle type caches and it is very specific when it says:

 

"For many caches of this type, the coordinates listed are not of the actual cache location but a general reference point"

 

For proof check out the “Picture This” series (#1-#18) in Maine that gets you to the general area then you have to use a photo to find the exact location where it was taken to find the cache. I've done most of these plus many others similar ones in different states. Are you saying all these caches are not legit? If your interpretation were correct it would invalidate countless puzzle caches.

The bolded text doesn't mean what you think it means. It's just saying that puzzle caches usually have bogus posted coordinates, usually within 2 miles of the actual cache location. They may or may not have any actual relationship to the cache itself. It in no way means that puzzle caches don't have to demonstrate the use of accurate GPS coordinates. After all, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. This isn't letterboxing or shutterspotting.

 

As for your example caches, they're meaningless. Please read the "no precedent" section of the guidelines: "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."

Having done some of the Maine "Picture This" series, I must say I'm conflicted. A couple of them I'd not have found the spot at all without following the GPS. Some are very well known spots anyone could tell you exactly where it was taken.

 

Oh, for those who don't know what we're talking about, a description from a cache page:

WE'VE ALL HEARD THE SAYING "A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" RIGHT? WELL THIS SERIES HOPES TO PROVE JUST THAT. YOU ALSO HAVE HD'S ASSURANCE THAT THIS SERIES WILL TAKE YOU TO SOME REALLY SPECIAL PLACES.

 

THE LISTED CO-ORDS IN THIS SERIES WILL TAKE YOU TO PARKING ONLY. YOU WILL ALSO BE GIVEN SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS TO HEAD YOU TO THE CACHE. YOU WILL THEN HAVE TO PUT YOURSELF IN SPOT WHERE THE PICTURE WAS TAKEN TO FIND THE CACHE.

Strangest, one has a photo that wasn't taken from where the cache is hidden, since you can see the hiding spot in the photo, at the same distance from the camera that the subject of the picture is. I was lucky to have someone along who didn't realize the "rules" for the series, while I was trying to figure out the camera angle, they found the cache.

 

She hasn't let me forget that yet. . .

 

Oh, by the way, yay to having 3 NH cachers posting in the same thread!

[+DeepButi]

The cache given as an example in this thread doesn't seem to comply with the listing guidelines because there is no meaningful opportunity to use GPS. General coordinates for the parking lot doesn't count. It would be silly of me to even take my GPS out of the car.

 

General coordinates for a random clearing in the woods, a quarter mile from the trailhead, from which the geocacher can spot the rocks and trees shown in the photo on the cache page? That's different. I have the option of using my GPS receiver in a meaningful way to go to those coordinates.

 

As for reviewing mystery/puzzle caches, I will look on the page to see if there's a plausible puzzle. If I see a Sudoku grid or math formula or a series of odd pictures, I'm done with that part of the review. If I don't understand how one finds the cache coordinates, I will ask.

 

Just this week, I worked with a cache owner who started off with just a photo and parking coordinates. Once he added a cool puzzle that resolved to the coordinates for where the photo was taken, I was happy to publish his cache.

Thanks Keystone, your answer seems clear and logical to me.

 

Of course I did already know that reviewers check the final coordinate, I have a couple of Misterys and have read the guidelines carefully. That's not what I was asking. And your way of dealing with the process seems a reasonable one.

The cache in question made me think no care is taken about anything else because to me it seems obvious there is no way to obtain the coordinates and wanted to know if it was a general behaviour or just an "accident" to approve caches like this one.

 

As for the cache, the posted coordinates are not even the general area ones. They are 300m to the East of the parking WP on a clear GPS signal area. The cache is aprox at 1.2Km North (16º) and no GPS signal available (take a look at Google Earth and you will understand why).

Before anyone tells me I cannot be sure: Yes, I'm. Last Monday I was just there, I followed exactly the path described. I was not caching this one because it was a last minute plan and I didn't have the info. I went to one of the sites cited on the description because I wanted to place a hide there (finally too close to GC1XH8N). So yes, I know.

And I cannot see how a GPS can be used to find this one. A parking WP coordinates don't seem to me valid enough.

 

Thks for all your answers.