Jump to content

Appeal Process for Cache Approval


hydrashok407
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I tried submitting a cache for approval. The kicker is, it's on private property and an entrance fee is required.

 

After a bout of emails, I concluded that no matter what case I presented, the particular person I was dealing with wasn't going to approve the cache.

 

Is there an appeals process, or am I just out of luck? It's an unusual cache, and there aren't that many (less than 10) in the US.

 

Thanks.

 

-=Jerry Goodson=- aka hydrashok

Link to comment

Could you give some info about the cache in question?

 

The reason caches on private property with fees are turned down is the 'commercial' aspect of it.

 

I, however, know that lots of state parks (and National Parks) charge entrance fees. I know of some caches on private land that require fees. Think non-profit places, such as historical sites. If you list that there is a fee on the cache description page - I don't see the problem.

 

but then again I'd have to see the details on the cache.

 

Of course, my opinion doesnt matter. Your best bet is asking the approver if there is anything you could do to get it approved. My experience is they will work with you to get it approved if at all possible.

 

sd

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

The cache is at:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=89892

 

The only note I got was "oops", so I started with the asking questions. It seems that everytime I sent a point, he came back with another reason to not approve it.

 

Our basic exchanges were:

Me: Is this OK?

Him: It's commercial in nature.

Me: It's a special type of cache (SCUBA) and any park is going to charge a fee. Look at the SCUBA Doo cache, they charge a fee.

Him: How much is their fee?

Me: (I provided a link to get in to the park)

Him: Ah. It's only $5 and it is a state park and is non-profit.

Me: Look at the Hidden Paradise SCUBA cache, it's just like the Clear Springs SCUBA cache like I'm trying to hide.

Him: That cache is in another state and is over a year old.

 

No matter what argument I can bring up, he has an excuse to not approve it. I posted the fees and such, and that didn't matter to him. He said he was just adhering (strictly) to the rules and guidelines, regardless of the special circumstances and past approved caches.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

Links to unapproved caches go to the 'hide/search' page.

 

YOu'll have to post specifics yourself - cut/paste will do the trick.

 

Of course - the Approver is only doing his job. If you want to have a scooba cache you may have to find another location.

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

I can respect that the approver is doing his job. What my issue is with is the double-standard that I'm being held to. My cache is a copy of another cache that has been approved. The fact that one is over a year old, and in another state doesn't mean we shouldn't have one down here.

 

What I'm after is maybe appealing his decision, and if there is such a process, what is it??

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydrashok407:

I can respect that the approver is doing his job. What my issue is with is the double-standard that I'm being held to. My cache is a copy of another cache that has been approved. The fact that one is over a year old, and in another state doesn't mean we shouldn't have one down here.


 

I'll agree there is some approver bias - as the rules aren't necessarily as hard and fast as they'd like us to believe, this isn't necessarily an example of bias. In some cases one states approver may allow something anothers won't.

 

In this case - the other cache is a YEAR old.

 

Rules change over time. Just recently there was a major flap over virtual crackdowns. Before that locationless, moving, and vacation caches.

 

This sport/game is evolving. Older caches get grandfathered in (except for virtual caches that were originally traditional - I saw an approver archive it and say 'it's not fair for somebody to get credit for a virtual when they found a traditional.' I thought totals didnt matter? - but I digress).

 

What was ok a year ago may not be ok now. The older caches are allowed to stay, but new ones are not approved.

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

I'm still not finding out if I can or how to appeal the disapproval.

 

If a cache is over a year old, and the rules are going to STRICTLY be enforced no matter what special circumstances may be presented, then cache hiders will be forever limited to hiding an ammo can in a gov't funded park or some place like that. I spent a LOT of time preparing this cache (from getting permission from the owners to creating a special logbook) based on what I saw in other caches.

 

The fact is, SCUBA divers (who this cache is limited) EXPECT to pay a fee to dive at their site. This is a SCUBA cache. There HAS to be some kind of allowances for such special caches. Otherwise, how can they justify spending money on special gear? I'm not doing this to make money. Why is OK to place a cache on gov't land where a fee is charged, but not OK to place a cache on private property where a fee is charged? I didn't hide this at an amusement park, I hid it at a SCUBA park. Whether it's gov't land or private land, divers would still have to pay to dive.

 

They should put a special note on "grandfathered" caches stating it's a grandfathered cache, and not to hide a cache based on what we see. The rules are the standards, not existing caches.

 

Sounds pretty anal to me...

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

I took a look at your cache page and have never seen one like this ( they may be out there) . In BIG BOLD letters it said You must be SCUBA certified to get the coordinates!

 

Its not like you have to have a boat, rope, flashlight, how do you make sure the cacher is CERTIFIED,

 

If a cache came through saying that you had to be a Doctor before you could get the coordinates, then what, maybe an astronaut?

 

I would have shot it down to sorry.

 

Tennessee Geocacher

Geocaching.com Admin

 

This is the appeals process but you must explain everything for everyone so they may try to see it as it really is.

Link to comment

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=5e08d6ed-70b6-40bd-9dd3-9bcf10616ac9

 

This is the Hidden Paradise SCUBA Cache. You have to be a certified diver to get this cache. It is on private property and there is an entrance fee.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=fc2fba23-535b-436c-8df1-cdde8a20b289

 

This is the SCUBA Doo cache. You have to be a certified diver to get this cache as well. It is in a "government" lake, so the entry fee goes to the government.

 

In both places, if you plan to dive there, you generally have to show your dive card from a certifying agency (PADI, SSI, etc...)

 

If you compare my cache to the Hidden Paradise SCUBA cache, they both state you need to be a certified diver. If you read the FAQ on Geocaching under the "Where are caches found?" heading, you'll see that it contains the sentence "An underwater cache may only be accessed by scuba." Just because the approver can't get to the cache doesn't mean he shouldn't approve it. I'm starting to get the feeling that's why he's not approving my cache. I can't say for sure.

 

The fact is, I went through a lot of time to prepare this cache based on previously approved caches only to be "shot down" by someone who doesn't even seem interested in "working with me". He was very quick to fire back with excuses to not approve it. While the geocaching GUIDELINES state it shouldn't be commercial in nature, SCUBA is very commercial oriented, whether it's from the government or a private entity. If I owned a McDonald's and placed a cache in my playground, I could understand being denied. It also says in the GUIDELINES that "There are always exceptions".

 

Why is it that I'm being held to policies that others weren't? What do I have to do to be one of those "exceptions"?

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

 

[This message was edited by hydrashok407 on September 01, 2003 at 10:13 PM.]

Link to comment

Private to me means somewhere you can’t go unless you pay:

 

From the Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines

 

Commercial Caches / Caches that Solicit

What is a commercial cache? A commercial use of the web site cache reporting tool is an direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a geocaching.com listing.

 

SCUBA Park is a private lake, and permission has been obtained from the owner to place this cache. not public

 

Your cache page said: rental of everything you need if you do not own your own gear. There is a $20 charge to use the park for a day, and if you want to camp (which is what I normally do...) then it is $5 extra.

 

Tennessee Geocacher

 

You need to compare apples to apples not apples to oranges

Link to comment

Ok, so from the approved Hidden Paradise SCUBA Cache where he said "You will need to drive to the camp office when you first arrive and sign in. There is a $10/day charge for diving. They also have air fill available for $5/tank" wasn't a solicitation?

 

If all I had to do was remove the "solicitation", would my cache have been approved?

 

If I were a diver, and didn't live around here, I would like to know that gear rental was available, as it's cumbersome to fly with gear (especially tanks). If that's considered solicitation, then I'd gladly remove itI could've removed any reference to having to pay anything, as some cache hiders have done, and let people just figure it out for themselves, but that wouldn't have made for happy geocachers.

 

My goal was to hide a SCUBA cache. There are limited areas to dive around here, and you have to pay to get into ALL of them. If I were to have hid this at Possum Kingdom, which is the only "public" (aka government) place to dive around here, there is a parking fee as well as an entrance fee, and it would've cost more to dive there. It's not as large, and not NEAR as nice as the closest feasable site I chose. But if the fact that the government gets the (more) money that it would cost is the deciding factor, then there seems to be a somewhat double standard. No commercial caches, except if the money goes to the government.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

Hindsight is always 20-20. The geocaching guidelines ask that if a cache might be percieved to be of a commercial nature you should ask first, before submitting it.

 

That avoids any subjective decision based on a cache approver's interpretation by putting it upon the shoulders of the site owner - Jeremy - to decide.

 

Incidentally, I approved the first of the two scuba caches you cited, but that was over a year ago when the rules were more relaxed.

If I had seen what would happen with the blue font color I would have archived it outright. icon_wink.gif

 

To ask for permission to place a commercial cache e-mail "contact@Groundspeak.com" with the details.

 

Regarding the "double standard" of where the money goes - yes that is a criteria for cache approval. Not just scuba caches. If a "parking fee" goes to pay for upkeep of a public park it's fine. If the same fee goes to enrich a property owner it's seen as commercial.

 

erik-geocaching.com admin

Link to comment

I agree with you hydrashok-the variance between flexabilty of approvers is extremely frustrating, especially from state to state. Your approver may not even live in the same state as you, or have any idea of the location you are talking about.

I would have done the same as you seeing that there was an exisiting cache in place similar to yours. It looks like you've wasted time and money placing a cache because of the tightening of unspoken "rules"

I would assume that as adults we can all make decisions if we want to give money to a commercial enterprise or not, especially as it lists costs on the web page. I would assume that fans of SCUBA and GeoCaching would appreciate your efforts and not only hit the cache, but help maintain it as well, creating a quality cache for pros and newbies of SCUBA alike. And who knows, maybe more and more people will hear about GeoCaching, thus spreading it's good name.

It seems to me this cache would give people a safe place to dive and cache at the same time, instead of you throwing a container in the middle of a random lake.

 

Anyway, posting to the forum is part of the appeal process and hopefully someone who can make a decision on the matter will read your requests. We've all had those disagreements with approvers at times, and sometimes we've won. It seems a shame yours isn't communicating very well, thus frustrating you. And on top of that the excuse that a cache is a year old and "grandfathered" in is a pretty lame excuse, especially if the rules for commercial placement of caches hasn't been changed or at least re-worded.

 

My two cents, I would approve your cache in a second.

 

imurevenge.gif

"Look at the bones!"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Rabid Bunny:

I agree with you hydrashok-the variance between flexabilty of approvers is extremely frustrating, especially from state to state. Your approver may not even live in the same state as you, or have any idea of the location you are talking about.

I would have done the same as you seeing that there was an exisiting cache in place similar to yours. It looks like you've wasted time and money placing a cache because of the tightening of unspoken "rules"

I would assume that as adults we can all make decisions if we want to give money to a commercial enterprise or not, especially as it lists costs on the web page. I would assume that fans of SCUBA and GeoCaching would appreciate your efforts and not only hit the cache, but help maintain it as well, creating a quality cache for pros and newbies of SCUBA alike. And who knows, maybe more and more people will hear about GeoCaching, thus spreading it's good name.

It seems to me this cache would give people a safe place to dive and cache at the same time, instead of you throwing a container in the middle of a random lake.

 

Anyway, posting to the forum is part of the appeal process and hopefully someone who can make a decision on the matter will read your requests. We've all had those disagreements with approvers at times, and sometimes we've won. It seems a shame yours isn't communicating very well, thus frustrating you. And on top of that the excuse that a cache is a year old and "grandfathered" in is a pretty lame excuse, especially if the rules for commercial placement of caches hasn't been changed or at least re-worded.

 

My two cents, I would approve your cache in a second.

 

http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de/tiere/imurevenge.gif

"Look at the bones!"


Yup, this is part of the appeals process. Let the rest of us debate it too.icon_smile.gif

Sounds like it fails miserably on the commercial cache rule, and a simple search of the forums shows that that rule HAS changed in the last year. The guidelines also pretty much tell you that your cache has to stand on it's own merits. Saying your cache should be approved because some other one like it was, some other time, in some other part of the world, doesnt cut it.

I don't agree totally with the current commercial cache guidelines, but when I visit someone elses home I honor their rules. It seems to me the approver is applying the written guidelines pretty fairly to this cache.

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mopar:

I don't agree totally with the current commercial cache guidelines, but when I visit someone elses home I honor their rules. It seems to me the approver is applying the written guidelines pretty fairly to this cache.


 

It also says in the guidelines "There are always exceptions"... given the special nature of this cache (there's only 5 total caches when doing a keyword search on "SCUBA"), why can't this be one of them?.. especially since there's not a single SCUBA cache in a 100 mile radius of this area? How's that for standing on its own merit? I don't think the approver "fairly" followed the guidelines, I think he "strictly" followed the guidelines.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by southdeltan:

I don't see how being strict equates to being unfair.


 

I understand the necessity of guidelines. In those guidelines, however, they imply that they are just guidelines and not hard set unbendable rules. If the approvers are going to treat the guidelines as hard fast strict rules, then we're going to limit the placing of caches so much that they will always be the same ammo containers placed at parks only. The same commercial guidelines that are posted state that there shouldn't be any entrance fees, yet caches are approved. The justification is "they are in public parks, so it isn't technically commercial". So, there is a bend in the rule when it suits them.

 

There is the "strict" vs. "fair" comparison. Why are they strictly following the guidelines (not rules) to the letter with my cache while bending them with others?

 

Let me state, again and very clearly, I'm not selling anything. A logged find on another "commercial" cache was just made yesterday, and the cachers didn't seem to report any disagreement with having to pay the entrance fee. It's in a different state, but not in a different country. Where I'm located, there's not a whole lot of selection, and when I placed this cache, I looked for quality, not whether a private company or the government gets the money.

 

The people that own the SCUBA park sure ain't getting rich off of the park, they just pour the little money they take in back into the park for improvements. That's more than what the government does with the money it brings in.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

Grandfathered caches exist. They do not justify new and similar caches. A couple of my caches would not be approved today.

 

Your cache has a fee. If that fee is for a non profit SCUBA park then you might have a basis for appeal. If the fee is for a for profit business or person, your cache is not approvable on this website. For profit is by definition commercial.

 

It really is as simple as that.

 

SCUBA is a non issue since that just makes the difficulty a 5 for terrain.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Knight:

Grandfathered caches exist. They do not justify new and similar caches. A couple of my caches would not be approved today.

 

Your cache has a fee. If that fee is for a non profit SCUBA park then you might have a basis for appeal. If the fee is for a for profit business or person, your cache is not approvable on this website. For profit is by definition commercial.

 

It really is as simple as that.

 

SCUBA is a non issue since that just makes the difficulty a 5 for terrain.


That is pretty much it in a nutshell. I think the admin did a great job.

 

As ~erik~ said, your next step is to email the contact address to see if this commercial cache could be approved somehow. I would doubt it but you can always ask.

 

One thing I have noticed on the cache page is that the archive note has been deleted. He may have told you the same things but since you deleted the archive note there is no easy way to tell.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by mtn-man:

One thing I have noticed on the cache page is that the archive note has been deleted. He may have told you the same things but since you deleted the archive note there is no easy way to tell.


 

...he wasn't THAT courteous. He just said "OOps".

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

After reading this thread and having direct knowledge of the caches being discussed here I just want to point out a few things for consideration.

These private diving lakes have a lot of expenses (Insurance being the biggest). This is perhaps the cheapest scuba lake I have found to date. You do not have to pay for a Dive Boat, Dive Master fees, and all the other things that are involved in Scuba Diving. In the placement of our Scuba Cache they do not charge for the privilege of caching but for Diving. And any one that wishes to do this cache would know that before they ever went out to try and find it. I have a regular cache in the same site as the Hidden Paradise Cache and they do not charge the people to come onto their property to find this cache. It is for the diving only. Sure they have to make money or they would not be able to operate the dive site.

This cache is not there to bring in customers but to give the Diving cachers a place to come and mix the two hobbies. I have received a lot of email from Cachers all over the US that are divers and want to know of other scuba caches that they can do while on vacation.

I think that the diving community knows that it will cost them before they start to go and find the cache. Diving cost money no matter where you dive.

We spend at least $1000 to buy are equipment and pay for our training and would like to be able to join are other hobbies and get a double bang for our buck. I like diving and I like caching. I would possibly do this new cache if it was approved and I am sure that other cachers/divers would as well.

A $20.00 fee is nothing to the diver that would do this cache. And they could still do several dives for there money. To me the challenge would be doing this cache as a night dive and then a night cache.

We know it will cost before we even get out the door.

 

Cache On!

Indy Diver

icon_smile.gif

 

ingeo-button1.gif

 

[This message was edited by Indy Diver on September 02, 2003 at 04:16 PM.]

 

[This message was edited by Indy Diver on September 02, 2003 at 04:18 PM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydrashok407:

You're my hero! Your post was VERY well said.


Yup, it was very well said. Still doesn't change the fact that under the current guidelines, caches located at for-profit locations (regardless of the actually profit they make) must be cleared by Groundspeak before being submitted. Indy's same reasoning can and has been used to argue for caches in theme parks and private nature preserves, unsucessfully.

Do I really think someone is gonna fork over a wad of cash JUST to go find a cache in Disney? No, I don't, but since the rules of this site now say that it's not allowed, I never submitted the rather cool (I think) multi-virtual I spent two trips to FL working on. Besides, it would also be a vacation cache now. Big deal. Suck it up and go hide a cache they WILL allow, or go start commercialcaching.com, and post it there.

If people took half the time they spend arguing to get the rules changed to allow their cache, and used it creating caches that met the guidelines, we would have a lot more quality caches out there, and a lot fewer gladware trashcaches.

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

Okay, you know you still haven't really answered the question.

 

HydraShock, go post a poll over in the General forum and present your case the best you can. Don't comment on how others are allowed, but your was shot down, let it stand on it's own.

 

Quite frankly, what I see above is another development that makes me uncomfortable. The best I've gotten out of it is if there is a fee that your must determine if the operator is private and if he makes a profit. What the heck does that have anything to do with it being "commercial?" I can make caches that are more commercial than the one described here and you'd never know about it until someone complained.

 

This guy is up front with fees. SCUBA is an outdoor sport in an outdoor setting. It really shouldn't matter if there is a fee, if it's owned privately, or if the guy makes a profit. It's in a outdoor park and it should be allowed.

 

Probably what bothers me the most is the fact the above dissenters give different reasons for shooting it down. That just tells me they're shooting from the hip and no one is on the same page.

 

..and that's very troubling, indeed.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Probably what bothers me the most is the fact the above dissenters give different reasons for shooting it down.

 

With all due respect, CR, from reading the input from the cache approvers it seems we're all consistant in infering that this runs afoul of the rules against commercial caches. We can argue if it's indeed commercial or not commercial, but the rules say that if it's percieved to be commercial it won't be approved.

Both mtn-man and I provided a reminder of how to ask permission. We don't know what the admin who originally reviewed the cache wrote, but I suspect he or she had the same reservation.

 

Personally I think it's a cool idea, as would a cache in DisneyWorld be a cool idea, but if it's commercial the decision to post it occurs at a level higher than the volunteer admins or what the majority vote on - it should be decided by the folks in the Groundspeak office.

 

erik - geocaching.com admin

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ~erik~:

 

With all due respect, CR, from reading the input from the cache approvers it seems we're all consistant in infering that this runs afoul of the rules against commercial caches.


 

I would like to draw your attention to what Tennessee Geocacher said. "I took a look at your cache page and have never seen one like this ( they may be out there) . In BIG BOLD letters it said You must be SCUBA certified to get the coordinates!

 

Its not like you have to have a boat, rope, flashlight, how do you make sure the cacher is CERTIFIED,

 

If a cache came through saying that you had to be a Doctor before you could get the coordinates, then what, maybe an astronaut?

 

I would have shot it down to sorry."

 

That's what I was talking about.

 

Anyway, from what I've read, I wouldn't call this cache "commercial." It might fit the GC.com definition of "commercial," but not in a real world sense. Different people have different perceptions, granted, but this, to me with the information at hand, is not a commercial cache.

 

~Erik~, I respect you and your positions on many issues. But, this is troubling to me.

 

Maybe, it's time for us all, as a community, to get together and decide what is and isn't commercial.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:

Quite frankly, what I see above is another development that makes me uncomfortable. The best I've gotten out of it is if there is a fee that your must determine if the operator is private and if he makes a profit. What the heck does that have anything to do with it being "commercial?" I can make caches that are more commercial than the one described here and you'd never know about it until someone complained.

 

This guy is up front with fees. SCUBA is an outdoor sport in an outdoor setting. It really shouldn't matter if there is a fee, if it's owned privately, or if the guy makes a profit. It's in a outdoor park and it should be allowed.

 

Probably what bothers me the most is the fact the above dissenters give __different reasons__ for shooting it down. That just tells me they're shooting from the hip and no one is on the same page.

 

..and that's very troubling, indeed.


 

Far from shooting from the hip, I'm basing my opinion on other recent threads such as this one, and this one. What I find disturbing, is how it seems like your opinion changes from thread to thread, since in that 2nd thread you posted:

quote:

Personally, I don't have a problem with commercial caches, but GC.com needs to get their due. GC.com is commercial by nature and if someone places a cache that takes them inside an Applebee's then that's okay if GC.com gets something for the advertising. If it weren't for some sort of guideline for commercial caches every Tom, Disk, and Harry would throw together a cache and put it behind the counter. Then were would the quality of cache database be?

 

Now, if Tom wanted to sponsor a cache that required someone to go to their place of business to get final coordinates to a cache--as long as they didn't charge the cacher any fee for simply requesting it--then I'd be for that, as long as GC.com got a fee to place it. (I understand you wouldn't be able to hunt it 24/7, but if the guy is going to pay, then he gets to say you have to come during business hours.)

 

As for guidelines to determine if the cache is commercial in nature, it shouldn't be too hard write down some questions that could determine if a cache is commercial in nature.

 

Is the cache, or clues to a cache,...

+ within the bounds of a business that is not:

in the business of preserving history or heritage.

in the business of perserving nature.

in the business of providing outdoor activities.

not-for-profit.

not soliciting funds.

+in a area that a fee must be paid to access it, unless it's government maintained.

 

That's just for starters and just my idea of a commercial cache. I'm sure someone else could come up with something better.


Since the cache now being discussed is clearly a commercial cache under your criteria, the only way this cache should be allowed is if Groundspeak collects a fee from the scuba park? I think that's pretty much how it is now, since there is not a BAN on commercial caches, rather:

quote:

Commercial Caches / Caches that Solicit

What is a commercial cache? A commercial use of the web site cache reporting tool is an direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a geocaching.com listing. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

 

Solicitations are also off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, or social agendas will not be listed.

Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.

 

Some exceptions can be made for certain cache types (e.g. locationless) In these situations, permission can be given by the geocaching.com web site. However, permission should be asked first before posting. If you are in doubt, ask first.


The way I read it, the door is open for a commercial cache, IF you check with Groundspeak first. That explains some obviously commercial caches over the years, like the APE caches, GPS Gold Rush, or the VW event. They had prior approval from the guy who OWNS this website.

I think the approver applied the guidelines in the only way possible in this case.

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:

Anyway, from what I've read, I wouldn't call this cache "commercial." It might fit the GC.com definition of "commercial," but not in a real world sense. Different people have different perceptions, granted, but this, to me with the information at hand, is not a commercial cache.


Make up your mind, CR. In the other thread, you said :

quote:
if Tom wanted to sponsor a cache that required someone to go to their place of business to get final coordinates to a cache--as long as they didn't charge the cacher any fee for simply requesting it--then I'd be for that, as long as GC.com got a fee to place it.

So which is it? You are required to enter a place of business to get the final coords for the cache. You are required to pay a fee to that same business before they will let you get the coords to the cache.

Seems like it met your idea of a commercial cache before, but not now?

The scuba aspect of it has no bearing on the discussion. It's really no different then if I placed a cache in a hardware store and made you refill the propane tank for your BBQ to get the coords. It's commercial.

That said, I've wanted to take up scuba diving for years, and I would LOVE to have a cache like that near me. I would probably use the cache as an excuse to sign up for lessons and buy $1000 worth of equiptment. But then, I also logged every grandfathered cache in Disney and Universal Studios, and the EPCOT micro is still one of my all time favorite caches.

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

Mopar,

 

I'm not the best in the world at saying what I want to say. I don't feel my view of a commercial cache has changed that much between now and then. However, I now feel if the business is in the business of providing primarily outdoor activites it should be looked upon more favorable than ones that don't.

 

One of the things I've thought about between now and then was how some parks can be free while others charge an arm and a leg. The difference is what subsidizes them. Free parks are generally owned by some governmental agency, be it a town, county, or whatever. Sometimes they are owned by some group privately but feel access should be freely given--these I've seen are generally small, have no staff, have practically no liabilites, and little overhead.

 

Some fee parks are owned by governments like a county or state, some are owned by large companies that have a philosophy of giving back to the community. They can afford to charge only a nominal fee because they get funds elsewhere to make up the difference.

 

Then there are the stand-alone, for-profit businesses. These seem to charge more because if they didn't, they'd close. There is no subsidy, they have to charge enough to stay in business. They don't have an option of not having staff or overhead, they have to generate money to stay open.

 

Now, we have governments in the business of providing parks, large corporations that can subsidize parks, small free parks that don't require huge amounts of money, and parks that do require money but don't get money from anything but services rendered.

 

Does any of the above really deserved to be punished because of their business model? I think not.

 

Geocaching is an outdoor activity and areas that provide outdoor services and activites should be looked at favorably regardless of fee. Of course, there can always be the option of rejecting the cache if it looks too commercial.

 

After all, we still pay for the park and services, be it taxes, higher utilities, donations, or user fees.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:

Actually, I think it being a SCUBA park has a lot to do with it.

 

There is a big difference between a SCUBA park and a Krispy Kreme!


Not under the current guidelines, and thats what this thread is about. Does the topic starter's cache meet the current published guidelines for hiding a cache, regardless of what caches may have been approved in the past? I say no (not that I have any REAL say in this).

Do I AGREE with the way the commercial section of the guidelines is worded? That's also a no.

I personally feel it should have to do more with "commercial intent" then with "commercial location". I don't think this scuba cache has any commercial intent, any more then I think a micro in Disneyworld placed by a visitor does. Now, If Disney placed a cache, in the park, full of discount coupons for my next trip, THAT would be commercial. If this scuba cache required you get your tanks filled there before getting the final coords to a cache full of 10% off next purchase coupons, THAT would be commercial.

However, I can see the problem with trying to base something on intent. How do you rule on that without knowing what the hider is thinking? I dunno. Making a blanket statement about no commercial locations probably makes the approver's job a whole lot easier. Cut and dry. It is a for-profit location, or it isn't. Those are the rules here, so those are the rules I follow if I want to post a cache here. Pretty simple. If I don't like them, I am free to post my caches elsewhere. I choose to work within the rules, there are more then enough places for me to hide a cache without breaking any.

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

Well, that may be the rule, but I don't like it.

 

The guidelines may have been followed, but I think the guidelines are wrong.

 

Yes, I am free to post caches elsewhere--don't think it hasn't crossed my mind--but I like this site, just not some of the rules.

 

If anyone thinks there is an ulterior motive here, you're right. There are two non-government run parks in the area that I have caches planned for. This will negate those plans. Both are very nice parks, one a former state run park now owned by a utility and the other a large private park.

 

I wasn't planning these caches to stuff the coffers of the owners. I was planning the caches because they are nice parks to visit and have plenty to see.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mopar:

Still doesn't change the fact that under the current guidelines, caches located at for-profit locations (regardless of the actually profit they make) must be cleared by Groundspeak before being submitted. Indy's same reasoning can and has been used to argue for caches in theme parks and private nature preserves, unsucessfully.


 

If you feel that way, then you're not really looking at the argument, and you're just defending why a cache shouldn't be approved.

 

quote:
Do I really think someone is gonna fork over a wad of cash JUST to go find a cache in Disney? No, I don't, but since the rules of this site now say that it's not allowed, I never submitted the rather cool (I think) multi-virtual I spent two trips to FL working on. Besides, it would also be a vacation cache now. Big deal. Suck it up and go hide a cache they WILL allow, or go start commercialcaching.com, and post it there.

If people took half the time they spend arguing to get the rules changed to allow their cache, and used it creating caches that met the guidelines, we would have a lot more quality caches out there, and a lot fewer gladware trashcaches.


 

First you say "guidelines", then you say "rules", but the website says "guidelines" which imply while they are posted, they are only "guides".

 

Second, I'm not promoting the park, I'm promoting SCUBA diving. I'm also trying to promote Geocaching. This cache is obviously not for everybody, it's for SCUBA divers, which the majority of admins I've run across so far not only seem uninterested in the sport, but seem like they don't care about the sport, as well.

 

Indy Diver made a lot of great points, but the fact that the cache is on private property where a dive fee is associated has been a source of tunnel vision for the admins. This isn't creating a very positive image for the admins posting here. The SCUBA park is a very outdoors setting where an outdoors activity that costs money (whether private or government) is expected. Instead of addressing all the great points Indy Diver provided, they were simply "blown off".

 

Now, you're simply refusing to look at the extrordinary circumstances that are present to make any special consideration for cache approval.

 

The more interesting thing I find is the statement in a post from the first thread you linked to (quoted by Markwell) stating:

quote:
The ban on commercial caches is not new. It was announced here over a year and a half ago.
The bad thing was, I couldn't get the link he posted to work.

 

However, if the commercial ban was in place over a year and half ago, but it's only been one year since LATimer's "commercial" SCUBA cache has been approved (as well as another regular cache in the same SCUBA park), then why can't mine be approved? That just totally negated the approver's argument that "that cache was placed over a year ago" based on the NOT so new "commercial cache" rule.

 

I didn't place a cache like the person whose thread you provided a link to... I placed a cache like one that already exists, and people are still finding.

 

To enforce certain guidelines on one cache and not another that is identical in nature is setting a double standard. If you want to have the same type of caches placed everytime, then you shouldn't have guidelines that say caches "should not", but have rules that say caches "shall not". You could add further clarity that say "caches shall only be placed in an approved rubbermaid or ammo container with official geocaching.com stickers, and can only contain approved geocaching items as listed on the geocaching.com website". I know that's extreme, but it's on the exact opposite end of the scale as your argument.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

I am seeing this cache a little different than some of you, if the cache is approved fine if not fine, and I will play by whatever rules there is.

 

What I see is a cache that I can not find, and don’t remember one where I had to learn a specializes sport or trade and spend a $1000.00 for training.

 

This would really p1ss me off if it was on my next closes list, but that’s OK too be there before also.

 

If the cache said I need a helicopter to get to the cache that would be OK, if I could afford it I would, but if it said I had to build and fly it to the cache, thats no more way out there than having to learn to swim and get certified.

 

Maybe I am just a Krispy Kreme kind of cacher, no special skills to eat one or no special skills to find a cache.

Link to comment

The argument that your cache should be approved based on another previously placed and approved cache isn't a valid one.

 

I sorta of compare this to when a retail store mislabels a price. The store typically will sell you the item for that marked price but they fix the problem so others can't continue to take advantage of the mistake.

 

As per the guidelines posted at http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

"Keep in mind that there is no precedent for placing caches. If a cache has been posted in the past and breaks any rules listed below, you are welcome to report it. However, we honor the posting of older caches that came in before the rule was issued."

 

quote:

To enforce certain guidelines on one cache and not another that is identical in nature is setting a double standard. If you want to have the same type of caches placed everytime, then you shouldn't have _guidelines_ that say caches "should not", but have _rules_ that say caches "shall not". You could add further clarity that say "caches shall only be placed in an approved rubbermaid or ammo container with official geocaching.com stickers, and can only contain approved geocaching items as listed on the geocaching.com website". I know that's extreme, but it's on the exact opposite end of the scale as your argument.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

 

"Law pain i reviar mistar aen"

Link to comment

It's interesting that different approvers had different reasons for not approving this cache.

 

I think the real issue is what constitutes a 'commercial cache'. If I recall there was some guy who put out caches with the intent to draw customers to his business or something - I'm sure somebody can markwell that incident...

 

I can understand where problems may arise.

I wonder, however, is it necessary for the rule/guidline/whatever to be this strict. If somebody places a cache with no intent to make money for himself or somebody else - why is that not allowed?

 

There is a fine line between user fees at 'public' parks and 'private parks'. I'm not sure how that's related to this topic, however...

 

There's also the fact that this website is a commercial endeavor. I'm not sure if that weighs in - but it may be relevant.

 

I guess it's all about intent.

 

I recommend that you post a thread to the GENERAL BOARD which gets a lot more traffic than this one (I'm not totally sure why, but it's true). I would not mention other caches, I would mention that this is a scuba cache - I would mention the costs involved and that scuba divers are well aware of that. I'd recommend that the prices are not out insanely high and possibly lower than prices at 'public' areas. Then ask their opinion - I personally think it should be allowed - if I understand everything properly. If nobody wants to find it they don't have to go after it.

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

"This is a free service. Only caches of a non-commercial nature can be posted through this site. If you wish to create a commercial cache or promotion, please contact us first. Caches perceived of a commercial nature will not be approved."

 

In this case, you should have asked permission first. The approver brought this cache to the attention of other approvers and Groundspeak. The decision made by Groundspeak was agreed upon by the other approvers.

 

If you would like to post a commmercial cache that may be perceived as commercial please email contact@Groundspeak.com with the details of your listing before submitting your cache report.

 

frog.gif hydee frog.gif

I work for the frog

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

"This is a free service. Only caches of a non-commercial nature can be posted through this site. If you wish to create a commercial cache or promotion, please contact us first. Caches perceived of a commercial nature will not be approved."

 

In this case, you should have asked permission first. The approver brought this cache to the attention of other approvers and Groundspeak. The decision made by Groundspeak was agreed upon by the other approvers.

 

If you would like to post a commmercial cache that may be perceived as commercial please email contact@Groundspeak.com with the details of your listing before submitting your cache report. (((DID YOU MEAN UNCOMMERCIAL THAT APPEARS COMMERCIAL??)))

 

frog.gif hydee frog.gif

_I work for the frog_


 

Can you clarify exactly what the definition of commercial is? There is a bit of confusion. If there is a fee involved and it goes to a 'public' entity such as a state or national park it appears to be ok. The same (or smaller) fee to a private organization seems to not be ok. I'm really not sure what the difference is - if it's because the private is making money - isn't the public organization making money?

 

I'm sure I'm not alone in wondering the harm of this particular cache. It's definetly not taking money out of Groundspeaks pockets, unless you guys are planning to merchandise underwater cache supplies or something. I'd actually argue that this is putting money in your pockets - more scuba cachers = more cachers = more people to buy merchandise.

 

This rule seems to eliminate a lot of great hiding places - where the hider has no intent to make money.

 

I also wonder if this person should have known to email Groundspeak when the rules are not totally clear.

 

I agree that by the rule the cache is illegal, but I don't see why the rule can't be explained for all to see. A bit of clarity would eliminate a lot of confusion

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by southdeltan:

 

Can you clarify exactly what the definition of commercial is? There is a bit of confusion. If there is a fee involved and it goes to a 'public' entity such as a state or national park it appears to be ok. The same (or smaller) fee to a private organization seems to not be ok. I'm really not sure what the difference is - if it's because the private is making money - isn't the public organization making money?


How much clearer can you possibly get?

quote:
What is a commercial cache? A commercial use of the web site cache reporting tool is an direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a geocaching.com listing. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

The public park is making money for us, the citizens. Any money made goes to funding projects for the residents of the city, county, state, whatever. The private suba park, theme park, or coffee shop makes money for the owners. Any money made goes into the owner's bank account. Can you really not see the difference between the 2, or are you just bored and typing for the heck of it?

 

"(Mopar is) good to have around and kick. Like an ugly puppy" - Jeremy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mopar:

How much clearer can you possibly get?

quote:
What is a commercial cache? A commercial use of the web site cache reporting tool is an direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a geocaching.com listing. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

The public park is making money for us, the citizens. Any money made goes to funding projects for the residents of the city, county, state, whatever. The private suba park, theme park, or coffee shop makes money for the owners. Any money made goes into the owner's bank account. Can you really not see the difference between the 2, or are you just bored and typing for the heck of it?

 


 

If the person hiding the cache doesn't make money (and doesnt intend for anybody to make money), why does it matter? As a cacher I'd still have to pay to find either one. If I didn't want to pay because the money went to a private organization - I wouldn't have to pay. The same way that people who don't want to pay to go to a state or national park doesn't have to. I don't see the big deal. It's not like he's hiding a cache at his place of emplyoment to try to trick people into buying some new GPS accessory.

 

Your last sentence was unnecessary. I do not understand what the difference is if there is no intent for the cache hider to make a profit.

 

I don't agree with the rules, you also said you don't totally agree, I am just seeking clarification on the purpose - I can't see how anybody is harmed here. Nobody forces anybody to go after any cache.

 

I'd also like to see some people who have logged Scuba caches to weigh in on the merits of this cache.

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

Link to comment

My two cents worth:

 

I don't see a problem with this cache. It's not like it's an ammo box with a giant gold "M" on it, full of McToys and free Big Mac (with purchase of large fries) coupons.

 

I always thought that guidelines are supposed to be guides, not commandments etched into stone tablets. This cache is clearly [iMHO] not of a commercial nature and thus should be approved. Every cache is different and whether or not it's approved should be determined based on the individual cache's merits. Again, I don't see a problem with this one.

 

As for government vs. private entrance fees, as long as the entity isn't in any way responsible for the cache placement (except by granting permission), it should be a non-issue. List the entrance fee on the cache page and the cachers will decide if it's worth going after. I doubt I'd go after the SCUBA cache, but I might go for a cache in an amusement park - but shouldn't that be my decision?

 

As long as the cache has already been placed, why not list it on other caching sites? If it eventually gets approved here, great - it'll be listed in multiple places and your cache will get more traffic. If it doesn't, at least it's listed somewhere and you won't have to go retreive it. I know that not having it listed here is a bummer (since every news article out there lists this site as the "official" home page of the sport), but if TPTB don't want this unique type of cache listed on their site, then it's their loss. I'm sure that the other sites would be thrilled.

 

--

Pehmva!

 

Random quote:

sigimage.php

Link to comment

I think southdeltan brought up a good point earlier -- that it may not have been clear to him on the need to contact Groundspeak on this scuba cache before submitted it because he may not have recognized it as possibly being commercial in nature. I noticed this is his first cache hide and I think, probably after looking at the other scuba caches, that he might have made a logical assumption (as I did when placing ours) that this type of cache was acceptable.

 

I guess anytime there is money exchanged for something for any reason, it could be perceived as commercial, but I just don’t see where there is an attempt to solicit customers in this case. You wouldn’t want to say this about most things, but I think it would be fair to say that this scuba cache has little or no commercial value. ;-)

 

I am very proud of our scuba cache and what it offers. We’ve combined diving, geocaching, and orienteering. I had the opportunity recently to dive with the last finder and got to watch him hunt for both stages of the cache, which turned out to be quite entertaining. This diver, like the others who have found it, had dove there before and the first finder happened to be there for his certification training and found the cache right after his training that same day. There are 17 watches on our cache right now and that many or more on some of the others, so there must be an interest in this type of cache. I wish I knew who they were, so I could direct them to this thread.

 

It would be nice for others to be able to enjoy a cache like this too, and I’m hoping at some point that hydrashok’s scuba cache will be reviewed again, through the pre-approval process at Groundspeak.com of course.

 

I will be visiting my brother in the near future, who lives in the same state and city near hydrashok and I will plan to do his scuba cache if it gets approved, but even if it doesn’t, I’m always looking for good places to dive and would like to dive his cache location anyway, but it would be a shame not to have his cache to hunt while I’m there.

 

LATimer LONGfellow

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

In this case, you should have asked permission first. The approver brought this cache to the attention of other approvers and Groundspeak. The decision made by Groundspeak was agreed upon by the other approvers.


 

Maybe I could relocate this cache to Benbrook Lake. It could read something like this:

 

You must be a certified SCUBA diver to get the coordinates.

 

The cache is hidden in Holiday Park at Benbrook Lake. The Army Corps of Engineers allows diving in this lake, although it's not generally recommended. The visibility is two feet, at best, and the boaters have no regard for dive bouys.

 

This is a public park and a public lake with no fees to park, hunt the cache, or dive. It's a shore dive, and some special gear is required. You need AT THE MINIMUM a dive bouy, cutting tool, dive light, slate, and a tether. You must be tethered to your buddy as the visibility is SO HORRIBLE that you can't really see him. There are many fishing lines, and the entanglement hazard is extremely high. I dived this lake, and I've been tangled before. Your two biggest risks are getting run over by a boat, and getting tangled. This is not a very safe dive site, but it can be done by experienced divers.

 

Once you find the coordinates, write them down on your slate, and swim back to shore (don't surface swim as boats are allowed on this public lake), then find the cache.

 

Dive Safe... I hope you don't die.

===

I'll bet THAT non-commercial SCUBA cache would get approved!

 

[This message was edited by hydrashok407 on September 04, 2003 at 01:11 AM.]

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Mopar:

quote:
Originally posted by southdeltan:

 

Can you clarify exactly what the definition of commercial is? There is a bit of confusion. If there is a fee involved and it goes to a 'public' entity such as a state or national park it appears to be ok. The same (or smaller) fee to a private organization seems to not be ok. I'm really not sure what the difference is - if it's because the private is making money - isn't the public organization making money?


How much clearer can you possibly get?

quote:
What is a commercial cache? A commercial use of the web site cache reporting tool is an direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers through a geocaching.com listing. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

The public park is making money for us, the citizens. Any money made goes to funding projects for the residents of the city, county, state, whatever. The private suba park, theme park, or coffee shop makes money for the owners. Any money made goes into the owner's bank account. Can you really not see the difference between the 2, or are you just bored and typing for the heck of it?


 

With all due respect Mopar:

 

I don't think that this is as cut and dry as you make it! As a lawyer, I could come up with many definitions of "commercial". As a geocacher, I define commercial as something that I am making money off of. Additionally, as a certified scuba diver that was certified in a lake (even though I lived in Florida at the time and now live in the hinterland) I understand that there are not many available areas for scuba diving if you don't live along the coast. In fact, I haven't been diving since I left Florida because it is so difficult to find a good place to dive (and I own all my equipment)!

 

This member of the geocaching commenity attempted to creat an aqua-cache, which I commend him on. In the hinterland, most of the good/great diving spots are privately owned, but if all/most of the diving spots in the area require an admission fee (at the minimum) what is the difference? I've seen dry land caches on private land that require admission fees, additionally I've seen dry land caches on non-profit land that require admission fees. What is the difference, other than scuba equipment ... scuba equipment that scuba divers already know that they will need to pay for if they don't own their own?

 

How does this differ from caches that require boat access? Many areas require a fee to put in a boat or a canoe (or to rent one if the cacher does not own a boat/canoe), but these caches are being accepted, even though they are on private land?

 

I'm sorry, I don't see a difference if the cacher is not making money on the cache.

 

This cache shows that there needs to be some clarification on the rules.

 

-stroh

 

-Technology...I have no idea what I would do without my GPSr, my TiVo, or my Computer with a broadband connection. I guess I would spend more time with my wife! icon_smile.gif

Link to comment

Let me make this clear. Public lands that charge admission are acceptable since the money goes back into funding projects for the public, while the others pocket the profits from admission fees and products they sell.

 

If the cache you want to post may be perceived as commercial ask permission first. (What i meant to say last time icon_rolleyes.gif )

 

If an admin archives your cache because it is 'commercial by nature' feel free to email Grounspeak and ask permission. Permission will be granted for some caches.

 

We want cool caches that the geocaching community will enjoy.

 

frog.gif hydee frog.gif

I work for the frog

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

If the cache you want to post may be perceived as commercial ask permission first. (What i meant to say last time icon_rolleyes.gif )

 

If an admin archives your cache because it is 'commercial by nature' feel free to email Grounspeak and ask permission. Permission will be granted for some caches.

 

We want cool caches that the geocaching community will enjoy.


 

Ok, Hydee. I apologize for my slightly terse response, I thought you were showing up as "Miss Groundspeak", and basically telling me that since I didn't ask for permission first, I was being punished by Groundspeak.

 

I did send an email to the email address you provided a couple of days ago, and still haven't gotten a response. I did send it from a different email address than my registered email address, so maybe I should send it again (from my registered address).

 

Again, I apologize.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

Let me make this clear. Public lands that charge admission are acceptable since the money goes back into funding projects for the public, while the others pocket the profits from admission fees and products they sell.


 

Not that I agree with the above as many small parks are not huge money generating ventures. They do provide jobs and services no different than publicly owned parks. But that is not the reason for this post.

 

I have a little wrinkle in your definition that I would like a ruling on. What about parks that are owned by a company which, in turn, is owned by the state? This company is in the business of making money, the board members and employess make handsome sums, and the business is expanding. Is this not for-profit? It also owns thousands of arces of land. Are these not, in essence, owned by the state and thus the public? ...even the historic park that was handed to it by the state?

 

Curious as to how TPTB would rule on this.

 

CR

 

72057_2000.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

We want cool caches that the geocaching community will enjoy.


 

I'm not trying to pick a fight, nor am I belittling the amount of effort that it takes to keep this site running smoothly. However, it seems that hydrashok's intentions are exactly what I've quoted.

 

It also seems that any ammo box full of McTrinkets hidden with permission on private land in the general proximity of the hider's area of finds will, in most cases, get a rubber stamped approval. How cool is that?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by kd4adc:

quote:
Originally posted by hydee:

We want cool caches that the geocaching community will enjoy.


I'm not trying to pick a fight, nor am I belittling the amount of effort that it takes to keep this site running smoothly. However, it seems that hydrashok's intentions are exactly what I've quoted.


You're absolutely right. However, in this post you're quoting from, she was urging me to plead my case because she WANTED this cache to be re-reviewed and reconsidered.

 

I got an email from her yesterday (in response to the request I sent to contact@Groundspeak.com), and she said she was reconsidering, but had to bring it up with the "Groundspeak Guys". She didn't tell me she was definately approving it, or definately declining it, she simply said she was willing to reconsider.

 

So, here I sit, one day later, as I keep "refreshing" the forums and constantly checking my email to see what the answer is. If I ever offended her by any post, this is a great way for her to exact her revenge... I'm suffering here! icon_smile.gif The suspense is definately killing me.

 

-=Jerry A. Goodson=-

 

"Real peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice" - http://www.hydrashok.com

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