reviewers

[broadhead420]

I was wondering where to complan about the reviewers for new caches. why dont they have to go and find the hide to see if the location is good or not they just can't know if the hide is good or not. a family member put a caches in a public park. but was not aloud to publish because to was to close to a school property. th hide was not even in view of the schools property do to a building between them. we then moved it to the other side of the park from the school next to the public restrooms. sent a note to the reviewer and its been over a week now and still havn't heard anything about it and is still not published.

I am new to this game and haveliked it so far. but i am holding off on becoming a prem. member because of this.

i was wondering if others have had this trouble?

[+Chokecherry]

I woudn't get too upset with the reviewer. Reviewers have numerous new caches to approve or disapprove. Not only that but they also have to deal with all the NA issues. Many also have a life beyond geocaching be it jobs or hobbies and some even geocache themselves.

 

Many parks are on if not extremely near school property. Any suspicious looking package on or very near school property can incite a bomb scare. The reviewer gave you a good suggestion with that.

[+BoMS]

Reviewers are unpaid volunteers who do the reviewing in their spare time. They can't possibly go find every new cache they are asked to publish and they are not required to. It's your responsibility as a cache hider to make sure it's a good location. The reviewers are willing to help, so try communicating with them in a positive way. Explain the situation to your reviewer openly and politely and listen to what they say.

 

About the reviewer not answering promptly: The reviewer might be busy at the moment, did you consider that? Maybe - just maybe - your listing isn't the most important thing in the world at the moment. And have you checked your cache listing to see if a reviewer note has been posted? The reply from the reviewer might have been been waiting for you all along.

[+addisonbr]

Check to make sure that the "Yes, this cache is currently active (Reviewers will not see this listing in the review queue unless this box is checked.)" box is selected. If that box became unchecked during the exchange, the reviewer won't know that your cache is ready to go.

 

Another way to get in touch with the reviewer is to go to the note that he/she posted to the cache page (about being too close to school property). Click on the username to be taken to the reviewer's profile, and then click "Send Message". That will let you generate a note that will get delivered to your reveiwer's email, and is a good backup in case your dialog on the cache page got lost in the shuffle for some reason we can't figure out.

[+buttaskotch]

I was wondering where to complan about the reviewers for new caches. why dont they have to go and find the hide to see if the location is good or not they just can't know if the hide is good or not. a family member put a caches in a public park. but was not aloud to publish because to was to close to a school property. th hide was not even in view of the schools property do to a building between them. we then moved it to the other side of the park from the school next to the public restrooms. sent a note to the reviewer and its been over a week now and still havn't heard anything about it and is still not published.

I am new to this game and haveliked it so far. but i am holding off on becoming a prem. member because of this.

i was wondering if others have had this trouble?

 

Just some quick, obvious question.

Did your family member seek permission with the park when initially placing the cache? If so, did you mention that?

Did you mention the building in between the cache and the school?

Is placing the cache next to the public restroom a good idea since muggles will be going in and out all the time and may incite curiosity or even incite a bomb scare?

 

Before getting heated, you need to take a step back and calm down. Especially since you are new to the game and it's rules. Take a chance to reflect and understand that the reviewers are not paid, they don't go and search every new cache GZ prior to publishing. (can you imagine finding every single of the over 1 million caches before it getting published? Probably not.)

 

Read and understand the rules and regulations, read through the forums for (mostly) good advice, then complain if you feel it necessary. But until then try to understand all the nuances of how to properly place a cache and deal withnthe reviewers

[+Ecylram]

Reviewers are volunteers, not employees. They have lives and jobs outside of reviewing. They have to review for an area that covers several hundred square miles. For example...

 

I believe my reviewer covers more than one state. Just for our state of Colorado the reviewer must approve 120-160 caches a month in an area of 104,100 square miles. In addition, they must deal with NA requests and a myriad of misc. email questions. It's just not humanly possible for a reviewer to visit every cache before approving.

 

We only have your word to go by, but based on your description I'm glad to hear that a reviewer is being cautious about placing a cache near a school. There have been a couple of bomb scares lately due to caches being placed near schools. The unfortunate reality is that muggles are very suspicious of people snooping around containers near schools.

 

For the reviewers reading this... Thank you for all the time you volunteer so the rest of us can enjoy this sport.

[+Packanack]

The cache reviewer does not review for quality of hide. That is one reason why I believe local groups should have peer review .

[Trader Rick & Rosie]

I believe local groups should have peer review .

That is the worst idea I've heard on these forums.

[+sseegars]

I believe local groups should have peer review .

That is the worst idea I've heard on these forums.

 

I agree. I wouldn't want that.

 

In answer to the original question/statement. I know that my reviewer helps out by reviewing several states. They are volunteers as has already been said. It's gotta be rough getting the submissions they likely get everyday. How about sending a nice note to your reviewer asking why you haven't been reviewed yet?

 

FK

[+Ecylram]

I believe local groups should have peer review .

That is the worst idea I've heard on these forums.

Agreed. That would greatly extend the time it takes to approve a cache and add a 'political' element to the Approval process. Not to mention how hard it would be to get enough volunteers to cover the entire territory.

[+Packanack]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

The reviewer is confronted with perhaps 100 new submissions per week, they have no time to section the wheat from the chaffe, that is something the local community would of necessity have to do. With cachers popping in and out like a revolving door the quality of caches placed seems to be lowering. A case in point, a well meaning new cacher places a glass pill bottle in a base of a hollow tree in a swamp, that floods regularly. That pill bottle will be flotsam in 4 months. Another places a cache in an alleyway, within 10 feet of a private residence backyard--did they not thing that people living there might be disturbed by strangers coming into the alley. Anectdotal, yes but that is a perception I have come to. I believe that the local organization can help to address some of this , along with the abandoned, in need caches --when some of the enthusiastic but short lived cachers abandon the field leaving behind geo litter.

[+mwellman]

Welcome to Geocaching broadhead420!

 

The goal is to have the Volunteer Reviewers perform the initial review within 72 hours. If your reviewer had a question then it could take longer as that initial review of any incoming new caches takes precedence over any caches that had an initial review and are now awaiting resolution of any concerns.

 

Thanks for hiding a cache for the rest of us to find. I know that it is hard to wait for it to get published and then to wait for the FTF log.

 

But don't deny yourself the benefits of Premium membership - Pocket Queries! 1000 caches downloaded at once! Caches along a route! If you are looking for old caches or a specific difficulty/terrain combination or just kid friendly or just night caches - easy and quick with pocket queries! Bookmarks are fun too - my favorites or caches to do or as lists for challenges caches.

 

Enjoy your Geocaching Adventures!

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

The reviewer is confronted with perhaps 100 new submissions per week, they have no time to section the wheat from the chaffe, that is something the local community would of necessity have to do. With cachers popping in and out like a revolving door the quality of caches placed seems to be lowering. A case in point, a well meaning new cacher places a glass pill bottle in a base of a hollow tree in a swamp, that floods regularly. That pill bottle will be flotsam in 4 months. Another places a cache in an alleyway, within 10 feet of a private residence backyard--did they not thing that people living there might be disturbed by strangers coming into the alley. Anectdotal, yes but that is a perception I have come to. I believe that the local organization can help to address some of this , along with the abandoned, in need caches --when some of the enthusiastic but short lived cachers abandon the field leaving behind geo litter.

 

It would be nice if there were a "Hiding 101" course that all new hiders must take prior to their first hide. It would point out things similar to those mentioned above. Of course this is still no guarantee that there would be no issues, but I am sure it would reduce some of the pitfalls we see.

 

When I do a Geocaching 101 event, I always talk about things to consider when hiding a new cache:

 

Containers

Off-limit areas

Local rules/laws

How the seasons chnage the hide location

etc

[Nomex]

I was wondering where to complan about the reviewers for new caches. why dont they have to go and find the hide to see if the location is good or not they just can't know if the hide is good or not. a family member put a caches in a public park. but was not aloud to publish because to was to close to a school property. th hide was not even in view of the schools property do to a building between them. we then moved it to the other side of the park from the school next to the public restrooms. sent a note to the reviewer and its been over a week now and still havn't heard anything about it and is still not published.

I am new to this game and haveliked it so far. but i am holding off on becoming a prem. member because of this.

i was wondering if others have had this trouble?

 

Snooping around a bit, it appears that your friend has addressed the Reviewers concerns regarding the proximity to the school grounds by relocating the cache and updating the coordinates.

 

However, your friend will need to Enable the Listing to return it to the Review Queue where the Volunteer Reviewer will *see* it. Unless the Reviewer has Watchlisted the Listing, they are probably unaware of the changes.

 

Good luck with the cache, but considering the numerous issues regarding cache placements near schools, your Reviewer was completely justified in questioning it IMHO.

 

I didn't see anything in the Reviewers Note that would justify your original posting (i.e. it was a form letter that is commonly used).

[+John in Valley Forge]

 

However, your friend will need to Enable the Listing to return it to the Review Queue where the Volunteer Reviewer will *see* it. Unless the Reviewer has Watchlisted the Listing, they are probably unaware of the changes.

 

That seems to be a common theme among folks that don't get their submissions reviewed. It must be confusing on the first try.

[Nomex]

 

However, your friend will need to Enable the Listing to return it to the Review Queue where the Volunteer Reviewer will *see* it. Unless the Reviewer has Watchlisted the Listing, they are probably unaware of the changes.

 

That seems to be a common theme among folks that don't get their submissions reviewed. It must be confusing on the first try.

 

I agree, it is quite common, although it is nearly as common as people not reading the Notes very closely for relevant instructions, like the following quote from the Note I mentioned:

 

I've temporarily disabled this listing to give you a chance to address this issue. If you have permission from the school administration, please place that person's contact information in your description on the cache page and then click on the enable link below the cache name to place this cache back onto the active review queue.

 

Perhaps the nomenclature is confusing to people. I know that it takes some folks one or two submissions before grasping this concept though. I'm not sure what the answer is

[+addisonbr]

However, your friend will need to Enable the Listing to return it to the Review Queue where the Volunteer Reviewer will *see* it. Unless the Reviewer has Watchlisted the Listing, they are probably unaware of the changes.

That seems to be a common theme among folks that don't get their submissions reviewed. It must be confusing on the first try.

Agreed, I see this a lot. It leads to a lot of unnecessary frustration - the reviewer isn't intentionally ignoring the changes the CO has made, but the CO doesn't realize anything is wrong until days have passed.

 

I don't know what the ultimate solution is, as I'm not a user interface guy. But it does seem like a slight redesign of this process could smooth things out a bit.

[+addisonbr]

I agree, it is quite common, although it is nearly as common as people not reading the Notes very closely for relevant instructions, like the following quote from the Note I mentioned:

...

Perhaps the nomenclature is confusing to people. I know that it takes some folks one or two submissions before grasping this concept though. I'm not sure what the answer is

It's certainly true that in virtually all of these cases there is some print (sometimes fine, sometimes not so fine) that the CO missed. It just strikes me that if new users routinely seem to be making the same interface errors, there may be some way to amend the process to make those mistakes less likely.

 

I'm certainly not criticizing the reviewer here; I'm just looking at it from a design standpoint - I agree that there may be something confusing about the terminology, as it seems like users keep getting this wrong no matter how the note or cache page are phrased. Maybe there's a way we could make the process more intuitive so that this comes up less frequently, although I also don't know what the answer is.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

The reviewer is confronted with perhaps 100 new submissions per week, they have no time to section the wheat from the chaffe, that is something the local community would of necessity have to do. With cachers popping in and out like a revolving door the quality of caches placed seems to be lowering. A case in point, a well meaning new cacher places a glass pill bottle in a base of a hollow tree in a swamp, that floods regularly. That pill bottle will be flotsam in 4 months. Another places a cache in an alleyway, within 10 feet of a private residence backyard--did they not thing that people living there might be disturbed by strangers coming into the alley. Anectdotal, yes but that is a perception I have come to. I believe that the local organization can help to address some of this , along with the abandoned, in need caches --when some of the enthusiastic but short lived cachers abandon the field leaving behind geo litter.

 

It would be nice if there were a "Hiding 101" course that all new hiders must take prior to their first hide. It would point out things similar to those mentioned above. Of course this is still no guarantee that there would be no issues, but I am sure it would reduce some of the pitfalls we see.

 

When I do a Geocaching 101 event, I always talk about things to consider when hiding a new cache:

 

Containers

Off-limit areas

Local rules/laws

How the seasons chnage the hide location

etc

I post this idea years ago but it is something Groundspeak is not interested in. I do not know how close the cache mentioned was to a school yard. But myself I just will not look for caches that are within 100 feet of any elementry school.

 

To have a reviewer go check on a cache just would never work.

 

To OP, go back and re read the guidlines for placing a cache.

When going out to place a cache load all the caches in the area into you GPS so that you know you are not to close other caches in the area. You may also need to find any multis in the area.

Hiding a cache is not always an easy task.

 

edit ti add: You may also want to think about premiummembership. You will not be able to see the coordinates for Caches that are for pemium members, this will add to your cache placing problems.

Edited November 16, 2010 by JohnnyVegas

[+Ecylram]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

The reviewer is confronted with perhaps 100 new submissions per week, they have no time to section the wheat from the chaffe, that is something the local community would of necessity have to do. With cachers popping in and out like a revolving door the quality of caches placed seems to be lowering. A case in point, a well meaning new cacher places a glass pill bottle in a base of a hollow tree in a swamp, that floods regularly. That pill bottle will be flotsam in 4 months. Another places a cache in an alleyway, within 10 feet of a private residence backyard--did they not thing that people living there might be disturbed by strangers coming into the alley. Anectdotal, yes but that is a perception I have come to. I believe that the local organization can help to address some of this , along with the abandoned, in need caches --when some of the enthusiastic but short lived cachers abandon the field leaving behind geo litter.

We have that. In addition to the ability to email a CO there is the "Needs Maintenance" and "Needs Archiving" options. Any cacher visiting a cache has the opportunity to point out any problems.

[knowschad]

I believe local groups should have peer review .

That is the worst idea I've heard on these forums.

Moot. Plenty of areas in the world don't even have a "local group". It ain't gonna happen.

[+dakboy]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

You mean like the content of the logs people write?

 

As a finder, if I'm looking at a dozen logs for a cache in my area and none of them is more than a few words, maybe a sentence, my impression is that there's nothing remarkable/interesting about the cache, and I won't make a special trip to find it.

[+Lovejoy and Tinker]

Perhaps the nomenclature is confusing to people. I know that it takes some folks one or two submissions before grasping this concept though. I'm not sure what the answer is

Maybe when the cache page is changed and saved, one of two screens should come up as confirmation, which would also clarify the status of the listing. Something like:

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is currently NOT visible to reviewers and is not in the queue for review.

If your listing is ready to go live you need to retrn to the edit page and...blah blah blah

 

or

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is now in the queue for review.

We aim to review all new listings within 72 hours, however ... blah blah blah

 

Mind you, it is so long since I set a cache that I have forgotton what actually does happen when you save a page for the first time, with or without the checkbox ticked. So it may do this already, in which case you cannot legislate for people not reading what's put in front of them.

[+dakboy]

I believe my reviewer covers more than one state. Just for our state of Colorado the reviewer must approve 120-160 caches a month in an area of 104,100 square miles. In addition, they must deal with NA requests and a myriad of misc. email questions. It's just not humanly possible for a reviewer to visit every cache before approving.

There are two reviewers for all of New York. This summer, NY cachers were placing in the neighborhood of 1000 caches every 6 weeks.

 

How NY Admin & Sapience Trek keep up with a pace like that, I will never understand. Even if, as some speculate, ST is multiple people, that's an insane rate without a sizable team.

[+GeoGeeBee]

The cache reviewer does not review for quality of hide. That is one reason why I believe local groups should have peer review .

 

We have peer review. Every cache, after it is published, is constantly reviewed by the seekers who leave logs on the cache page.

 

For some reason, people think they are only supposed to leave nicey-nice logs. This diminishes the functionality of the review process somewhat, because even lame hides will get nice logs. But the most egregious cases, like hides next to elementary schools, will generally get logs that point out the problems.

[+ChileHead]

On the feedback site one of the requests is that new finders have to pass some sort of "test" before submitting their first cache.

 

Possibly one of the questions could be:

 

If your cache hasn't been published, what should your steps be?

- post a negative thread in the forums

- keep waiting

- check your cache page for any reviewer notes, make sure it's enabled, and make sure you have complied with any requests exactly as written

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I've gotten six notifications for new caches listed close to me in Birmingham AL so far this morning. I have no doubt that several more will be listed near me later today, because that's about average. My primary Reviewer lives +120 miles away near Atlanta GA.

 

Thank goodness I don't have to wait on someone to go look at all those caches before they could be listed!

[+Harry Dolphin]

I believe local groups should have peer review .

That is the worst idea I've heard on these forums.

 

Shhhh. It is considered bad form to say 'That is the worst idea'.

[+Packanack]

Worst idea ? Just wait, I am full of ideas

 

Hey, there you go, my idea just got peer reviewed .

Edited November 16, 2010 by Packanack

[+Setan Meyacha]

Now that I have your attention, let me expand it to say, peer review after the cache is placed, approved and published. So that the owner can gauge exactly how the local community feels about any individual placement.

You mean like the content of the logs people write?

 

As a finder, if I'm looking at a dozen logs for a cache in my area and none of them is more than a few words, maybe a sentence, my impression is that there's nothing remarkable/interesting about the cache, and I won't make a special trip to find it.

 

Perhaps you are getting the wrong 'impression' just because people are either too lazy or in too big of a hurry to log a lot of caches to leave individual comments on each cache they find. I have been to caches that were in great locations and hidden quite cleverly but found on-line logs that were mostly of the TFTC type. Don't be deceived by the shortness of a log as to the quality of a cache or its location.

As to peer review! Everyone has their own opinon as to what constitues a 'quality' cache. And just whom is going to be in charge of selecting that 'peer' group? Are you talking about 'peers' picked by Groundspeak, or just the number of logs that bash a certain cache? And what, in your opinion, constitutes a 'quality' cache? Is it the container, the way in which it is hidden, location, all of these, or only one of them? To me, they are all quality caches in one way or another because someone took the time, energy and expense to place it for me and others to find. Some are of a higher quality than others, but they are all quality caches to me. Guess I would make a poor peer reviewer.

[+briansnat]

I was wondering where to complan about the reviewers for new caches. why dont they have to go and find the hide to see if the location is good or not they just can't know if the hide is good or not. a family member put a caches in a public park. but was not aloud to publish because to was to close to a school property. th hide was not even in view of the schools property do to a building between them. we then moved it to the other side of the park from the school next to the public restrooms. sent a note to the reviewer and its been over a week now and still havn't heard anything about it and is still not published.

I am new to this game and haveliked it so far. but i am holding off on becoming a prem. member because of this.

i was wondering if others have had this trouble?

 

I don't see anything in the queue under your name in your state. I suspect the reviewer disabled the cache, or unchecked the "Yes this cache is active" box on the submission form, therefore he won't see it or any notes from you. If he disabled it or unchecked the active box, he likely explained in his note that you need to enable it for it to appear again in the review queue. I suggest you check and see if your cache is disabled and if it is, click on the "enable Listing" link in the upper right hand corner of your cache page. If you haven't checked the "This cache is active" box, be sure to do that too.

 

If on the other hand the listing was archived, you can either e-mail the reviewer and ask him to unarchive it, or easier yet, simply submit a new cache page.

Edited November 16, 2010 by briansnat

[+Isonzo Karst]

click on the enable link below the cache name to place this cache back onto the active review queue.

 

mmm, the enable listing link hasn't been under the cache name for some years.....

 

There's a set of instructions that could use an update.

[+Don_J]

Perhaps the nomenclature is confusing to people. I know that it takes some folks one or two submissions before grasping this concept though. I'm not sure what the answer is

Maybe when the cache page is changed and saved, one of two screens should come up as confirmation, which would also clarify the status of the listing. Something like:

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is currently NOT visible to reviewers and is not in the queue for review.

If your listing is ready to go live you need to retrn to the edit page and...blah blah blah

 

or

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is now in the queue for review.

We aim to review all new listings within 72 hours, however ... blah blah blah

 

Mind you, it is so long since I set a cache that I have forgotton what actually does happen when you save a page for the first time, with or without the checkbox ticked. So it may do this already, in which case you cannot legislate for people not reading what's put in front of them.

 

The first would be fine. The second not. I typically make several edits before I'm ready to submit. I would not want it going active, automatically.

 

(edit for clarity)

Edited November 17, 2010 by Don_J

[+Lovejoy and Tinker]

Perhaps the nomenclature is confusing to people. I know that it takes some folks one or two submissions before grasping this concept though. I'm not sure what the answer is

Maybe when the cache page is changed and saved, one of two screens should come up as confirmation, which would also clarify the status of the listing. Something like:

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is currently NOT visible to reviewers and is not in the queue for review.

If your listing is ready to go live you need to retrn to the edit page and...blah blah blah

 

or

 

Thank you. Your changes have been saved.

This listing is now in the queue for review.

We aim to review all new listings within 72 hours, however ... blah blah blah

 

Mind you, it is so long since I set a cache that I have forgotton what actually does happen when you save a page for the first time, with or without the checkbox ticked. So it may do this already, in which case you cannot legislate for people not reading what's put in front of them.

 

The first would be fine. The second not. I typically make several edits before I'm ready to submit. I would not want it going active, automatically.

 

(edit for clarity)

No, the second message would only come up if you have ticked the "ready for review" box on the edit page (or whatever it is called).

Until you ticked that box you would always get the first confirmation page above.

 

So if you did multiple edits you would always see the "not in the queue" page, which would also act as a confirmation that you hadn't accidentally ticked the box and sent your page through for review.

At no point would the page go active automatically, you still have to check the box when you are ready.

The two different pages are really just telling you whether you checked the box during the edit.

 

Hope that makes sense?

[+Isonzo Karst]

At the top of your profile page is a list of

 

Your Disabled Caches (unfortunately, not specified is that these are unpublished disabled caches

 

Under that are the cache title(s)

 

If you open a listing, you'll see on an unpublished, disabled cache:

 

Cache Issues:

 

* This cache has not been reviewed yet. Once it is published, it will be listed on the site. Check the logs to see if the reviewers have left a note for this listing.

* The reviewers will not see this listing until you enable it.

* This cache is temporarily unavailable. Read the logs below to read the status for this cache.

 

The important warning, reviewers will not see this listing until you enable it, is somewhat lost between two others - and the first is rather contradictory to the second. I suspect all are artifacts of assorted updates and changes over time.

 

______________________________

 

If you have an unpublished cache awaiting review you'll see

 

Your Geocaches Waiting for Review (View Archived)

 

Cache Title(s)

 

Open those caches, and at the top is:

 

Cache Issues:

 

* This cache has not been reviewed yet. Once it is published, it will be listed on the site. Check the logs to see if the reviewers have left a note for this listing.

 

__________________________________

 

If you have an archived unpublished cache, you can edit that listing, and on the cache report form you can then enable it! at the top of the cache page, you'll then have:

 

Cache Issues:

 

* This cache has been archived, but is available for viewing for archival purposes.

* This cache has not been reviewed yet. Once it is published, it will be listed on the site. Check the logs to see if the reviewers have left a note for this listing.

 

confusing enough? yep, I'd say so.......

[WashoeZephyr]

My primary Reviewer lives +120 miles away near Atlanta GA.

 

Thank goodness I don't have to wait on someone to go look at all those caches before they could be listed!

 

Our's doesn't even live in the country!

[+mtn-man]

My primary Reviewer lives +120 miles away near Atlanta GA.

 

Thank goodness I don't have to wait on someone to go look at all those caches before they could be listed!

 

Our's doesn't even live in the country!

How are the donations going to see if the country he now calls home will keep him?

[WashoeZephyr]

My primary Reviewer lives +120 miles away near Atlanta GA.

 

Thank goodness I don't have to wait on someone to go look at all those caches before they could be listed!

 

Our's doesn't even live in the country!

How are the donations going to see if the country he now calls home will keep him?

It's the gubbermint keeping him there.

[Ingmar Anhold]

Hi,

For me as a greenhorn in hiding geocaches it would be nice to know if there is a way to make sure that my listing is noticed by the local reviewer.

I hided my first cache three weeks ago. For this I filled out the form with all demanded information and left detailed notes for the reviewer describing the cache location.

Futhermore I checked the box that the listing is active and agreed to all guidelines and terms of agreements.

 

Since then nothing has happened.

Are there some more things to do to make sure the reviewer sees a new listing?

[+briansnat]

Hi,

For me as a greenhorn in hiding geocaches it would be nice to know if there is a way to make sure that my listing is noticed by the local reviewer.

I hided my first cache three weeks ago. For this I filled out the form with all demanded information and left detailed notes for the reviewer describing the cache location.

Futhermore I checked the box that the listing is active and agreed to all guidelines and terms of agreements.

 

Since then nothing has happened.

Are there some more things to do to make sure the reviewer sees a new listing?

 

It sounds as if you did everything correctly. Have you checked the cache page to see if the reviewer left a note for you? Have you checked to see if the cache page is even there? If you take too long to fill it out, it will simply disappear. You may think you submitted it, but it won't be submitted.

Edited November 21, 2010 by briansnat

[Keystone]

Ingmar Anhold's cache is properly awaiting review, although there are several issues with it. The reviewers ought to have left a note by now, but I am sure one of them will be along soon.

[Ingmar Anhold]

Yes, today tzhe reviewer contacted me and adressed an issue which I will try to solve now.

So everthing is fine again

 

However it would be great for new cachers like me to be sure that the listing is correct as otherwise you start wondering if something has gone wrong all the time.

 

Thanks nontheless!