Jump to content

Commercial cache guideline


Zilvervloot
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

it shows you feel that GS is beyond critique

 

No I don't. I think they were correct in this particular situation. I don't hesitate to criticize Groundspeak when they make poor decisions. In this case, the decision they made was absolutely correct. The cache was blatantly commercial and did not deserve secondary consideration for any reason.

 

Where? - please share with me one single example of you criticizing Groundspeak. One. Unless that means I am seeking special treatment.

 

For starters, try reading any recent thread about Waymarking or Virtual Geocaches...

Link to comment

Yet, I see many caches that contain references to "Starbucks" or local businesses nearby or on which is planted the cache.

 

When you see caches that violate the guidelines, report them to a reviewer. Trying to use them as an excuse for violating the guidelines yourself won't work - the issue of precedent is clearly addressed in the guidelines. Remember, when you try to publish a cache, you must agree that you've read and understood the guidelines. By demonstrating that you haven't in such a manner, you're really damaging your credibility. Why should Groundspeak give you any further consideration if you haven't even made it past the first four paragraphs of the guidelines?

 

Thank you....I was missing the insults.

 

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

Nah - nothing commercial or promoting visiting a business there and spending money.

 

I report a cache I believe is dangerous, misleading, needs maintenance or is offensive. If the reviewers have decided to grant an exemption to a guideline (as per the guideline's own language) then I am OK with it.

 

Still waiting for the one single critique you have had of Groundspeak.

 

Btw - since you feel free to attack me and accuse me of not knowing or complying with GS guidelines, you may want to revisit the one about cache owner's required to maintain their caches. That is 10 out of 18 of your caches that have been disabled/archived and in need of help for what, years? Including ignoring reviewer's request to address issues for 6+ months? How is that glass house? Clear enough to call the kettle black?

Edited by caccbag
Link to comment

I report a cache I believe is dangerous, misleading, needs maintenance or is offensive. If the reviewers have decided to grant an exemption to a guideline (as per the guideline's own language) then I am OK with it.

 

If you choose not to report problematic caches, that's your decision. You can't point to those problematic caches as an excuse for publishing your own. Precedent is addressed in the guidelines.

 

 

Still waiting for the one single critique you have had of Groundspeak.

 

 

Waymarking, the end of virtual geocaches, power trails, the bizarre situation in Texas with only one reviewer and a huge backlog, weird inconsistencies with Earthcache guidelines... and that's just in the last couple of weeks. :D

 

Btw - since you feel free to attack me and accuse me of not knowing or complying with GS guidelines, you may want to revisit the one about cache owner's required to maintain their caches. That is 10 out of 18 of your caches that have been disabled/archived and in need of help for what, years? Including ignoring reviewer's request to address issues for 6+ months? How is that glass house? Clear enough to call the kettle black?

 

One of my caches is currently disabled. I disabled it today. I see that some of my caches that have been archived for years still have NM icons on them, but... they're archived. This would all seem more relevant if I had come into the forum to yell about Groundspeak not giving me special treatment, which I did not.

 

Anyway, we're pretty far away from your original claim, which was that your cache was "denied because the historic building in which I was hiding a cache was converted to a retail establishment." I think we've established that this was, at best, a massively inaccurate oversimplification of the actual facts.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

Do you really have issues with reading? I don't want to insult you if that is some sort of imparment but since you seem to not read what I write it does make me question.

 

"You can't point to those problematic caches as an excuse for publishing your own. Precedent is addressed in the guidelines."

Did I say they were problematic? I said they were examples of the inconsistent application of the guidelines.

 

Waymarking, the end of virtual geocaches, power trails, the bizarre situation in Texas with only one reviewer and a huge backlog, weird inconsistencies with Earthcache guidelines... and that's just in the last couple of weeks. :D

 

I read some - wow, scathing! Please, don't hold back in the future. Let your feelings known. The one or two posts that seemed real complaints seemed like you were looking for special treatment to appease your own personal concerns. No, actually they did not. I thought you were trying to improve a site...hopefully you weren't personally attacked by others who felt they were better than you and preached down to you and said the fact you dared raise a question meant you lacked an ability to understand rules. Wouldn't wish that on anyone.

 

One of my caches is currently disabled. I disabled it today. I see that some of my caches that have been archived for years still have NM icons on them, but... they're archived. This would all seem more relevant if I had come into the forum to yell about Groundspeak not giving me special treatment, which I did not.

 

Hmmm......:

 

November 20, 2008 by anakerose (1481 found)

 

Is this one going to be replaced?

 

View Log

September 4, 2008 by narcissa (1555 found)

 

Cache has been muggled. It will be replaced shortly.

 

View Log

September 3, 2008 by gmoffatt (418 found)

 

Looked for a long time to no avail. Will try again next time I am in town.

 

Just Ducky

 

View Log

August 25, 2008 by K-Town Kachers (64 found)

 

Nice east find!

 

View Log

 

--------

 

August 8, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

ARCHIVED: No Action Taken After Being Disabled

 

Previously a 'Reviewer Note / Disabled' was placed on this listing in regard to some issues that were noticed. Since the current owner has made no status change or updates on this geocache in a timely fashion following that note, this listing is being ARCHIVED. You may request that this listing be unarchived by email as provided below.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email with GC# through my profile (visit link)

Guide to Getting your Cache Listed Quickly (visit link)

 

 

View Log

July 10, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

Extended Disable: Needs action from owner

 

Quite some time has passed since this listing was disabled. Please see the follow item taken from the listing guidelines.

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time - normally a few weeks - in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing. Please see the specific listing guidelines about 'Maintenance' (visit link)

 

Please have this geocache enabled again within a short time or archive the listing. However if you have extenuating reasons for a delay that are beyond your control then please use the Write Note log type to detail them. If such a case exists you will still need to check on the location and post a follow up on a monthly basis to demonstrate that you are still actively attempting to make this listing available.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email through (visit link)

 

 

 

View Log

May 1, 2008 by narcissa (1555 found)

 

This one needs a little TLC. I'll put it back soon with a new, dry log book.

 

View Log

April 24, 2008 by Team Polarbear (1389 found)

 

Found this one easily, log was damp, container also, so took a few minutes to try and dry things out before signing the log.

 

View Log

 

(I think that is almost half a year between a NM and no action leading to archiving) and two reviewer warning ignored.)

 

______

 

August 8, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

ARCHIVED: No Action Taken After Being Disabled

 

Previously a 'Reviewer Note / Disabled' was placed on this listing in regard to some issues that were noticed. Since the current owner has made no status change or updates on this geocache in a timely fashion following that note, this listing is being ARCHIVED. You may request that this listing be unarchived by email as provided below.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email with GC# through my profile (visit link)

Guide to Getting your Cache Listed Quickly (visit link)

 

 

View Log

July 10, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

Extended Disable: Needs action from owner

 

Quite some time has passed since this listing was disabled. Please see the follow item taken from the listing guidelines.

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time - normally a few weeks - in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing. Please see the specific listing guidelines about 'Maintenance' (visit link)

 

Please have this geocache enabled again within a short time or archive the listing. However if you have extenuating reasons for a delay that are beyond your control then please use the Write Note log type to detail them. If such a case exists you will still need to check on the location and post a follow up on a monthly basis to demonstrate that you are still actively attempting to make this listing available.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email through (visit link)

 

 

 

View Log

May 1, 2008 by narcissa (1555 found)

 

This one needs a little TLC. Somehow, the duct tape that was providing some extra support to the magnet came off, and the container separated from the magnet. I'll put out a new, dry one shortly.

 

(that is 4 months no action and 2 reviewer notes)

___________________

 

August 8, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

ARCHIVED: No Action Taken After Being Disabled

 

Previously a 'Reviewer Note / Disabled' was placed on this listing in regard to some issues that were noticed. Since the current owner has made no status change or updates on this geocache in a timely fashion following that note, this listing is being ARCHIVED. You may request that this listing be unarchived by email as provided below.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email with GC# through my profile (visit link)

Guide to Getting your Cache Listed Quickly (visit link)

 

 

View Log

July 10, 2008 by CacheDrone (2 found)

 

Hello fellow geocacher. I'm one of the volunteer reviewers for Ontario.

 

Extended Disable: Needs action from owner

 

Quite some time has passed since this listing was disabled. Please see the follow item taken from the listing guidelines.

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time - normally a few weeks - in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing. Please see the specific listing guidelines about 'Maintenance' (visit link)

 

Please have this geocache enabled again within a short time or archive the listing. However if you have extenuating reasons for a delay that are beyond your control then please use the Write Note log type to detail them. If such a case exists you will still need to check on the location and post a follow up on a monthly basis to demonstrate that you are still actively attempting to make this listing available.

 

The full guidelines for placing a geocache can be found at (visit link)

 

CacheDrone: Volunteer Geocaching Reviewer for Ontario

Email through (visit link)

 

 

 

View Log

May 1, 2008 by narcissa (1555 found)

 

This one needs a little TLC. I'll put it back soon with a new, dry log book.

 

View Log

 

(another 4 months and multiple reviewe notes ignored..did you need a link to the maintenance requirements for owners?)

 

___________

 

"Apparently I'm a bad owner for leaving it there. :D

 

No comment.

 

------

 

I can see where you get your self-rightous justification to insult my critique of a GS' approach of cache owners. Thank you for putting your comments in perspective.

___________________

Edited by caccbag
Link to comment

Again, this would all seem more relevant had I come into the forum to make a claim for special treatment. I wasn't able to act on those caches in a timely manner after I disabled them, and the reviewer was right to archive those caches so others could use the space. The guidelines were applied fairly, and many of those spaces have since made way for new caches. My circumstances have also changed in 3-4 years, and I've been able to place and maintain new caches over that time. I have no complaints with any of the reviewers I've dealt with for my cache placements.

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Again, this would all seem more relevant had I come into the forum to make a claim for special treatment. I wasn't able to act on those caches in a timely manner after I disabled them, and the reviewer was right to archive those caches so others could use the space. The guidelines were applied fairly, and many of those spaces have since made way for new caches. My circumstances have also changed in 3-4 years, and I've been able to place and maintain new caches over that time. I have no complaints with any of the reviewers I've dealt with for my cache placements.

"

 

"Again, this would all seem more relevant had I come into the forum to make a claim for special treatment."

 

It is strange and unfortunate for you, but repeating a false statement 5 times, 10 times, 50 times or 100 times does not make it true. Since you refuse to read or are inable to comprehend my repeated statements that I am trying to improve the application of the guidelines for ALL we can just accept the fact that your computer must have defective screen that does not allow you to read.

 

I see....so your own personal circumstances justify you to ignore repeated reviewers' warnings and the guidlines you cite as gospel. Hmmm...good thing you don't think your own circumstances' grant you special excuses. Nearly 100 caches and we MAINTAIN them all. Guess one of us can read and support that guideline and not seek special personal excuses.

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

I can go muggle it! :wub:

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

No need to as it has been archived due to the cache owner's inability to comply with the guidleines requiring maintenance. Her violation of the rules resulted in its archiving already.

Link to comment

Lets sum this up shall we?

 

caccbag

 

- Tried to hide a cache in his friend's shop, the reviewer denied it, and the appeal was rejected.

- Thinks that the guidelines should be changed/waived to accommodate him, because there are other caches like it that were approved.

- - The guidelines address the fact that the publication of a cache does not set a precedent.

- - - Feeling that your cache should be published anyway demonstrates a lack of understanding of the guidelines.

 

Narcissa

 

- Was not able to maintain her caches in a timely manner.

- Those caches (some of them anyway) were archived by CacheDrone.

- She has no issue with this, as he was upholding the guidelines.

 

----------------------------

 

There's a big difference between having your cache archived because you weren't able to maintain it, and complaining about the fact that a precedent did not justify the publication of your cache.

 

The former indicates that circumstances change, and that caching is not the top priority in everyone's life. Archival is often the consequence of not maintaining your caches, however that is not necessarily disregarding the guidelines (or a case of not understanding them), it is simply waiving your right to not have your cache archived by the reviewer.

 

In the case of the latter, it is either a disregard or lack of understanding of the guidelines. Why? Because it tries to make use of precedents - something that the guidelines expressly say don't exist.

Link to comment

 

It is strange and unfortunate for you, but repeating a false statement 5 times, 10 times, 50 times or 100 times does not make it true. Since you refuse to read or are inable to comprehend my repeated statements that I am trying to improve the application of the guidelines for ALL we can just accept the fact that your computer must have defective screen that does not allow you to read.

 

I see....so your own personal circumstances justify you to ignore repeated reviewers' warnings and the guidlines you cite as gospel. Hmmm...good thing you don't think your own circumstances' grant you special excuses. Nearly 100 caches and we MAINTAIN them all. Guess one of us can read and support that guideline and not seek special personal excuses.

 

Circumstances do sometimes prevent cache owners from properly maintaining caches at times, and from what I've seen, reviewers tend to look upon cache owners with kindness when this happens. I've known cache owners who were ill, got injured, fell under hard times financially, experienced family difficulties, etc. - the sorts of life events that can cause even the most diligent cache owner to disregard the game (i.e. become "inable") for a time. It would be real detriment to the game (not to mention heartless) if cache reviewers took such a punitive and retributive attitude toward cache owners in these kinds of circumstances.

 

The guidelines have been applied fairly in your case. Your cache makes numerous references to the store's name and requires cachers to go inside the store. It is a blatant case of a geocache being placed for commercial purposes. I realize that bringing people to your friend's business might seem like a worthy thing to do, but I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling thankful that Groundspeak makes an effort to keep exploitative advertising out of the game. We're bombarded with advertising everywhere, and it's nice that geocaching is a bit of a haven away from that.

 

I'm not sure what sort of special circumstances would explain or excuse the placement of a commercial cache. Cache maintenance can fall by the wayside when life gets difficult, but personal circumstance seems like an odd excuse for trying to use a geocache to get people into a store.

 

The appeals tool is an important thing to have - reviewers sometimes do make the wrong call - but Groundspeak chooses its reviewers carefully, and it's a rare situation when they can't defer to the reviewer's judgment in a situation like this. There was no reason for Groundspeak to overturn the reviewer's decision. The reviewer's decision was absolutely correct. The appeals are there for special cases - not so you can go over the reviewer's head every time you don't get your way.

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

No need to as it has been archived due to the cache owner's inability to comply with the guidleines requiring maintenance. Her violation of the rules resulted in its archiving already.

 

No, that cache is still active. You may report it if you wish.

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

I can go muggle it! :wub:

 

I'm going to muggle you. :wub:

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

I can go muggle it! :wub:

 

I'm going to muggle you. :wub:

 

Not if I muggle you first! :wub: :wub: :wub:

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

No need to as it has been archived due to the cache owner's inability to comply with the guidleines requiring maintenance. Her violation of the rules resulted in its archiving already.

 

No, that cache is still active. You may report it if you wish.

 

Sorry, confused it with your other 10 archived caches due to your rule violations. And no I won't report, unlike you I get no pleasure making caching less fun for others. So long as families can still enjoy a cache, that is what I think is important....sorry if allowing your cache to stand offends your sense that others need to abide 110% by all guidelines. Hope my willingness to let your cache cross the iron-clad lines of the guidleines doesn't upset you as much my attempt to use published procedures to sek an exemption.

Link to comment

I got a great idea caccbag! Instead of throwing a fit over the fact that your cache that violated the guidelines, and getting mad that you came on here looking for support from other cachers only to find very little, go out and create a new cache. I bet if you put as much passion into thinking of a new idea for a cache, or even making modifcations to the cache that wasnt approved (like Groundpseak suggested many times) you could have a really cool one. Its time to let it go and move on.

Link to comment

Should I have reported one that used the following: Narcissa's Micro #1 is strategically located close to a couple of great places to stock up on swag and other caching necessities.

 

The Ontario reviewers seem to draw the line at naming the store or requiring people to go into the store. This cache involves neither. You can report it if you wish. :rolleyes:

 

No need to as it has been archived due to the cache owner's inability to comply with the guidleines requiring maintenance. Her violation of the rules resulted in its archiving already.

 

No, that cache is still active. You may report it if you wish.

 

Sorry, confused it with your other 10 archived caches due to your rule violations. And no I won't report, unlike you I get no pleasure making caching less fun for others. So long as families can still enjoy a cache, that is what I think is important....sorry if allowing your cache to stand offends your sense that others need to abide 110% by all guidelines. Hope my willingness to let your cache cross the iron-clad lines of the guidleines doesn't upset you as much my attempt to use published procedures to sek an exemption.

 

Kindly read this. :smile:

Link to comment

I got a great idea caccbag! Instead of throwing a fit over the fact that your cache that violated the guidelines, and getting mad that you came on here looking for support from other cachers only to find very little, go out and create a new cache. I bet if you put as much passion into thinking of a new idea for a cache, or even making modifcations to the cache that wasnt approved (like Groundpseak suggested many times) you could have a really cool one. Its time to let it go and move on.

 

Gold!

Edited by Taoiseach
Link to comment

...I get no pleasure making caching less fun for others. So long as families can still enjoy a cache, that is what I think is important...

 

This seems a bit disingenuous, since you were trying to use the cache in question to advertise a friend's store. I can think of few things that would zap my family's enjoyment of geocaching more than blatant advertising would.

 

I suppose a cache filled with excrement and/or sharp objects would be even less fun than a cachevertisement.

Link to comment

I got a great idea caccbag! Instead of throwing a fit over the fact that your cache that violated the guidelines, and getting mad that you came on here looking for support from other cachers only to find very little, go out and create a new cache. I bet if you put as much passion into thinking of a new idea for a cache, or even making modifcations to the cache that wasnt approved (like Groundpseak suggested many times) you could have a really cool one. Its time to let it go and move on.

I got a great idea caccbag! Instead of throwing a fit over the fact that your cache that violated the guidelines, and getting mad that you came on here looking for support from other cachers only to find very little, go out and create a new cache. I bet if you put as much passion into thinking of a new idea for a cache, or even making modifcations to the cache that wasnt approved (like Groundpseak suggested many times) you could have a really cool one. Its time to let it go and move on.

 

Hmmm.... first I did not come here for your claimed purpose and never sought support (that would be like going into a Trekkie convention and expecting the crowd to support an initiative to make Battlestar Gallatica the new icon...no offense Spock). Please look at the original post and my reply. It was in response to a question about commercial caches. It was only when others asked for more info did I post. Second, please go find any of the caches we planted and allege we don't put in effort - in fact, please search, find and tell us how we can improve our Tolkien series or our Dirty (Bakers) Dozen series - happy to accept your expert advice. And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions other than to move the cache. I would prefer they come out and say the guidelines are rules and that there is no appeal process. Sorry for throwing a fit....I mean questioning Groundspeak.

Link to comment

...I get no pleasure making caching less fun for others. So long as families can still enjoy a cache, that is what I think is important...

 

This seems a bit disingenuous, since you were trying to use the cache in question to advertise a friend's store. I can think of few things that would zap my family's enjoyment of geocaching more than blatant advertising would.

 

I suppose a cache filled with excrement and/or sharp objects would be even less fun than a cachevertisement.

 

I was? So honestly (try) how many ultramarathoners would be sent to my friends' store by this cache. Really? How many? Maybe, maybe, I will grant that one person who has run 50K may come to that store due to the cache. Other than, I dare you to really justisy that allegation. Come on - I am waiting. Find me one cache that has more than 3 ultramarathoners in the world find and I will retract everything I have said. Or are you too busy ignoring your own caches to count the 1 or 2 runners to reply? And shame on you for even suggesting our caches are not intended to promote family and enjoyment, Your own selfish agenda aside, shame on you. Find any one of our caches and I dare you to say that again. Shame.

Edited by caccbag
Link to comment

And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions

 

uh...

 

other than to move the cache.

 

I would prefer they come out and say the guidelines are rules and that there is no appeal process.

 

That's simply not true. You just don't have a case.

 

Appeal rejected! Next case!

Link to comment

"And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions other than to move the cache"

 

BINGO. Move your cache, and there shouldnt be an issue. You say this building is historical, Im sure there must be some way to build a historic building puzzle cache by having them visit this location, and hide the cache somewhere else.

Link to comment

And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions

 

uh...

 

other than to move the cache.

 

I would prefer they come out and say the guidelines are rules and that there is no appeal process.

 

That's simply not true. You just don't have a case.

 

Appeal rejected! Next case!

 

Did you or your wife write that? Nice open mind.

Link to comment

I was? So honestly (try) how many ultramarathoners would be sent to my friends' store by this cache. Really? How many? Maybe, maybe, I will grant that one person who has run 50K may come to that store due to the cache. Other than, I dare you to really justisy that allegation. Come on - I am waiting. Find me one cache that has more than 3 ultramarathoners in the world find and I will retract everything I have said. Or are you too busy ignoring your own caches to count the 1 or 2 runners to reply?

 

You'll have to provide some market research data if you want to me to come up with an analysis of the store's market and the potential efficacy of your advertising. Is your friend's store really staying in business on the basis of three customers worldwide? No wonder you want to advertise for them!

 

Still, I doubt that Groundspeak will let you publish your cachevertisement on the grounds that it won't be effective.

Edited by narcissa
Link to comment

"And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions other than to move the cache"

 

BINGO. Move your cache, and there shouldnt be an issue. You say this building is historical, Im sure there must be some way to build a historic building puzzle cache by having them visit this location, and hide the cache somewhere else.

 

Absolutrely - but blinkies bore me. This cache was intended to bring families to a historic site and supply them a wonderful cache...not a chance to sign a slip of paper and add 1 more to their overall fund count. A hide-a-key may have lasted a week at most before being muggled. I chose not to move it but publish it on other caching sites. I accepted that. Others here (you) seem to have a problem with it.

Link to comment

This cache was intended to bring families to a historic site and supply them a wonderful cache...

 

If this is true, then why is the entire cache description based on the name of the store? There are many ways you could have highlighted the historic site AND provided a nice cache container without turning the cache page into an advertisement.

 

The cache was intended to be an advertisement. If you were sincere in wanting to provide families with a nice experience, you would have worked with the reviewers to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

Link to comment

And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions

 

uh...

 

other than to move the cache.

 

I would prefer they come out and say the guidelines are rules and that there is no appeal process.

 

That's simply not true. You just don't have a case.

 

Appeal rejected! Next case!

 

Did you or your wife write that? Nice open mind.

 

You're acting like it's some big injustice that they're not letting you place a cache in your friend's store!

 

If you have a compelling reason as to why you should get a guidelines waiver, please! Tell us what it is! Evidently it isn't what you told the appeals folk, as they certainly didn't buy it.

 

Seriously! If there is some extenuating circumstance at play here, let us know! The guidelines are flexible, but if you're trying to bend them, you have to provide a good reason for doing so. I'll give you an example. One of my caches is too close to another cache. I pointed out to the reviewer that although the caches are more than 100' too close to each other, mine is on an island and by the time you walk to the bridge, over the river, and back to the other cache, you end up going far more than 528'. Also, you'd have to be an idiot to try to wade across the Ottawa River, even if it is the more minor part that goes between the island and the shore. Another one of my caches was even closer to another cache! The extenuating circumstance? To walk straight from the one to the other would require scaling a cliff!

Link to comment

"Absolutrely - but blinkies bore me"

 

If they bore you why did you keep on complaining that Groundspeak didnt change the rules for you to hide one within .1 miles of another cache? Something tells me from reading over your posts that you like to complain and be angry, and nothing anyone says will change that. You cant accept being wrong. Its not healthy. I suggest steping away from this forum for a bit, go and do something fun, and follow the guidelines if you place a cache again.

Link to comment

I was? So honestly (try) how many ultramarathoners would be sent to my friends' store by this cache. Really? How many? Maybe, maybe, I will grant that one person who has run 50K may come to that store due to the cache. Other than, I dare you to really justisy that allegation. Come on - I am waiting. Find me one cache that has more than 3 ultramarathoners in the world find and I will retract everything I have said. Or are you too busy ignoring your own caches to count the 1 or 2 runners to reply?

 

You'll have to provide some market research data if you want to me to come up with an analysis of the store's market and the potential efficacy of your advertising. Is your friend's store really staying in business on the basis of three customers worldwide? No wonder you want to advertise for them!

 

Still, I doubt that Groundspeak will let you publish your cachevertisement on the grounds that it won't be effective.

 

 

Wow - you don't only not read what I write, but you don't read what you write. I could place a cache in a shop intended for those who breed Llamas and you would claim "How can they stay in business if they rely only on 3000 breeders"....it was the number of ultramarthoners that also do geocaching that was the point. You do yourself a disservice by trying to come up with clever arguments.

Link to comment

it was the number of ultramarthoners that also do geocaching that was the point

 

Can you explain the methodology you used to come up with three? I'm curious to know how you identified these geocacher-marathoners. Did you identify them when you and your friend came up with the cache advertising idea?

Link to comment

"And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions other than to move the cache"

 

BINGO. Move your cache, and there shouldnt be an issue. You say this building is historical, Im sure there must be some way to build a historic building puzzle cache by having them visit this location, and hide the cache somewhere else.

 

Absolutrely - but blinkies bore me. This cache was intended to bring families to a historic site and supply them a wonderful cache...not a chance to sign a slip of paper and add 1 more to their overall fund count. A hide-a-key may have lasted a week at most before being muggled. I chose not to move it but publish it on other caching sites. I accepted that. Others here (you) seem to have a problem with it.

 

Is there no green space with a mile or two of this theatre? A park, or something?

 

The final doesn't have to be right at the theatre, you know. You can just make that a 'question to answer' waypoint.

Link to comment

"Absolutrely - but blinkies bore me"

 

If they bore you why did you keep on complaining that Groundspeak didnt change the rules for you to hide one within .1 miles of another cache? Something tells me from reading over your posts that you like to complain and be angry, and nothing anyone says will change that. You cant accept being wrong. Its not healthy. I suggest steping away from this forum for a bit, go and do something fun, and follow the guidelines if you place a cache again.

 

Something tells me you didn't read what you write about. How many times did I complain about that blinkie? It wasn't even in my original post responding to a question about commercial caches. I didn't even appeal. I accepted it (yes, I think some flexability would have been nice, but never complained about it here, never appealed, I moved it) Thanks for your suggestions - I have already placed 3 more caches - just not published them on geocaching.com. Why would you assume that if have an opinion that is not alligned with you that it is unhealthy? Who has the issue? And, you and a few others keep saying "follow the guidelines"....please READ the guidelines before you write that. The guidelines themselves are just that, guidelines. They state they are "generally" applied. They state they are "presumptions" only and can be overcome. And they claim exceptions can be requested. That is all we did...followed the guidelines.

Link to comment

it was the number of ultramarthoners that also do geocaching that was the point

 

Can you explain the methodology you used to come up with three? I'm curious to know how you identified these geocacher-marathoners. Did you identify them when you and your friend came up with the cache advertising idea?

 

You can publically retract that now. It is your opportunity. If you want to attack me that is fine - but to come up with absolutely false and defamatory statements about me and my friends is something else.

Link to comment

I have to know. If this shop caters specifically to 'ultra-marathoners,' what could they possibly sell?

 

I'd understand if they catered specifically to high level athletes/runners, but what specific equipment would an 'ultra-marathoner' need, that somebody who frequently participates in local fun runs wouldn't? And how is there so much equipment that a speciality store like this could possibly stay in business?

Link to comment

"And, you should go back and actually read...GS never offered suggestions other than to move the cache"

 

BINGO. Move your cache, and there shouldnt be an issue. You say this building is historical, Im sure there must be some way to build a historic building puzzle cache by having them visit this location, and hide the cache somewhere else.

 

Absolutrely - but blinkies bore me. This cache was intended to bring families to a historic site and supply them a wonderful cache...not a chance to sign a slip of paper and add 1 more to their overall fund count. A hide-a-key may have lasted a week at most before being muggled. I chose not to move it but publish it on other caching sites. I accepted that. Others here (you) seem to have a problem with it.

 

Yes, there is a park about 0.1 miles away with a cache called something like "Elvis Lives" in a tree in the park.

 

Is there no green space with a mile or two of this theatre? A park, or something?

 

The final doesn't have to be right at the theatre, you know. You can just make that a 'question to answer' waypoint.

Link to comment

And they claim exceptions can be requested.

 

The fact that exceptions can be requested doesn't mean they will always be granted, nor should they be. If every exception was granted, the guidelines would serve no purpose. Your cache violated the guidelines in an insidious fashion. The mere fact of an appeal doesn't mean the appeal is worthy of consideration. Groundspeak has many good reasons to keep caches like this off their site, and I am pleased to see that they stick to their guns when it comes to this kind of exploitation.

Link to comment

I have to know. If this shop caters specifically to 'ultra-marathoners,' what could they possibly sell?

 

I'd understand if they catered specifically to high level athletes/runners, but what specific equipment would an 'ultra-marathoner' need, that somebody who frequently participates in local fun runs wouldn't? And how is there so much equipment that a speciality store like this could possibly stay in business?

 

Generally, it is gear that allows one to run 24 to 48 hours in the mountains at one time. Special running shoes, calf sleeves, cold weather gear, videos on ultramarathoning, books on trauining, one-on-one coaching, photography services, etc. I think they are able to stay in business because there are a lot of ultramarathoners in northern California (that is where the 100 mile trail run in the USA started) but hardly any of them are also geocachers...I believe this is true based upon polls I have taken and interactions with other ultramarathoners. I am happy to hear from other ultramarathoners here.

Link to comment

"Something tells me you didn't read what you write about. How many times did I complain about that blinkie?"

 

In posts #27, 29, and 33.

 

" Who has the issue?"

 

You apperently, otherwise why would you bring it up and keep up with it for this long?

 

"They state they are "presumptions" only and can be overcome. And they claim exceptions can be requested."

 

Yes, and where does it say that every appeal will be granted. If theres a good reason to make an exception, then Im sure they will. One of my caches has an exception to one of the guidelines after one of my area reviewers decided to ask others what their take on it would be, so I know first hand it can and does happen.

 

I also find it interesting that you completely didnt answer why if nano caches are so boring why you were complaining about it on here.

Link to comment

I have to know. If this shop caters specifically to 'ultra-marathoners,' what could they possibly sell?

 

I'd understand if they catered specifically to high level athletes/runners, but what specific equipment would an 'ultra-marathoner' need, that somebody who frequently participates in local fun runs wouldn't? And how is there so much equipment that a speciality store like this could possibly stay in business?

 

This has been puzzling me as well.

 

I'd also like to know how this individual - who claims that the cache isn't there to advertise - knows with certainty that the intersection between ultramarathoners and geocachers comes to a worldwide total of three.

Link to comment

They state they are "presumptions" only and can be overcome. And they claim exceptions can be requested. That is all we did...followed the guidelines.

 

You did, and your request was denied because you did not present a compelling enough reason for an exception.

 

Make up your mind...did I follow the guidelines or did I not? Am I mad because I was seeking spoeacial treatment (as your wife claims) or because I feel GS did not follow their own posted guidelines?

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...