DO you reviewers actually KNOW the area

[mresoteric]

the OP appears to not be a he.

 

There's the problem.

[+CachinStrattons]

Any IDIOT can tell.

 

Its bloody stupid, insane and anal retentive.

 

Comments like this will NOT help your cause.

[+Panther&Pine]

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility.

Two things I don't see:

1. Evidence of the OP having limited mobility.
   
2. Why it matters.

Also, based on the pics in their profile that appear to be taken from arm's length, the OP appears to not be a he.

 

Being mobility impaired is not an excuse to be rude, or to require extra special consideration.

 

 

I am mobility impaired (some days more so then others), and the only consideration I'd like is for people to rate their caches correctly.

[+Too Tall John]

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility.

Two things I don't see:

1. Evidence of the OP having limited mobility.
   
2. Why it matters.

Also, based on the pics in their profile that appear to be taken from arm's length, the OP appears to not be a he.

Being mobility impaired is not an excuse to be rude, or to require extra special consideration.

Then we agree.

 

I did say I don't see why it mattered, after all...

[+caccbag]

I was born in my "area", grew up in the nearby area, went to school in my area and lived in my area for 20+ years since graduating from university.....and geocaching exposes me to places that I have never seen or was even aware of before geocaching in that very same area. Reviewers are probably the same - they may know an area very well, but they certainly can't be expected to know every park, cul de sac, school, building and other location.

 

Here, the reviewers are basically two individuals that oversee huge metrolopitan and rural areas in northern California. I doubt anyone knows the layout of every single school or park in such a huge area. Plus, google maps are not fool-proof. I once had a local review temporaily disable a proposed listing because he/she thought it was on a school grounds (and the map did make it look as such). I pointed out that it was not, but in a nearby open field used by both the school and public seperated by about 40 feel of stairs. The reviewer then allowed it -but I decided to simply move it as I did not want to cause any issues. A very similar thing with another proposed placement - but here there were physical barriers separating the school grounds from the park and it was impossible for someone to get from one to the other without exiting and walking a long route around the parameters. That one was allowed after that explanation and still exists with no issues today. Reviewers are people volunteering their time and doing the best they can to make geocachers happy while trying to be mindful of Groundspeak rules (which I believe contain much inconstistency and vagueness and sometimes outright errors which do not make a reviewer's job any easier).

[+Too Tall John]

When I first started caching, the reviewer in my state (New Hampshire) was from South Carolina. He was covering at least 3 other states, and has found a grand total of nine caches in NH. (Looking into his hides, at least a couple of those finds were after he was no longer reviewing here, too!)

 

In my opinion, he did a great job. Any questions that ever came up were able to be resolved, he's a great communicator, something I think they look for in reviewers.

 

If you're going off on your reviewer, who seems to be somewhat more local, because they asked for clarification on a new placement, maybe you need to look inward.

[+Panther&Pine]

When I first started caching, the reviewer in my state (New Hampshire) was from South Carolina. He was covering at least 3 other states, and has found a grand total of nine caches in NH. (Looking into his hides, at least a couple of those finds were after he was no longer reviewing here, too!)

 

Mine has 15 finds, all events. Sometimes I think it is important to point out that their Reveiwer account is not their player account.

[+Too Tall John]

When I first started caching, the reviewer in my state (New Hampshire) was from South Carolina. He was covering at least 3 other states, and has found a grand total of nine caches in NH. (Looking into his hides, at least a couple of those finds were after he was no longer reviewing here, too!)

Mine has 15 finds, all events. Sometimes I think it is important to point out that their Reveiwer account is not their player account.

Not necessarily. Groundspeak gives them that option. Edited April 11, 2011 by Too Tall John

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

When I first started caching, the reviewer in my state (New Hampshire) was from South Carolina. He was covering at least 3 other states, and has found a grand total of nine caches in NH. (Looking into his hides, at least a couple of those finds were after he was no longer reviewing here, too!)

 

In my opinion, he did a great job. Any questions that ever came up were able to be resolved, he's a great communicator, something I think they look for in reviewers.

 

If you're going off on your reviewer, who seems to be somewhat more local, because they asked for clarification on a new placement, maybe you need to look inward.

 

I think I know him. He is the reviewer for Rhode Island, and still does a great job, even all the way from South Carolina.

[sabrefan7]

Looks like some ones breakfast cereal was befouled. 4 different reviewers posting to your thread. Unless the cache has explicite permission granted, a school or play ground is the worst place for a cache to be near. Its just common sense

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility. So, I'd assume he's limited in where he goes.

 

You guys/gals are just too nice in the way ya'll are treating him.

Besides it being completely irrelevant. One could asume that your also wrong on both parts.

[+popokiiti]

Interesting, I see by clicking on swan_jun_g3 there has been a name change. Eternal_Sailor_Moon is the new moniker.

Anyways, thanks to all our reviewers...I know your job isn't easy. And look out!!!! I'm thinking of placing another cache sometime.....

[+Shop99er]

Looks like some ones breakfast cereal was befouled. 4 different reviewers posting to your thread. Unless the cache has explicite permission granted, a school or play ground is the worst place for a cache to be near. Its just common sense

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility. So, I'd assume he's limited in where he goes.

 

 

So what? That doesn't give him/her permission to be rude.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

 

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility. So, I'd assume he's limited in where he goes.

 

You guys/gals are just too nice in the way ya'll are treating him.

 

While this (added highlight) may well be true... it is certainly better than unduly calling out a reviewer, or resorting directly to name calling.

Based upon that, this type of backlash should have been expected by the OP. Ranting is one thing, mudslinging is something else.

[+briansnat]

 

Looking at his profile, he seems to have limited mobility. So, I'd assume he's limited in where he goes.

 

You guys/gals are just too nice in the way ya'll are treating him.

 

While this (added highlight) may well be true... it is certainly better than unduly calling out a reviewer, or resorting directly to name calling.

Based upon that, this type of backlash should have been expected by the OP. Ranting is one thing, mudslinging is something else.

 

Consider how different the reception would have been had the OP instead wrote:

 

"I recently tried to publish a second cache and a comment back that it was denied due to being on school property. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the guidelines, because my cache is in a public park 300 feet from the school. Could someone perhaps clarify the guideline for me because on the surface I think my reviewer might be wrong. If I believe he is wrong, what are my options?"

[Pup Patrol]

Interesting, I see by clicking on swan_jun_g3 there has been a name change. Eternal_Sailor_Moon is the new moniker.

Anyways, thanks to all our reviewers...I know your job isn't easy. And look out!!!! I'm thinking of placing another cache sometime.....

 

Name changes usually take effect in the forums, too, no? Or does one need to log back into the forums for it to happen?

[+Bear and Ragged]

Name changes usually take effect in the forums, too, no? Or does one need to log back into the forums for it to happen?

If you start a thread, the names stays as the thread starter.

Otherwise, yes, the name changes. (Providing you log out/log back in for the changes to take affect)

[+LightHouseSeekers]

That is why reviewers use online mapping tools - the same ones available to cache owners.

Could we have examples, please?

 

I ask because one tool I used in the past (don't recall which one)

didn't show the proper position of a RR line so I could make a placement

far enough away. The same tool even showed existing caches to be on the

opposite side of the RR line.

[+briansnat]

That is why reviewers use online mapping tools - the same ones available to cache owners.

Could we have examples, please?

 

I ask because one tool I used in the past (don't recall which one)

didn't show the proper position of a RR line so I could make a placement

far enough away. The same tool even showed existing caches to be on the

opposite side of the RR line.

 

They are basically the same ones that are linked to on each cache page. Google maps, Mytopo, Mapquest, Yahoo maps, Bing, Open Street. Google Earth also is heavily used and the street view where available.

[+StarBrand]

Very few folks around here know the local reviewer even when he is at an event. I laugh at some of the idle talk around him complaining about cache submissions.

 

I was told within days after he became the reviewer so I never made the same 'small talk'.

[+geodarts]

That is why reviewers use online mapping tools - the same ones available to cache owners.

Could we have examples, please?

 

I ask because one tool I used in the past (don't recall which one)

didn't show the proper position of a RR line so I could make a placement

far enough away. The same tool even showed existing caches to be on the

opposite side of the RR line.

 

They are basically the same ones that are linked to on each cache page. Google maps, Mytopo, Mapquest, Yahoo maps, Bing, Open Street. Google Earth also is heavily used and the street view where available.

 

In my area there are some tricky boundaries between National Park Service land, state parks, county open space, and water district lands. My understanding is that the reviewers use maps specific to the NPS, which sometimes appear to be hard to read.

 

There have been more than one occasion, on first review, caches on state park or water district lands have been rejected for being on NPS land. My friends and I have generally been able to work this out with the reviewer, using a variety of maps, some of which are not on the Groundspeak site. By the same token, we have noticed that a cache is occasionally approved that is on NPS land, and have been able to bring this to the attention of the reviewers as well.

 

So local knowledge helps. I am very familiar with all the boundaries and would like to think that I have a reputation for being accurate. But I also know that our reviewers are very supportive, will readily respond to questions, and are working for the good of the game -- so I approach them with this attitude and the respect that anyone who devotes time to this game deserves.

Edited April 12, 2011 by mulvaney

[+briansnat]

That is why reviewers use online mapping tools - the same ones available to cache owners.

Could we have examples, please?

 

I ask because one tool I used in the past (don't recall which one)

didn't show the proper position of a RR line so I could make a placement

far enough away. The same tool even showed existing caches to be on the

opposite side of the RR line.

 

They are basically the same ones that are linked to on each cache page. Google maps, Mytopo, Mapquest, Yahoo maps, Bing, Open Street. Google Earth also is heavily used and the street view where available.

 

In my area there are some tricky boundaries between National Park Service land, state parks, county open space, and water district lands. My understanding is that the reviewers use maps specific to the NPS, which sometimes appear to be hard to read.

 

There have been more than one occasion, on first review, caches on state park or water district lands have been rejected for being on NPS land. My friends and I have generally been able to work this out with the reviewer, using a variety of maps, some of which are not on the Groundspeak site. By the same token, we have noticed that a cache is occasionally approved that is on NPS land, and have been able to bring this to the attention of the reviewers as well.

 

So local knowledge helps. I am very familiar with all the boundaries and would like to think that I have a reputation for being accurate. But I also know that our reviewers are very supportive, will readily respond to questions, and are working for the good of the game -- so I approach them with this attitude and the respect that anyone who devotes time to this game deserves.

 

In areas where there are shape files available reviewers will use them. Wilderness.net has shape files for wilderness areas for example. Some state park systems have provided shape files and shape files can also be found online, but in the absence of them reviewers are for the most part just using the same maps available to everyone else.

 

Very few folks around here know the local reviewer even when he is at an event. I laugh at some of the idle talk around him complaining about cache submissions.

 

I was told within days after he became the reviewer so I never made the same 'small talk'.

 

I've been on group hunts with reviewers who are in the closet and listened to people bad mouth the reviewer to his face, not realizing who they were talking to. It's actually quite funny.

Edited April 13, 2011 by briansnat

[+Dr. House]

I recently tried to publish a second cache and a comment back that it was denied due to being on school property. The cache is obviously in a public park. Any IDIOT can tell just by puttting the co-ords in google maps. Interesting enough, not a bloody response when i relisted the cache explaining it wasnt on school property. Its bloody stupid, insane and anal retentive.

 

I am convinced half the reviewers dont know the area or even live in the same city or province

 

Its frustrating and annnoying when i have come across many caches on school property. Right by the back school playground and in somne cases almost right in front of the school entrance.

 

I have come to a conclusion that if u r personal friends with a reviewer you caches tend to be reviewed quicker and / or a little bit more "flexibility" is given. Its not what you know...but who u know. Same with quite a few "FTF" in the Toronto area. I find it rather "coincidental" that a few ppl in my area always seem to have ftf's with people they go caching with on a regular basis.

 

As for the "life is good" comment someone wrote.... i would gladly trade places with u

 

Now reading this post with the backstory, I'm just beside myself. The faceless person you insult is so far removed from your description that I believe if you were to actually meet them in person, you'd probably feel rather silly about this whole incident.

 

I have the pleasure of calling CacheDrone a close friend. I don't fear being the friend of a Reviewer as others have mentioned in this thread because I strongly feel that I am a better cacher as a result of his guidance. Through listening, writing to each other on listings, phone calls, texts, personal emails, and just plain ol' hanging out with him, I've learned so much about the nuances of this game/hobby that I would likely not have otherwise figured out myself in as short a time as I have. I'm not the smartest person on earth, but I do recognize that working against those folks who would help you more fully enjoy this little website we've got the pleasure of knowing about is exceptionally counterproductive, and really, in the end, the only person who loses in that exchange is yourself.

 

It's easy to be ignorant and petulant and stomp your feet when you perceive you've been wronged, whereas it takes effort and respect to recognize that this issue with your unpublished cache is just part of the learning curve. Please take a moment to accept the fact that the VR's are, in fact, here to help you get your listing published and will help you if you'll accept it. We've got 4 good ones, so use them as a resource.

 

At the end of the day, this little game/hobby we love is not worth getting this worked up about. It is just a great race against nobody where the ultimate goal is feeling like a kid again, rather than acting like one.

[+humboldt flier]

What kind of idiot would call his reviewer an idiot?

 

Talk about putting one's foot in one's mouth.

 

Does not portend well for a huggy, kissy future.