Jump to content

Is this ever acceptable?


PeakFault
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

A cache popped up recently and in the cache description the CO states that:

 

"The Co-ordinates are a 100m from the cache, as the GPS signal is poor because of tree cover"

 

They then go onto to give directions as to how to find the cache.

Most people have found it using these directions & seemingly accept it without many questioning the CO in the logs.

 

Does anyone think this is okay?

Link to comment

When verbal directions must be used to find a cache (as opposed to specific and accurate coordinates), a container should be listed as a letterbox instead!!

 

If this cache was in my area, I would most definitely send an email to the reviewer. Wait to hear what others suggest, but that's my opinion.

 

And just asking.... the reviewer approved the cache based on the coordinates given. If those coordinates are not correct, then it's possible the cache is currently too close to another!

Link to comment

When verbal directions must be used to find a cache (as opposed to specific and accurate coordinates), a container should be listed as a letterbox instead!!

 

If this cache was in my area, I would most definitely send an email to the reviewer. Wait to hear what others suggest, but that's my opinion.

 

And just asking.... the reviewer approved the cache based on the coordinates given. If those coordinates are not correct, then it's possible the cache is currently too close to another!

 

I've just looked at Groundspeaks rules regarding cache placement and it states:

 

2.1. Listing Guidelines that Apply to All Geocaches

1.Technical Requirements

1. Listings must contain accurate GPS coordinates. You must visit the geocache site and obtain all the coordinates with a GPS device. GPS usage is an integral and essential element of both hiding and finding geocaches and must be demonstrated for all cache submissions

 

This cleary hasn't happened in this case.

 

I'm not normally one for picking faults in others caches but this is so way off I can't believe it got past the reviewer. That's why I was asking if this was okay because as I see it, it isnt!

 

I think what I will do is go and find the cache so I know exactly the facts of it and then email the CO and direct them to the guidebooks etc

Link to comment

When verbal directions must be used to find a cache (as opposed to specific and accurate coordinates), a container should be listed as a letterbox instead!!

 

If this cache was in my area, I would most definitely send an email to the reviewer. Wait to hear what others suggest, but that's my opinion.

 

And just asking.... the reviewer approved the cache based on the coordinates given. If those coordinates are not correct, then it's possible the cache is currently too close to another!

 

I've just looked at Groundspeaks rules regarding cache placement and it states:

 

2.1. Listing Guidelines that Apply to All Geocaches

1.Technical Requirements

1. Listings must contain accurate GPS coordinates. You must visit the geocache site and obtain all the coordinates with a GPS device. GPS usage is an integral and essential element of both hiding and finding geocaches and must be demonstrated for all cache submissions

 

 

The very next line from this same guideline is, "Projecting waypoints from locations defined by coordinates is permissible."

Link to comment

Seems to me you could put this cache on your ignore list and go out and find some other caches in the area. Why let this one cache upset you so much? Can I ask if this is really so terrible? Don't let this ruin what could be a great relationship between yourself and another cacher. Make noise over something like this and the word travels fast in the caching world I presume. Might want to sleep on it and wait a couple of days before you take any action. Is it worth it?

Link to comment
<snip>I'm not normally one for picking faults in others caches but this is so way off I can't believe it got past the reviewer.

 

So why not contact the reviewer who published it and ask them......? It could be a really cunning hide or it did slip past the reviewer - a mistake. We do make them. Nice to find out first rather than read about it in a public forum though.

 

Edited to add. Whoops wrong account - meant to publish under my Graculus one... too early in the morning!

 

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 The Blorenges
Link to comment

Seems to me you could put this cache on your ignore list and go out and find some other caches in the area. Why let this one cache upset you so much? Can I ask if this is really so terrible? Don't let this ruin what could be a great relationship between yourself and another cacher. Make noise over something like this and the word travels fast in the caching world I presume. Might want to sleep on it and wait a couple of days before you take any action. Is it worth it?

 

No in the grand scheme of things it's not so terrible. It just has me completely confused to be honest.

 

I asked on here first so I didn't "make noise" over it as you put it.

 

My intention was merely hoping to offer some advice by email to the CO as they're new.

Believe me I know how bitter some people can be to newbies and if you knew me you'd know I'm not like that at all.

Link to comment
<snip>I'm not normally one for picking faults in others caches but this is so way off I can't believe it got past the reviewer.

 

So why not contact the reviewer who published it and ask them......? It could be a really cunning hide or it did slip past the reviewer - a mistake. We do make them. Nice to find out first rather than read about it in a public forum though.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

 

Perhaps I should have but I was just trying to determine whether a "mistake" (for want of a better word) had been made.

Link to comment

Is it listed as traditional? This sounds like a classic offset cache which should be listed as a multi.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/cache_types.aspx

 

Multi-Cache (Offset Cache)

 

A Multi-Cache ("multiple") involves two or more locations. The final location is a physical container. There are many variations, but most Multi-Caches have a hint to find the second cache, and the second cache has a hint to the third, and so on. An offset cache (where you go to a location and get hints to the actual cache) is considered a Multi-Cache.

Link to comment

Seems to me you could put this cache on your ignore list and go out and find some other caches in the area. Why let this one cache upset you so much? Can I ask if this is really so terrible? Don't let this ruin what could be a great relationship between yourself and another cacher. Make noise over something like this and the word travels fast in the caching world I presume. Might want to sleep on it and wait a couple of days before you take any action. Is it worth it?

Sorry but I beg to differ here.

On the assumption that this is a Traditional type cache (if not then there probably isn't a problem) then co-ordinates being out by a long way can lead to negative affects on the environment. Not all cachers read the listing and go out with just co-ords and probably the hint. They will go to the co-ords and search which seems pretty reasonable, but after spending sometime searching leaving no stone unturned there is a possibility of damage to the local environment, and then the spot is visited by several+ cachers doing the same and the damage is multiplied several times. I'm not saying that this is the case here as I don't know the cache, it might be an urban cache on a street corner and likely to cause frustration only, but if in a sensitive area.................

Another problem with wildly inaccurate co-ords is proximity to other caches, it may be too closer to another or someone else may unwittingly place one too close to it.

Link to comment

A cache popped up recently and in the cache description the CO states that:

 

"The Co-ordinates are a 100m from the cache, as the GPS signal is poor because of tree cover"

 

They then go onto to give directions as to how to find the cache.

Most people have found it using these directions & seemingly accept it without many questioning the CO in the logs.

 

Does anyone think this is okay?

 

It might be OK if it were listed as a Multi and gave a bearing. Is it possible the CO modified the cache description after it was published?

Link to comment

Not the same cache but GC2PB8A was recently re enabled near me the other day. Is the fact that there is no box allowed?

No, virtual caches are not allowed. That cache has been changed since it was reviewed and published. Thanks for letting me know, I'll contact the owner.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Link to comment

I often look for trads with just the co-ords and the clue. No GC number, no cache name and no description. A cache like the one TheGoodNorth describes has, in the past, lead me to hunt for 40 minutes in a spot 80m from the cache. Given there are directions to follow I'd call this a puzzle, unless there was a stamp in the box, in which case it'd be a letterbox. If the directions are 'go 100m NNW' then some might call it a multi. Whatever it is, a trad it isn't. If I knew my co-ords are shocking I'd always ask finders to post their own co-ords and average a few of them out to improve the cache-page co-ords. Perhaps the CO in question could do that?

Link to comment

If I knew my co-ords are shocking I'd always ask finders to post their own co-ords and average a few of them out to improve the cache-page co-ords. Perhaps the CO in question could do that?

I'd just go back to the cache site and get some better coordinates, then add some extra help in the hint. Even with heavy tree cover it's quite easy to make it a simple find. Like SP I normally just use coordinates and hint for traditional caches.

Link to comment

We did one yesterday in Mildenhall. GC29G4B "Child's Play".

Wasted a good twenty minutes looking, and wasn't until we looked at the 'Description' that we read:- CACHE IS NOT AT POSTED COORDS

This cache has been re-hid in a different part of town....

 

Listed co-ords N52 20.463 E000 30.093

New co-ords N52 20.975 E000 31.755

Edited by roger-rabbit
Link to comment

We did one yesterday in Mildenhall. GC29G4B "Child's Play".

Wasted a good twenty minutes looking, and wasn't until we looked at the 'Description' that we read:- CACHE IS NOT AT POSTED COORDS

This cache has been re-hid in a different part of town....

 

Listed co-ords N52 20.463 E000 30.093

New co-ords N52 20.975 E000 31.755

 

Thanks for letting us know I've contacted the owner

 

Andy

The Long Man

Volunteer UK Reviewer - geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Guidelines http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books http://support.Groundspeak.com//index.php

Link to comment

I am not sure what the issue is with this really. There is a cache near me in the middle of a tunnel that is half a mile from end to end GCRRB0 - Tunnel Tastic. Im pretty sure they couldnt get accurate co-ords from the middle of the tunnel and even if they could what good would they do you? Once your in the tunnel, they arnt going to help you to the location. However, this is probably the best cache I have done since i started. Absolutely loved it and had a great time walking through the tunnel for the first time even though the entrance is only a 5 minute walk from my houe.

 

Im new to this so maybe I am wrong but for me, the owner has announced the fact and it all adds to the fun in actively having to search for the cache.

 

And i think like others say. We all do this for different reasons with different goals set and get different things from it. If the cache is not to anyones taste they can just choose to not go and find it.

Edited by danhewitt1986
Link to comment

We did one yesterday in Mildenhall. GC29G4B "Child's Play".

Wasted a good twenty minutes looking, and wasn't until we looked at the 'Description' that we read:- CACHE IS NOT AT POSTED COORDS

This cache has been re-hid in a different part of town....

 

Listed co-ords N52 20.463 E000 30.093

New co-ords N52 20.975 E000 31.755

 

Thanks for letting us know I've contacted the owner

 

Andy

The Long Man

Volunteer UK Reviewer - geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Guidelines http://www.geocachin...guidelines.aspx

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books http://support.Groun....com//index.php

 

I guessed I had found this one so just checked and yes I had but its only recently moved, I would suggest the owner was not sure how to update the coordinates as their re-enabled log has added the new coordinates as a waypoint, was only a few logs down with the new coordinates:

 

http://www.geocachin...1e-a338e079755d

 

Maybe it could have just had its coords updated by the reviewer?

Edited by Gushoneybun
Link to comment

Im new to this so maybe I am wrong

 

Correct! You are indeed wrong!

 

A Traditional cache should be at the listed co-ordinates

 

There are well known exceptions usually old (Tunnel-Tastic for example) or very old (Angel's View View for example) but it's NOT acceptable these days.

 

Mark

 

Mark he is not wrong and gave a good example to the exception YOU GAVE! Please...............

Link to comment

 

Im new to this so maybe I am wrong

 

Correct! You are indeed wrong!

 

A Traditional cache should be at the listed co-ordinates

 

There are well known exceptions usually old (Tunnel-Tastic for example) or very old (Angel's View View for example) but it's NOT acceptable these days.

 

 

Mark

 

Wow. A new cacher who wasnt to know that a cache he had found, that contradicted a persons thinking on something was a well known and accepted contradiction cache that was not allowed to be the norm anymore, shock horror.

 

Feels good to be welcomed into a new community. Good job im not put off or offended easily i guess and it dosnt bother me what people think of my opinions otherwise people like your good self would stop anybody new from taking up this game 'experienced only or us newbies ruin it for the rest of you' or heaven forbid someone having an idea different to that of your own.

Link to comment

 

Mark he is not wrong and gave a good example to the exception YOU GAVE! Please...............

 

Oh for crying out loud!!

 

Those two examples I gave are old caches. I could have listed a couple of dozen we have found like that.

 

Current guidelines are:

 

Traditional Cache

 

This is the original geocache type consisting of, at minimum, a container and a log book or logsheet. Larger containers generally include items for trade. “Nano” or “micro” caches are tiny containers that only hold a logsheet. The coordinates listed on the traditional cache page provide the geocache’s exact location.

 

 

See for yourself HERE

 

If your reviewer in Western NY - USA allows caches with step by step instructions starting from vague co-ords, then (s)he isn't doing the job properly.

 

 

Mark

Link to comment

 

Wow. A new cacher who wasnt to know that a cache he had found, that contradicted a persons thinking on something was a well known and accepted contradiction cache that was not allowed to be the norm anymore, shock horror.

 

Feels good to be welcomed into a new community. Good job im not put off or offended easily i guess and it dosnt bother me what people think of my opinions otherwise people like your good self would stop anybody new from taking up this game 'experienced only or us newbies ruin it for the rest of you' or heaven forbid someone having an idea different to that of your own.

 

Dan,

 

I, too, would like to welcome you to the forums. :D It helps if you have a sense of humour and (sometimes) a thick skin. Some people are not very tactful when posting responses, especially to new cachers who are just venturing into these snake pits and lions' dens wherein strange esoteric gems of information may be found.

 

Here... have a donut...

 

MrsB :)

 

donut.jpg

Link to comment

I wouldn't get too bothered about it Dan, peoples egos tend to expand in direct proportion to the number of posts they've made on the forums, leading them to think their opinions are more relevant than others!!

 

Just look at your GPS and find caches, it's the easiest way to do it, only come on here if you're very, very bored!! :ph34r:

 

C

Link to comment

I wouldn't get too bothered about it Dan, peoples egos tend to expand in direct proportion to the number of posts they've made on the forums, leading them to think their opinions are more relevant than others!!

 

Just look at your GPS and find caches, it's the easiest way to do it, only come on here if you're very, very bored!! :ph34r:

 

C

 

Some very sound advice there Chalky :)

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...