Cache Place Before Publish

[+doug_hollyNKC]

I don't know if it's a problem in many other areas, but it seems too be a recurring them lately around me. CO's are sending in new caches to be published, however the physical cache has not been placed yet. I know this is in the rule books, but it seems to be ignored quite often.

 

Is it possible on the online forum to have a simple line that says "Has the geocache been placed?" with a check box for yes or no. Obviously anyone checking NO would not get there cache published. If checking no, it could also pop up a little message telling you that the cache must be placed before being published.

[+Lieblweb]

I don't know if it's a problem in many other areas, but it seems too be a recurring them lately around me. CO's are sending in new caches to be published, however the physical cache has not been placed yet. I know this is in the rule books, but it seems to be ignored quite often.

 

Not a problem in my area. I've only seen this happen one time in my area. Believe me.... that CO learned a HUGE lesson. Our local cachers gave him/her the riot act by leaving notes on the cache page.

 

I don't think another check box is needed. This can be narrowed down to an individual who - chances are - will only do it ONCE before he/she learns not to do it again. If a CO is doing this repeatedly, then he/she needs to be banned from publishing caches completely.

 

Your local cachers should be policing this type of behavior and communicating with your reviewer. Just my thoughts....

[Moun10Bike]

The new cache submission process that is close to being released makes a greater point of emphasizing that the cache should be in place before the submission is sent in for review.

[+doug_hollyNKC]

That sounds good to Moun10Bike! Thanks for responding.

[+L0ne.R]

The new cache submission process that is close to being released makes a greater point of emphasizing that the cache should be in place before the submission is sent in for review.

 

Excellent. Thanks.

[+Ambient_Skater]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

[+Pitt Monqui]

I like that idea, especially when there are people who spend hours in the cold and dark marking Night Caches without actually knowing if they'll be allowed.

 

Laying a 2 mile trail of reflectors that accidentally ends in the middle of someone else's Multi would be pretty disappointing.

 

E-mailing a reviewer in advance would be an option, but don't they already do enough for us?

[Mr.Yuck]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

 

I don't know where that idea was posted in these forums, but it is done that way at a certain "Network" of alternative Geocaching websites, and I like it very much. You get an email telling you it's ready for you to enable, or publish yourself.

 

Also glad to here the new cache submission process has greater emphasis on the cache being in place! I've only seen this not in place at publication thing maybe 10-15 times over the years in my area, but almost all of them are in the past couple of years.

[+Mallah]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

I think that's a brilliant idea. You should suggest it just in case 'everyone' thinks that 'someone' has done it, only to find out their mate 'no-one' has done it.

[+Ambient_Skater]

I think that's a brilliant idea. You should suggest it just in case 'everyone' thinks that 'someone' has done it, only to find out their mate 'no-one' has done it.

I will soon, but I want to write a good write-up for it first.

[+ngrrfan]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

I think that's a brilliant idea. You should suggest it just in case 'everyone' thinks that 'someone' has done it, only to find out their mate 'no-one' has done it.

All you have to do, when you think up an idea and location for a cache, is to ask your reviewer if the area is clear. If it is, then you can hide the cache and submit the form for review and publishing.

[Mr.Yuck]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

I think that's a brilliant idea. You should suggest it just in case 'everyone' thinks that 'someone' has done it, only to find out their mate 'no-one' has done it.

All you have to do, when you think up an idea and location for a cache, is to ask your reviewer if the area is clear. If it is, then you can hide the cache and submit the form for review and publishing.

 

I can't speak for every reviewer everywhere in the world, but the one time I just tried "asking" via email, I was told to create a cache page and check the box that it wasn't ready for review yet. I'd be more specific, and use the correct terminology, but I see the "report a cache" page has changed since my last hide 10 months ago.

 

I also remember I was told to do this because of the "tools" at the disposal of a reviewer when there is a listing, whether it's ready to be published or not. Hopefully someone else, or even a reviewer themselves can come along and verify my experience.

[+Team Unibolt]

Someone suggested a few days ago that caches should be reviewed first, and then queued for the owner to enable. That way, everyone knows that their cache can be enabled the moment they place it and they don't have to worry about having to return to retrieve or move it if the cache fails review.

 

That seems like one of those ideas that are so crazy it just might work.

 

Exactly the way it should be - Reviewed, approved or denied, if approved, queued for the CO to place and enable. This is the only system that can work in all circumstances. Imagine you spend 2 weeks planing coord math, lay out a mile of fire tacks and carry in a large container to the top of a mountain only to have the listing rejected.

[+palmetto]

I just tried "asking" via email, I was told to create a cache page and check the box that it wasn't ready for review yet

 

This is what I'd want you to do, as the only way for me to check coords is put them into a test cache page. As you're the one who will be using that cache page, you might as well create it. You can enable it too, with a reviewer note that it's just for checking coords, but it's safer not to - as a sleepy reviewer might hit the publish button on your "just for coords checking" cache if it shows up on the review queue.

 

Exactly the way it should be - Reviewed, approved or denied, if approved, queued for the CO to place and enable. This is the only system that can work in all circumstances. Imagine you spend 2 weeks planing coord math, lay out a mile of fire tacks and carry in a large container to the top of a mountain only to have the listing rejected.

 

This exists now - ie, you scout and plan, then write up a cache page, and in a reviewer note, explain that the cache is not in place but you are asking for a check of the viability of the listing. If it's good, you can then go physically place the cache, and enable the listing again, this time with a reviewer note that says, "ready to publish". If there's a problem with the original placement, you can find out before you physically place it.

 

Jeremy once responded to a request for an "owner publish" option that it seemed like a nice idea.

Cache is reviewed, and then locked by the reviewer to prevent changes, the cache owner can publish when they want to, and that would unlock the listing.

I've not seen any work being done on this, perhaps in the future.

 

The new cache report form is occupying a lot of effort, I assume.