Contacting a reviewer prior to placing the cache?

[graftedoaks]

Hello everyone!

 

I was wondering what the proper etiquette is for this situation. I have scoped out an accessible area near my house in the woods that has no caches. But before I place them there and submit the form, I was wondering if I could contact my local reviewer and give him the coords first, to check if the location is okay. I'd rather not go through all the work of making/placing the cache to be rejected based on location.

 

Should I email the reviewer the coords and politely ask if the area is okay?

Or should I submit the cache with the title "Coordinate Check" (as this suggests: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=199)?

 

Thanks!

[+Ambrosia]

Create a cache page, but don't click the box that enables it. Then email your local reviewer with the GC#.

[knowschad]

That's not a bad idea if you're not already familiar with the caches in the area, especially if you are putting a lot of extra effort into the hide. Ambrosia's method is probably the best way to do it, rather than simply sending them the coords, because that saves their time and, I guess, allows the reviewer to easily use their regular tools.

 

However... normally we simply hide the cache and await the news, good or bad (after first doing what research we can do).

[graftedoaks]

Thanks for your input. Yes I know usually we just place the cache and hope it's alright. But I want to do something fancy with these ones :-) so I figured this would save a lot of energy and time.

[+The VanDucks]

We've e-mailed our local reviewer (it's not always the same person around here) a few times with similar questions, and he or she has always been very helpful. However, you should give the reviewer as much information as possible; not only entering the cache in to the system to get the GC number (without enabling it) as mentioned above, but also give the reviewer a description of where the cache is hidden and what kind of container it will be. You should check to be sure you don't need permission of a land manager or owner, whether hidden in a public park or on private land. Our local reviewers have gotten very strict about providing permission and contact information for any caches in local parks. I'm sure you've also thought to just stand at your proposed GZ and check on your GPS to see that other nearby caches are at least the minimum .10 mile from yours. A problem can occur if there is a puzzle cache that might have its final too close to your new cache, but the reviewer can let you know if that's the case. Good luck!

[+Viajero Perdido]

Our local reviewer suggests we submit the cache listing, with the checkbox saying yes it's ready (which puts it in the queue), but with a reviewer note saying it's NOT really ready, and this is just a coordinate check (or whatever). Then they deal with the question, reply, and un-check the checkbox for you.

 

That's how our reviewer likes to do it, and they seem happy to handle requests like this sooner than later.

[+Ambrosia]

Our local reviewer suggests we submit the cache listing, with the checkbox saying yes it's ready (which puts it in the queue), but with a reviewer note saying it's NOT really ready, and this is just a coordinate check (or whatever). Then they deal with the question, reply, and un-check the checkbox for you.

 

That's how our reviewer likes to do it, and they seem happy to handle requests like this sooner than later.

 

The tricky thing is that not all Reviewers like this. Some areas prefer that you not do this, because it clutters up the Reviewer queue with caches that are not ready to be published.

[+Ambient_Skater]

Unless your reviewer says otherwise, email them a link to the unactivated page. I think most reviewers would not want these caches cluttering up the queue.

 

You can also show your support for a modified cache submission process designed especially for situations like this. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=295198

[+palmetto]

The article you cite, Checking for Cache Saturation, provides 2 possible routes for reaching a reviewer, once you've created a cache page -> the cache page should clearly be a "Checking Coords" listing, and have a reviewer note that the cache is NOT ready.

 

1) leave it disabled, email the reviewer with the GC Code

 

2) enable it so it shows up in the reviewers queue.

 

I'd prefer email wit GC Code of disabled cache, some reviewers would prefer it to show up on queue! (reviewers get a lot of geocaching related emails, I can understand the simplicity of just handling it on the review queue.)

 

Try one way, and ask the reviewer's preference, next time, you'll know.

 

You can do a good bit of saturation checking yourself - once that listing is written, the "nearest caches" link will show you the area traditional caches, as well as nearby multi and mystery caches.

Over 75% of the cache saturation issues I see are to traditional caches - ie, errors the owner could have caught for themselves.

[Keystone]

I'm one of the reviewers who prefers the "enable the page so it shows up in the review queue" method. I check the queue more often than my email, and it's just one click to open a listing with a title like "Coord Check." If I'm notified of the GC Code by email, I have to go to a search page, enter the GC Code and open the listing for review.

 

I don't mind these inquiries at all since it avoids disappointment and surprise later on. I like publishing caches, not disappointing cache hiders.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Keystone

[+Lil Devil]

I don't mind these inquiries at all since it avoids disappointment and surprise later on. I like publishing caches, not disappointing cache hiders.

I wholeheartedly agree!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

You can do a good bit of saturation checking yourself - once that listing is written, the "nearest caches" link will show you the area traditional caches, as well as nearby multi and mystery caches.

Over 75% of the cache saturation issues I see are to traditional caches - ie, errors the owner could have caught for themselves.

 

I wonder how close the 75% figure is for other reviewers. The suggestion of a "proximity checker" comes up quite often in the forums and it usually only takes 2-3 response before the "but you'll be able to battleship puzzle caches" with a proximity checker.

 

Suppose a basic proximity checker were integrated into the new DCP. It could do a proximity check for traditional caches and indicate if there are any issues with traditional caches. If so, it could turn of the "Submit" button so that reviewers would never see a submission which had proximity issues with an existing traditional cache. It could also test the coordinates against any Multi, unknown, and Wherigo caches within 2 miles and *warn* the submitter that there *may* be proxmity issues and point to the "Checking for Saturation" page.

 

It seems to me something like that could save a bit of time for the reviewers (notifying submitters that failed to even check if there were other traditionals nearby) and allow a potential new cache owner to quickly verify if there are any caches which *definitely* would cause proximity issues.

[+Cissy PSP]

Hello everyone!

 

I was wondering what the proper etiquette is for this situation. I have scoped out an accessible area near my house in the woods that has no caches. But before I place them there and submit the form, I was wondering if I could contact my local reviewer and give him the coords first, to check if the location is okay. I'd rather not go through all the work of making/placing the cache to be rejected based on location.

 

Should I email the reviewer the coords and politely ask if the area is okay?

Or should I submit the cache with the title "Coordinate Check" (as this suggests: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=199)?

 

Thanks!

 

The reviewer that I have told me he prefers to send in the cache, enabled, but the title is to be "Coords Check Only, Do Not Publish". Then if all is ok, he disables it says to change the title to whatever it's going to be, then re-enable and send it. Our reviewers are super people and so friendly. I think we are very lucky to have these particular reviewers.

[+Ambrosia]

 

You can do a good bit of saturation checking yourself - once that listing is written, the "nearest caches" link will show you the area traditional caches, as well as nearby multi and mystery caches.

Over 75% of the cache saturation issues I see are to traditional caches - ie, errors the owner could have caught for themselves.

 

I wonder how close the 75% figure is for other reviewers. The suggestion of a "proximity checker" comes up quite often in the forums and it usually only takes 2-3 response before the "but you'll be able to battleship puzzle caches" with a proximity checker.

 

Suppose a basic proximity checker were integrated into the new DCP. It could do a proximity check for traditional caches and indicate if there are any issues with traditional caches. If so, it could turn of the "Submit" button so that reviewers would never see a submission which had proximity issues with an existing traditional cache. It could also test the coordinates against any Multi, unknown, and Wherigo caches within 2 miles and *warn* the submitter that there *may* be proxmity issues and point to the "Checking for Saturation" page.

 

It seems to me something like that could save a bit of time for the reviewers (notifying submitters that failed to even check if there were other traditionals nearby) and allow a potential new cache owner to quickly verify if there are any caches which *definitely* would cause proximity issues.

It probably depends on the area. The Seattle area has a ton of Mystery/Puzzle caches, so I think those numbers might be different.

[+dprovan]

The reviewer that I have told me he prefers to send in the cache, enabled, but the title is to be "Coords Check Only, Do Not Publish". Then if all is ok, he disables it says to change the title to whatever it's going to be, then re-enable and send it. Our reviewers are super people and so friendly. I think we are very lucky to have these particular reviewers.

It seems like there should be a checkbox for this. I'd be afraid that the wrong reviewer looked at the cache, and thought "Coords Check Only, Do Not Publish" was an amusing title...

[+Ambient_Skater]

It seems like there should be a checkbox for this. I'd be afraid that the wrong reviewer looked at the cache, and thought "Coords Check Only, Do Not Publish" was an amusing title...

That sounds like a good name for some sort of puzzle cache now.

[+jellis]

Besides Hemlock (sorry Hemlock) our other reviewer doesn't mind us sending the coords for checking. I one time was creating a puzzle and had the posted coords the same as the final just to start. No way near completion and then I get an email from a reviewer advising me that I have to change my coords. Sorry, I felt intruded on because I wasn't even done and the coords were not ready for him to suggest I change them. And NO I didn't even check the box to put it in the queue.

Oh and the coords had been confirmed by the other reviewer as being clear.

Edited May 25, 2012 by jellis

[+Cissy PSP]

It seems like there should be a checkbox for this. I'd be afraid that the wrong reviewer looked at the cache, and thought "Coords Check Only, Do Not Publish" was an amusing title...

That sounds like a good name for some sort of puzzle cache now.

 

LOL about the amusing title! But, that's what our reviewer (Hemlock) has asked me to do. It works and I am so appreciative of it

[+Trucker Lee]

Like Palmetto points out, the first check can be done before time is spent writing the cache page, just do a search from the coords. Took just a few seconds, showed me there were no problems with visible locations, so I made the placement. Thank goodness there are no proximity restrictions to benchmarks, a cacher could get four finds within 500 feet with my last hide. (GC3M631)

[+Cissy PSP]

Like Palmetto points out, the first check can be done before time is spent writing the cache page, just do a search from the coords. Took just a few seconds, showed me there were no problems with visible locations, so I made the placement. Thank goodness there are no proximity restrictions to benchmarks, a cacher could get four finds within 500 feet with my last hide. (GC3M631)

 

As for checking the area myself, I do two things that really help (providing cell coverage is there). First, I usually know where I want to put a traditional. I put in the surrounding caches in my GPSr, then go .1 of a mile away. If it fits, I will put it there myself. If I know the first location of a puzzle is nearby and I don't want to waste time by not knowing where the final is, I mark the spot with my GPSr (GPSMAP 62s), do home, set up the cache page and title it "Coords check only, do not publish". Reviewer gets it and tell me if it's OK ... or not. If Ok, I go back out the next day (or if convenient I have left the cache there), place the cache and then enable it and wait for publication.

 

Another thing I do is mark with my GPSr, take my smartphone, go to geocaching.com, put in the coords on the "Hide and Seek" page, hit submit and then it tells me if I am .1 or more from nearest. If all ok, I place the cache, go home, write it up and submit for publication. This providing cell reception is there.

 

I know that writing this all out makes it seem complicated, but it really isn't. Usually takes me 3 or so minutes to do it all.

 

Hope this helps......or not

 

Cissy