Distance between geocaches rule too prescriptive?

[+briansnat]

This probably the 412,543th thread there has been on why the distance guideline should not be applied. I think .1 is plenty fine.

 

I'd be in favor of doubling it.

[+addisonbr]

This probably the 412,543th thread there has been on why the distance guideline should not be applied. I think .1 is plenty fine.

I'd be in favor of doubling it.

Man, that would crush my game board.

[+briansnat]

Interestingly enough, it seems that the section I remember has been removed. It used to say that if you were having trouble with a cache listing (placed on hold / disabled / archived) that you should take the following steps:

 

1) "First contact the reviewer.... Exceptions may sometimes be made."

2) "ask the volunteer to post the cache for all of the reviewers to see in their private discussion forum"

3) "feel free to post a message in the 'Geocaching Topics' section of the Groundspeak Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks"

4) "you may send an email... [to] appeals@geocaching.com"

 

It appears that the above has been replaced with a link to use the following form for any decision appeals:

 

http://support.Groun....php?pg=request

 

Not sure what the genesis of that switch was - if it wasn't productive for reviewers to feel their decisions were being picked apart by committee, or if it was just simpler to cut straight to email to Groundspeak since most situations ended up there anyway, or what.

 

But I thought it was interesting that people used to be encouraged to bring issues to the forums, and it no longer appears to be the case.

 

The guidelines still encourage a dialogue with the reviewer. The reviewers still discuss borderline and questionable caches in a private forum, just as they always have. The CO does not now (nor have they ever) need to request that step.

 

Encouraging posting in the forums was a relic from the days when Jeremy and other top dogs at GS frequented the forums had a direct hand in the listing decision making process. They are busy with other stuff now and leave that in the hands of the appeals team. It never was a truly effective way to do it anyway. I can probably count the times on one hand with a few fingers left over where a forum post had enough community support to effect an override of a reviewer's decision. The appeals process is a much more effective way to do it.

[+addisonbr]

I can probably count the times on one hand with a few fingers left over where a forum post had enough community support to effect an override of a reviewer's decision.

Yeah, that matches what I've seen. I'm not even sure that 100% support from the geocaching community would result in a reviewer override. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm not lucky enough to have witnessed one.

[+GeoGeeBee]

Youre right. Skater made his post as the very first reply after the guy say he wanted to quit. You made your post as the second reply after friegaric said he was quitting the forums. I guess that makes it ok. At least skater didn't call the guy a liar and start a thread about someones post.

Not that I'm going to change your mind or anything, but they are completely different situation.

 

Skater thread:

OP: Woe is me, things are horrible, can I fix it or should I quit?

Skater: Do it! Quit!

 

This thread:

OP: Mean reviewer won't publish my cache.

Many, many posts: helpful advice on how to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

OP: Wah, you are all meanyheads because you aren't taking my side. Wah, I've lost the will to live, I'll never post in the forums again.

Me: An admittedly snarky response, but one that I think the OP deserved.

 

I, like many others in this thread, offered helpful advice to the OP. He didn't want to hear any of it, and proceeded to attack the forum posters who were trying to help him. Good riddance.