Jump to content

Why are you so discouraging to new cache hiders?


Tehuti

Recommended Posts

I have set up three caches. Each time I have been brought to tears by reviewers finding hidden rules that I have supposedly broken.

 

The first time was because I put in a background on the web page that the Sidetracked micros web site asked me to put in! The second time was because a clump of ivy was deemed to be church premises, even though it was accessible without going into the church yard.

 

The current one is because I did not put in a hidden waypoint to the final location of a puzzle cache. I was not asked to do this by the forms I filled in to set up the cache, so how was I supposed to know? However, I did put the final coordinates into a note to the reviewer, who presumably did not bother to read them. The cache was set up on April 17. On April 19 I got a a message from someone called Anthea saying she was disabling the cache because of the coordinates. I immediately trawled through everything to find out how to make a hidden way point and did this. My cache is still disabled, five days after I changed things. I have no idea if anyone has even bothered to look at it.

 

I am extremely upset by the way I am treated on this site. It took me months to pluck up courage to set up a new cache after the upsets of the first two, and now I'm back once again to stress and tears and being made to feel like dirt.

 

I love geocaching, even though I don't have much time to do it. Once again, though, I'm feeling that perhaps I should just chuck it in.

 

Krys

Link to comment

Hi Krys, yes, cache placement has become more complex over time. There are now far more specific arrangements about where and how caches can be placed for different areas.

 

Your reviewers have certainly written some very polite, encouraging pleasant reviewer notes.

 

The UK reviewer profiles all link to the The Geocaching Association of Great Britain (GAGB) landowner agreement database and other special information of use to UK cachers. I appreciate that first time cache placers have probably not seen this information, however.

 

Your current multi-cache is disabled, and won't be seen again by the reviewer until you enable it.

The reviewer note does mention this, but I understand that there's a LOT of information all packed into a bit of reading.

 

The form you filled out might have warned you at the top that you'd chosen Multi-cache or Unknown and not added any additional wayppoints - but you might have missed that red warning. Or, if you first selected Traditional, and then changed it to Multi-cache, it won't warn you - a weakness of the cache report form.

Link to comment

I have set up three caches. Each time I have been brought to tears by reviewers finding hidden rules that I have supposedly broken.

 

The first time was because I put in a background on the web page that the Sidetracked micros web site asked me to put in! The second time was because a clump of ivy was deemed to be church premises, even though it was accessible without going into the church yard.

 

The current one is because I did not put in a hidden waypoint to the final location of a puzzle cache. I was not asked to do this by the forms I filled in to set up the cache, so how was I supposed to know? However, I did put the final coordinates into a note to the reviewer, who presumably did not bother to read them. The cache was set up on April 17. On April 19 I got a a message from someone called Anthea saying she was disabling the cache because of the coordinates. I immediately trawled through everything to find out how to make a hidden way point and did this. My cache is still disabled, five days after I changed things. I have no idea if anyone has even bothered to look at it.

 

I am extremely upset by the way I am treated on this site. It took me months to pluck up courage to set up a new cache after the upsets of the first two, and now I'm back once again to stress and tears and being made to feel like dirt.

 

I love geocaching, even though I don't have much time to do it. Once again, though, I'm feeling that perhaps I should just chuck it in.

 

Krys

Not sure why the background picture was disallowed but You can ask for an explanation and delete it in the interim. If the cache is in a churchyard it will still be allowed as far as I am aware provided of course you have permission from the church. Reviewers are careful about caches placed in such areas (even if accessible from outside) for- in my view- understandable reasons. On the puzzle cache, putting in a waypoint for the final means that reviewers can see where it is when approving other caches. If you haven't had a reply I suggest a polite email to the reviewer who first looked at it.

 

I am pretty sure that Groundspeak and its reviewers haven't got a vendetta against you so probably no need to get too stressed or morose about it.

Link to comment

Hi

I'm sorry you feel so upset at the way your caches have been reviewed. We are always polite and informative in all the notes we post to caches when we have to temporarily disable them during the review process.

 

To answer your questions. Yes there may appear to be 'hidden' guidelines. The main Geocaching.com guidelines cannot tell you everything about a particular country as they cover the whole world. They do tend to be general. The Geocaching Association of Great Britain has guidelines for the UK. If you've never heard of the GAGB you wouldn't know that either. When your cache was temporarily disabled and sent back to you the reviewer gave you details of the problem. In the case of the cache in the ivy on the churchyard wall the reviewer had to query the location because we don't know where exactly your cache is. So we have to ask you to clarify it. The reviewer note told you the reasons and also gave you a link to the forum post explaining about caches on church property. Of course you probably didn't know about the guideline but that is all part of the review process.

 

The 'sidetracked' cache breached the commercial guidelines because it has banner adverts on it. That has now been changed since your cache was published as we clarified with Groundspeak (who own geocaching.com) to make an exception to this. Links to the sidetracked website now are allowed (and that information posted in this forum).

 

Re the multi-cache. The guidelines (which you have read) do say and I quote: Provide the coordinates of all stages of the multi-cache by using the Additional Waypoints feature. The posted coordinates are for the first stage. If you don't want the coordinates for the rest of the stages displayed to the public, mark them as "hidden." Only the cache owner and reviewers are permitted to view hidden coordinates. Because you'd not added the waypoint for the actual cache my colleague simply disabled the cache and asked you to add them. Just putting them into a reviewer note doesn't work! My colleague even gave you a link to the Knowledge Books to help you add the waypoint. We have various system tools that check caches when we review them and these use those waypoints.

 

I hope this helps explain things to you. We reviewers are always available to answer questions. You can email us through our profiles (just click on the reviewers name where it appears in a log or forum post). You can of course ask questions of the caching community in these (and the GAGB) forum.

 

Finally I suggest you take a look at my Resources for the UK website (link under my signature) which has a lot of information about the very things you've queried. This link appears under most of the reviewers signature on logs.

 

Edited to add: As pointed out above you do need to enable the multi-cache otherwise it won't appear in the queue of caches waiting for review - we won't see it!

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Edited by Graculus
Link to comment

Your current multi-cache is disabled, and won't be seen again by the reviewer until you enable it.

The reviewer note does mention this, but I understand that there's a LOT of information all packed into a bit of reading.

 

The form you filled out might have warned you at the top that you'd chosen Multi-cache or Unknown and not added any additional wayppoints - but you might have missed that red warning. Or, if you first selected Traditional, and then changed it to Multi-cache, it won't warn you - a weakness of the cache report form.

 

Hello Palmetto and Pieman and thank you for answering.

 

Palmetto, I have made the changes requested to the cache, so I do not understand why it is disabled. I cannot see anywhere where I can enable it.

 

The form warned me I might need additional waypoints for parking etc. It did not say that I needed a hidden waypoint nor did it mention that it was possible to put in a hidden waypoint.

 

Pieman, I did sort the other caches and they are active. I got rid of the background on the Sidetracked micro, which is a pity because it had a link to a web site about the whole series. The reason for the banning was that the Sidetracked micros website has Adsense on it. Again, this is not something that seems an obvious crime since most web sites have Adsense, so how was I to know? This is the point I was trying to make: there are so many hidden rules here. I didn't immediately set up loads of caches. I waited a couple of years before even daring to make my first two caches, and I tried to copy as closely as possible what I had seen in caches I had found and enjoyed, but even so, that was not good enough. I think the page for registering a cache needs to be more informative and user-friendly.

 

Krys

Link to comment

The Geocaching Association of Great Britain has guidelines for the UK. If you've never heard of the GAGB you wouldn't know that either. When your cache was temporarily disabled and sent back to you the reviewer gave you details of the problem. In the case of the cache in

 

I know about the South Wales geocachers site. I was not aware of any other sites in the UK. I will have a look. As I mentioned in a previous reply, I do not know what to do to enable the cache other than make the changes that were demanded.

Link to comment
<snip>I waited a couple of years before even daring to make my first two caches, and I tried to copy as closely as possible what I had seen in caches I had found and enjoyed, but even so, that was not good enough. I think the page for registering a cache needs to be more informative and user-friendly.<snip>

One of the problems with this game is that it constantly changes. A few years ago we didn't worry about caches near railways stations or airports. Now due to the increased terrorist threat in the UK such caches probably won't be allowed. Similarly we recently introduced a new guideline about caches at war memorials. It was felt by the community such caches are not respectful of such locations. Caches that may have been published previously at such a location are considered 'grandfathered in' and wouldn't need to be moved.

 

You are quite likely to have seen a cache in a location that is no longer allowed. My resource site and the GAGB site keep a list of all such changes and of course the main geocaching.com guidelines are also updated from time to time.

 

Regarding the form you fill in, if you want to get changes made to it then please use the Feedback option available on the website. If you don't tell us, we won't know what issues there are :blink:

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Edited by Graculus
Link to comment

When you're a geocacher you see new cache listings appearing day by day, week by week... there they are popping up like daisies... it makes it seem so easy...

 

What many cachers are not aware of is that many caches have to go backwards and forwards between prospective cache owner and reviewer many times before they are fully Guideline compliant for listing on this site. Some may go back and forwards 6... 8... 10+ times before they get published - but the cacher who simply sees that new listing appear has no way of knowing all the background trials and tribulations and the efforts made by both cache owner and reviewer to get that cache out there, ready to be found.

 

It all gets easier with practice!

 

Good luck - I'm sure your cache will get there eventually.

 

MrsB :)

Edited by The Blorenges
Link to comment

I suspect the check box "Enable cache listing" needs to be ticked. It's not far from the top of the submission form.

 

Thank you Pieman!!! I didn't see that when I was putting in the extra waypoint, and afterwards did not realise I had to go back to that screen. :unsure:

Link to comment
The current one is because I did not put in a hidden waypoint to the final location of a puzzle cache. I was not asked to do this by the forms I filled in to set up the cache, so how was I supposed to know? However, I did put the final coordinates into a note to the reviewer, who presumably did not bother to read them.

 

The guidelines as currently written certainly are vague on this one.

Link

 

"Give as detailed information as possible to the reviewer when you submit the cache. Report the coordinates for the actual cache location and use the "Additional Waypoints" feature to input any other relevant stages or clues."

 

It talks about reporting the actual coordinates and then says to use Additional Waypoints for any other relevant stages. This is poorly written because I remember when the Additional Waypoints functionality was added to the site and I remember being told (likely via the forums?) that all Puzzles were required to have the actual coordinates listed as an Additional Waypoint. I assume because it makes it easier (perhaps even automatic?) for the reviewers to check for proximity or permission issues?

 

Prior to that including the actual coordinates in a Reviewer Note was the accepted method but I know that changed so I am surprised the Guideline doesn't spell that out clearly.

 

It can be very tough to place a cache and meet all the guidelines, especially as they change and evolve over time. It can be discouraging but the Reviewers have a tough job to do to keep the game going. Chin up! Experience is a great teacher and it will get easier each time.

Link to comment

Also, make sure you put the "correct" co-ords in the "hidden waypoints" of a puzzle cache......unlike me, didn't I go and put the co-ords of ANOTHER puzzle cache final location of mine.......then wondered why it was disabled due to "proximity issues with another cache".........stoopid me! Better to double and treble check before hitting the "submit changes" button :laughing:

 

Good luck with your cache.

Link to comment

Thank you for all the encouraging comments, and especially to MrsB for pointing out that many caches go through a long toing and froing before being published. I really didn't think that was the case! :anicute:

 

I've reactivated the cache, now I know how, and hopefully things will move on.

Link to comment

Rest assured that even people who've submitted more than 100 caches over a period of years (like me) find it tricky to get a cache through review first try. Also rest assured that all the extra local rules and complexities have been thoroughly questioned and argued about over the past few years (mostly to no avail, it has to be said!).

So you're not on your own. Don't give up. I agree that you now need a course in cache setting before starting out, but your reviewer (and fellow cachers on here) will be happy to point the way.

Link to comment

Tehuti. Don't give up is the best advice I can give you.

I'm in an area where caches pop up like weeds, we have some VERY prolific cache places locally and talking to some they still get problems getting them passed.

Looking at the local caches I decided that the multitude of nanos, micros and smalls in some large rings, especially in woods, I could and should do something different and better. Plus I could combine two hobbies, exploring the local mines and quarries and geocaching.

It was a long learning experience, the first was different and to be honest a bit hit and miss as to the cache experience. The second I changed and improved the means of finding the cache location and as gps doesn't work underground, finding the route to the cache once inside the quarry. Both the first two have been archived for access reasons. But they were good experience for me.

This led on to the current Below Above series. It took about six months of working out where and how, getting the permissions writing the routes and then creating the page. The first one I submitted was naturally rejected, I hadn't included the final location. How the f*** was I going to work that out when as mentioned a gps doesn't work underground? Basically I cheated slightly. I realised that as long as it was about right and the reviewer could see it was he was happy and I was happy. It took a LOT of mails between the reviewer and myself to sort out how we could get them passed but we did. I suspect the reviewer actually did a little cheating himself to help get them passed. But the first four Below Aboves all went live on the same day as I'd requested.

Then along came Below Above number five. I thought it would be easier as the reviewer and I had been through it all before. I wrote the page up as I had done in the past, almost exactly the same format, posted all the relevant co-ordinates and included a note to the reviewer to help. Did it get passed? Like f*** did it! In the period between Below Above 1-4 and 5 a new reviewer had come along, so the joint education had to start all over again LOL. One change the new reviewer wanted was I hadn't included attributes. I decided to be fair and include appropriate ones, like caving equipment needed etc and not be silly and use not suitable for cars etc. It was tempting though lol.

Soon I'll be placing the next and last two Below Aboves. One I'm hoping will be a ring of ten caches underground. The reviewers say all the mystery start references have to be different and a GPS must be used in each case. I'd have liked to write the route to stage 1, then write from 1 proceed North and turn left after 50 metres etc. But it seems I won't be able to. I'm still thinking up the right way to cheat on that and please Groundspeak. Oh I'll work it out :P

But has it been worth while? Most certainly. The logs from people who've thanked me and enjoyed the experience pushing themselves beyond their normal comfort zone in some case has been the greatest reward far beyond any expectations I could have dreamt of.

The biggest surprise wasn't meeting a reviewer at an event, but the two involved in passing the caches. They thanked me as it was something different for them and pushed their skills and limits. They appreciated the experience too, but both admitted they'd not be doing the series for various reasons. Your logs might not read as mine do, stories of epic adventures but you'll still feel the reward and be proud of your achievements.

The greatest bonus though has been that so far each Below Above has been awarded an Ambrel Top Cache Award. I'm hoping to make it seven by the time the Below Above series ends.

Why seven? I don't want the Below Above experience to become thinned by excess and also I'm planning something else which I've already discussed with those two reviewers and they're looking forward to as much as I am.

 

Clawz

Link to comment

Only just looking at the forums this morning as with the nice weather have been kept very busy reviewing my own areas and South Wales whilst the reviewer is on holiday, and being a new area my review times are taking longer as I get to grips with Welsh place names!

 

Just to give you some idea this morning I have published 15 caches, disabled 11 and archived 1. Of those I disabled 2 are for the second time. Mrs B is right, many caches go back and forth quite a few times before being published. Sometimes because the explanation doesn't clarify, sometimes because I haven't spotted something first time or because a change has brought along a new issue.

 

But what all the reviewers do is try to work with you to have your caches published. The resources that Graculus has suggested are great please use them, I do as a reviewer and cache placer!

Link to comment

It is sometimes very hard to get things just right to please to reviewers...but trust me keep at it....remember it could be worse as anyone familiar with the fight i had with the powers to be Your havin a laugh...and i still lost even though it was active for years and cachers loved it....i nearly threw in the tail then and am still bitter how it seemed to be one way traffic.....i received one email from GC and that was to tell me to shut up and go away....i was mad.. murderous.....took me months of therapy to get over it!...in fact not over it!.....still resentful.But working on it to get it back on line...still got a good few years left in me yet....i will fight til i drop!

Link to comment

I am extremely upset by the way I am treated on this site. It took me months to pluck up courage to set up a new cache after the upsets of the first two, and now I'm back once again to stress and tears and being made to feel like dirt.

 

You have to jump through hoops otherwise we'd have tonnes of caches without the correct waypoints or the wrong coordinates or clues etc (more than we do now!). I would say placing a puzzle cache for one of your first was probably a bit ambitious too.

 

I had done 5 traditional hides before I submitted my multi-cache and I'd done many multi-caches before that but it still took me a lot of research and work to make sure everything was in order before I submitted - and it got accepted straight away.

 

Even this weekend I set a new (traditional) cache and the reviewer questioned certain aspects of it, which I didn't mind at all, they are doing their (unpaid) job.

 

Much of what they send is actually pre-written so can sound a bit formal, while reviewers are always polite, they don't have time to hold your hand and guide you through the process.

Link to comment
You have to jump through hoops otherwise we'd have tonnes of caches without the correct waypoints or the wrong coordinates or clues etc (more than we do now!).

Yes - players don't get to see the caches which the reviewers weren't able to publish. Not all of these are due to minor, borderline issues. :blink:

Link to comment

I sympathise with the OP as it has become more complicated to hide/list a cache in recent years, and it would be useful to have a handy checklist somewhere easily found. It would help hiders and reduce the workload on reviewers.

 

These are most of the questions a new hider should be asking themselves. The guidelines/rules will be found on the GC.com site and the GAGB site. Graculus's Follow the Arrow site is excellent and contains pretty much what you need to know. MAGIC map will allow you to identify many specific areas of land which do need specific permission. GAGB database is also worth checking if you're looking at anywhere other than normal countryside. (Yes, real permission is always good but many caches don't have it and don't cause any problems). Forums are also handy founts of info, or ask a local more experienced cacher for some help.

 

Some hiding questions:

  • Is it a good place to bring other people to? (Personal taste - sometimes questionable!)
     
  • Is access ok to this site? Will cachers stand out, be arrested/shot, cause a nuisance? (Common Sense - often quite rare!)
     
  • Is it a banned location: Network Rail property, War memorial, 'terrorist target' (what isn't?), school, playground, etc. (Guidelines/rules)
     
  • Do I need specific permission? Is it in one of the following:
    Church yard, Nature Reserve, SSSI, Woodland Trust, National Trust, Forestry Commission, etc (Guidelines/rules)
     
  • Is it a good hiding place - will it be invisible to muggles? Will it last frequent cachers finding and rehiding it? Will it protect the box from the rain? Will it be different in another season? (Common sense and cunning)
     
  • Make sure it's not in a wall or attached to something potentially dangerous like an electrickery box. (Guidelines/rules)
     
  • Is it a location I want to return to 'often' to carry out maintenance? (Yes, you will need to revisit, sometimes quite frequently)
     
  • What size box do I need? (The bigger the better usually!)
     
  • How can I add a fun twist? Is there anywhere better? (Is this really worth it? Anything sneaky/fun/better?)
     
  • How near is the next cache, am I more than 160m away and does this spot need another cache if I'm that close? (Does it add to or disrupt other cache series?)

 

The simple version is:

Find a great location that is brill.

Get permission from the landowner.

Hide a nice box well.

List the cache with all the details needed.

Watch it get published and the finders rush out.

 

Don't be paranoid - the reviewers aren't out to get you. Generally, they are helpful folk often dealing with cachers who haven't thought much about what they are doing. Yes, it can be confusing all the rules and forms, but with a bit of work it can be done. Obviously, the more you want to 'push the envelope' of what is seen as a normal cache, or an exotic/unusual location, the more work needs to be done, often with the reviewers assistance.

 

Having hidden over 200 caches, I've only had a couple of minor issues picked up by the reviewers. Nearly all of my caches I've sorted out properly and so they have been reviewed quickly and ok'd. :)

Link to comment

Tehuti I'm glad you've persevered with placing your caches. Having a cache submission rejected doesn't mean you're a rubbish cacher. I've totally messed up on some of my caches and had them rejected for lots of reasons. I found the reviewers very helpful, and after following their guidance, managed to get everything right and the caches were published.

 

Martlakes, your list of questions is very useful, thanks.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...