Report Button ?

[+RubyandCo]

Hi there

 

Just wondered what the world Geocaching family thinks of this idea....

 

It always amazes me how some caches get published which quite frankly are downright dangerous.

 

Often the CO's are very vague on the listing and it's only apparent once the logs come in that they are in very irresponsible places eg on bridges above roads, rivers etc. I realise that extreme caches in involving all sorts of efforts needed in isolated areas are a popular challenge for some and should be encouraged but I'm talkng about Urban Areas where anyone can get to them.

 

I realise that the reviewers can only go on the facts they are given and can't follow up every cache they publish but I've wondered about the idea of a "Report Cache" button which would be forwarded to the local reviewer who could then check logs and follow up if required. Ideally this would be anonymous and have select buttons for the reason you were doing this and a space for brief details.

 

I realise that GS T&C more or less say "own risk" and there is the difficulty rating to go on but I worry about younger cachers especially during holiday times could be tempted to try something really daft - I don't won't to be a kill joy are the Anti Fun Police but it is something that concerns me

 

Thoughts anyone ?

[+The Blorenges]

At the moment, putting a Needs Archive log on a cache acts as a Report button - Such logs go straight to the reviewer for action (if deemed necessary). Some cachers are happy to report a cache in this public way, others don't like to do it because of the possible bad feelings that may follow.

 

But it's always possible to report issues with a cache to a local reviewer by sending them an email directly to their reviewing account. Remember to include the GC number of the cache and include specific details of why you feel the cache breaks the Guidelines. Offer to send photographs if you have them.

 

As you note, there are many extreme caches around - caches that require dangling over drops, swimming/wading/boating to get to the cache, climbing high trees etc. As long as they've been correctly rated for Difficulty and Terrain, and they meet all the other Guidelines then many cachers will enjoy them and seek them out.

 

MrsB

[+RubyandCo]

That's interesting - thank you

 

however as I'm well known to the local reviewer as a cache owner I'd still be a little reluctant to email as he knows me by name ! The caches I'm refering to are 5/5 but I'm wondering if 5/5's should involve more research from the reviewer and details from the CO before being published in the first place ? One of these recent caches all the listing says is

 

"small nano that will have you on your knees looking for a bit"

 

Photos on logs show finder crawling along the edge of a major road bridge high above another road !

 

perhaps this subject is worth a seperate post ?

[+The Blorenges]

When the reviewers review they use various mapping tools to show the approx location of the co-ordinates but it's not always possible to see precisely where the cache is located - in the example you give it's possible that the cache may have appeared to be at one end of the bridge in a less hazardous location not over the busy road. If it is placed as you describe then IMO the reviewer needs to be made aware of it. I'm not too concerned about the Difficulty aspect in relation to those who try to find the cache, but it sounds as though their hunting activities could cause concern/distraction to drivers on the road below which might result in a traffic accident.

 

Contact the reviewer, explain your concerns, add a link to the log photgraph you mention. Although the reviewer knows you, your email will remain confidential - he/she will not tell the cache owner how they became aware of the issues with the cache location.

 

MrsB

[+OZ2CPU]

if YOU think it is NOT safe, DONT do it,

others might think it is fun or cool with right equipment,

others might risk it using no equipment at all. THEIR choise, a CO is NOT responsible for a finder

nor his lack of equipment or safe way to handle things.

But I must say I did find a few my self, I think is simply bad style !!

 

I think you should ask a few friends with alot of skils in high D/T to tell you what they think,

when they have personally seen the site.

 

Why are people affraight to stand forward and tell what they think ?!?!

DONT hide behind alias or a reviewer. be a MAN tell who you are,

chance is your ideas are taken much more serious this way.

come on, if you are nice and polite and talk like a friend, it is OK not to like the same caches as a CO

and it is OK to think they are bad or even dangerous and you want it to be changed or archived,

any CO or person should be open to at least listen to what others think.

to simply dislike YOU as a person back, due to what you think about a cache is way out..

Edited August 1, 2012 by OZ2CPU

[Mr.Yuck]

That's interesting - thank you

 

however as I'm well known to the local reviewer as a cache owner I'd still be a little reluctant to email as he knows me by name ! The caches I'm refering to are 5/5 but I'm wondering if 5/5's should involve more research from the reviewer and details from the CO before being published in the first place ? One of these recent caches all the listing says is

 

"small nano that will have you on your knees looking for a bit"

 

Photos on logs show finder crawling along the edge of a major road bridge high above another road !

 

perhaps this subject is worth a seperate post ?

 

A lot of people who probably are not going to carefully read your responses are going to tell you "the reviewers are not the arbitors of safety", and "if you don't feel the cache is safe for your abilities ignore it", etc., etc.. Some might even call you a whiner and a Geo-cop. But we know that won't happen.

 

Does this highway bridge you describe not have sidewalks? It's probably illegal to be crawling around on the shoulder then. And about the most blatant invitation I've ever heard of for the first cop to drive by to stop, and see what the nutjob is doing. Personally, I'd report to the reviewer privately, but that's just my opinion.

[+StarBrand]

There is a clear difference between hazardous and illegal areas just as there is between hazardous to a cacher vs hazardous to innocent others. I think you have cited examples that cross the separation there.

 

Having said that - the reviewers and the guidelines themselves do not overtly address safety related issues when it comes to the cache seeker. All cachers need to learn to walk away from caches they are not personally prepared to do with proper equipment and fitness.

 

It never hurts to shoot a few photos and cite your concerns to the local reviewer if the cache listing is inadequate.

Edited August 1, 2012 by StarBrand

[knowschad]

That's interesting - thank you

 

however as I'm well known to the local reviewer as a cache owner I'd still be a little reluctant to email as he knows me by name ! The caches I'm refering to are 5/5 but I'm wondering if 5/5's should involve more research from the reviewer and details from the CO before being published in the first place ? One of these recent caches all the listing says is

 

"small nano that will have you on your knees looking for a bit"

 

Photos on logs show finder crawling along the edge of a major road bridge high above another road !

 

perhaps this subject is worth a seperate post ?

 

A lot of people who probably are not going to carefully read your responses are going to tell you "the reviewers are not the arbitors of safety", and "if you don't feel the cache is safe for your abilities ignore it", etc., etc.. Some might even call you a whiner and a Geo-cop. But we know that won't happen.

 

Does this highway bridge you describe not have sidewalks? It's probably illegal to be crawling around on the shoulder then. And about the most blatant invitation I've ever heard of for the first cop to drive by to stop, and see what the nutjob is doing. Personally, I'd report to the reviewer privately, but that's just my opinion.

I will be that person. The reviewers are not the arbitors of safety, and if you don't feel the cache is safe for your abilities ignore it.

 

 

That said, I managed to locate the cache that you are referring to, as well as some others of the same vain by the same hider, and I will offer that there are some guidelines that a reviewer may choose to use in some of these situations:

 

1.1.2 There may be locations in which cache hides are inappropriate, even though not prohibited by local laws.

 

If Groundspeak is contacted and informed that your cache has been placed inappropriately, your cache may be temporarily disabled or permanently archived.

 

1.2.2 Think about how your container and the actions of geocachers seeking it will be perceived by the public. Although your cache will be hidden with landowner or land manager permission, concerned passersby who are unaware of geocaching, may view people searching the property as suspicious.

[+RubyandCo]

Food for thought there - thanks everyone - I just don't do them but I'm concerned about an accident putting Geocaching on the front page for the wrong reasons - we're already having local councils getting heavy about caching and I don't want it getting worse for the averager cacher/CO

 

Knowshad's mention of GSpeaks 1.2.2 is the best way of looking at this.

[knowschad]

Food for thought there - thanks everyone - I just don't do them but I'm concerned about an accident putting Geocaching on the front page for the wrong reasons - we're already having local councils getting heavy about caching and I don't want it getting worse for the averager cacher/CO

 

Knowshad's mention of GSpeaks 1.2.2 is the best way of looking at this.

 

Be aware that your decision to report these caches will likely not be a popular one, once word gets around. And it will... even if the cache owner doesn't read this forum, it is almost certain that somebody from your area does. And those caches do seem to be well liked by many. (they also don't appear to be as dangerous to me as they apparently do to you, but that's a moot point, I guess).

[+CanadianRockies]

Why are people affraight to stand forward and tell what they think ?!?!

DONT hide behind alias or a reviewer. be a MAN tell who you are

I'm not sure, but perhaps they want to avoid creating unnecessary drama and having their manhood questioned.

[knowschad]

Why are people affraight to stand forward and tell what they think ?!?!

DONT hide behind alias or a reviewer. be a MAN tell who you are

I'm not sure, but perhaps they want to avoid creating unnecessary drama and having their manhood questioned.

 

Especially female cachers.

[+RubyandCo]

....I really wanted to post here just to see if I was just being a bit grumpy and to a certain extent I am and really just wanted to "think out loud" so it's interesting to read the different views

 

It's really not for me to decide what's right and whats wrong with another CO's hide - what I've read here has made my mind up to not pursue this further but I really appreciate the input

 

Thank you

[schattentanz]

Be aware that your decision to report these caches will likely not be a popular one, once word gets around. And it will... even if the cache owner doesn't read this forum, it is almost certain that somebody from your area does. And those caches do seem to be well liked by many. (they also don't appear to be as dangerous to me as they apparently do to you, but that's a moot point, I guess).

 

Paranoia aside and returned to reality...

 

We have a few hiders here who have had many questionable locataion caches, and I don´t mean 5/5 in urban areas. These caches have been reported by other cachers, city officials, or other involved non-players. All were archived. Nobody cared. Nobody was hit with massive revenge plans or cache-warfare. No bad words were said to the reporters.

 

However, the hider´s reputation went down the tubes because of their ego and egocaches, and when they did the semi-hostile logs on newbies, many others in the local community had no problem giving said newbie a "it´s fine" and then pointed out the egocacher´s own problems.

 

Simplified: The most of the cachers around go "Yay, point!" to the find, think nothing of it when it´s gone, because they found it already, then go "Yay, point!" again to the next cache that appears in that area.

[+bflentje]

Careful, don't veer off the sidewalk into the grass, you might get hurt.

[+Sol seaker]

Careful, don't veer off the sidewalk into the grass, you might get hurt.

 

are you kidding ?

Sidewalks are very dangerous places !!

 

To the thread owner: do what you think is right. If you report it, it will be out of your hands. It will be up to the reviewer to decide whether to do anything about it or not.

Would you regret not reporting it?

 

Generally I say 5/5 caches are great and really needed in the game. It's good if they have some warnings on the cache page.

But what Knowschad said was true: there are some inappropriate caches out there.

If you email the reviewer, he/she decides,.not you.

[+briansnat]

Dangerous caches are not against the guidelines so reporting a cache just because it's dangerous is pointless. These caches could however have other legit issues that might be of interest to the reviewer. On private property without permission, on public property against the wishes of the land manager, on bridges or other infrastructure or places where its illegal for the general public to enter. Those should be reported.