New cache rejected

[+Lil Weed Pot and Flower]

Recently I placed a new cache for others pleasure to find. I received a rejection because it is 302 feet from the end of a multicache. There is no way to determine any parts of a multicache after the starting coords. Potentially, multi caches can hog up multiple sites because of the multi terms but it cannot be predetermined where these sites are. I would agree that it may be wrong to place a cache within a tenth of a mile from any other posted cache but not any other multicache locations. I am discouraged enough to no longer set out caches due to my frustration with this rejection. Is there a way to change these rules?

[+GeoBain]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

[Pup Patrol]

Recently I placed a new cache for others pleasure to find. I received a rejection because it is 302 feet from the end of a multicache. There is no way to determine any parts of a multicache after the starting coords. Potentially, multi caches can hog up multiple sites because of the multi terms but it cannot be predetermined where these sites are. I would agree that it may be wrong to place a cache within a tenth of a mile from any other posted cache but not any other multicache locations. I am discouraged enough to no longer set out caches due to my frustration with this rejection. Is there a way to change these rules?

 

I doubt very much that the saturation guidelines will be changed any time soon.

 

Not sure why you wouldn't just find the multicache and make note of its waypoints.

 

Cache saturation guidelines are rather fundamental and definitely not new.

 

There's some good advice in the Help Center article " 4.9. Checking for Cache Saturation":

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=199

 

 

B.

[+wimseyguy]

You have been caching for seven years, and this is the first time that you have heard of this issue? I've been at this for ten years and cannot recall that there has ever been anything less than 528' as the saturation guideline.

 

You have three options, you can ask the reviewer for a little more info so that you know which way to move, although they have already told you how far. You can click the 'show all nearest caches' on your listing and check out the nearby multis and puzzles, or you can continue to pout and not put out any more caches. I would encourage options 1 or 2.

Edited September 29, 2012 by wimseyguy

[4wheelin_fool]

As a cache hider, you are expected to revisit your hide for maintenence and removal when it is archived. Moving it a few hundred feet should not be such a big hassle as to stop setting caches out.

Edited September 29, 2012 by 4wheelin_fool

[knowschad]

Moving it a few hundred feet should not be such a big hassle as to stop setting caches out.

Sometimes that's true, sometimes it is simply not possible for any of a variety of reasons, and yet other times the hiding spot is unique enough that moving the location would change the hide completely.

[+Don_J]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

 

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, and this is coming from a person who is not particularly lazy. It is much easier to simply not hide a cache at all. I have a entire nearby community where I will never hide a cache in because of the high concentration of puzzle caches, (one hider), that I can not solve. The ones that I have been able to solve lead me to nanos on telephone poles. If I simply knew where all of these telephone pole nanos were, I might be able to fit something a bit more creative in. As the landscape becomes more crowded, both with caches and cachers, I think that we are going to hear this complaint more and more often.

 

And, I think, "go out and solve all the puzzles and find all the multis", before you can hide a cache is not the answer.

Edited September 29, 2012 by Don_J

[knowschad]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

 

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, and this is coming from a person who is not particularly lazy. It is much easier to simply not hide a cache at all. I have a entire nearby community where I will never hide a cache in because of the high concentration of puzzle caches, (one hider), that I can not solve. The ones that I have been able to solve lead me to nanos on telephone poles. If I simply knew where all of these telephone pole nanos were, I might be able to fit something a bit more creative in. As the landscape becomes more crowded, both with caches and cachers, I think that we are going to hear this complaint more and more often.

 

And, I think, "go out and solve all the puzzles and find all the multis", before you can hide a cache is not the answer.

 

In general I have to agree with you. I will say, though, that multi-s are almost always much more "doable" than many puzzles. I am one of may cachers that I know of that simply ignore puzzle caches. I'm not real big on multi-caches either, but if I wanted to know where the final was so I could hide a cache of my own, at least I know that I would be able to do it. Not always so with puzzle caches.

 

ETA: Finals of multi's can sometimes be miles from the posted coordinates, too. You may not even be a multi around to know that you need to solve. Sure, you can ask the reviewer about a spot, but not practical to you or the reivewer to do it for each and every cache you want to hide.

Edited September 29, 2012 by knowschad

[+GeoBain]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

 

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, and this is coming from a person who is not particularly lazy. It is much easier to simply not hide a cache at all. I have a entire nearby community where I will never hide a cache in because of the high concentration of puzzle caches, (one hider), that I can not solve. The ones that I have been able to solve lead me to nanos on telephone poles. If I simply knew where all of these telephone pole nanos were, I might be able to fit something a bit more creative in. As the landscape becomes more crowded, both with caches and cachers, I think that we are going to hear this complaint more and more often.

 

And, I think, "go out and solve all the puzzles and find all the multis", before you can hide a cache is not the answer.

 

Not hiding caches is always the easiest option.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

There is no way to determine any parts of a multicache after the starting coords.

 

Yes there is. Go out and find the cache.

[+Don_J]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

 

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, and this is coming from a person who is not particularly lazy. It is much easier to simply not hide a cache at all. I have a entire nearby community where I will never hide a cache in because of the high concentration of puzzle caches, (one hider), that I can not solve. The ones that I have been able to solve lead me to nanos on telephone poles. If I simply knew where all of these telephone pole nanos were, I might be able to fit something a bit more creative in. As the landscape becomes more crowded, both with caches and cachers, I think that we are going to hear this complaint more and more often.

 

And, I think, "go out and solve all the puzzles and find all the multis", before you can hide a cache is not the answer.

 

In general I have to agree with you. I will say, though, that multi-s are almost always much more "doable" than many puzzles. I am one of may cachers that I know of that simply ignore puzzle caches. I'm not real big on multi-caches either, but if I wanted to know where the final was so I could hide a cache of my own, at least I know that I would be able to do it. Not always so with puzzle caches.

 

ETA: Finals of multi's can sometimes be miles from the posted coordinates, too. You may not even be a multi around to know that you need to solve. Sure, you can ask the reviewer about a spot, but not practical to you or the reivewer to do it for each and every cache you want to hide.

 

Unfortunately, the multis around here are puzzles. Go get a number off a box and then apply some trigonometric function to it, which will bring you to another box with another number where you have to perform algebra on it's prime factors, etc. I'd rather be out finding caches then running back and forth to my computer trying to learn the advanced features of Excel.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

[Pontoffel Pock]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

Lol, I live outside of town. There is a mountain drive 'loop' that is 10 minutes from me and its my 'get away' place thats close. There were a few good caches out there,in the trees and trails, and I thought "I wish there were a few more out here"...well, someone placed one about every 528ft, just off the road - not really what I had in mind. Now the GOOD (IMO) caches will have to find someplace farther out. Just be carefull what you wish for.

 

Shawn.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

Lol, I live outside of town. There is a mountain drive 'loop' that is 10 minutes from me and its my 'get away' place thats close. There were a few good caches out there,in the trees and trails, and I thought "I wish there were a few more out here"...well, someone placed one about every 528ft, just off the road - not really what I had in mind. Now the GOOD (IMO) caches will have to find someplace farther out. Just be carefull what you wish for.

 

Shawn.

Ya, that sucks. The only thing about GC that can get me a bit edgy is when a silly roadside cache knocks out some prime hiking spots.

[jholly]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

Lol, I live outside of town. There is a mountain drive 'loop' that is 10 minutes from me and its my 'get away' place thats close. There were a few good caches out there,in the trees and trails, and I thought "I wish there were a few more out here"...well, someone placed one about every 528ft, just off the road - not really what I had in mind. Now the GOOD (IMO) caches will have to find someplace farther out. Just be carefull what you wish for.

 

Shawn.

Ya, that sucks. The only thing about GC that can get me a bit edgy is when a silly roadside cache knocks out some prime hiking spots.

You mean the trails for a hike are less than 528 feet? Yeah, it can be a bit of a drag when you have a prine hike only 250 feet long.

[knowschad]

The proximity rule has been around since I started caching which was just a few months before you. They serve a good purpose.

 

You just need to go do the multi and note all the points along the way. Then you will know where you can place your cache.

 

I'm going to be perfectly honest here, and this is coming from a person who is not particularly lazy. It is much easier to simply not hide a cache at all. I have a entire nearby community where I will never hide a cache in because of the high concentration of puzzle caches, (one hider), that I can not solve. The ones that I have been able to solve lead me to nanos on telephone poles. If I simply knew where all of these telephone pole nanos were, I might be able to fit something a bit more creative in. As the landscape becomes more crowded, both with caches and cachers, I think that we are going to hear this complaint more and more often.

 

And, I think, "go out and solve all the puzzles and find all the multis", before you can hide a cache is not the answer.

 

In general I have to agree with you. I will say, though, that multi-s are almost always much more "doable" than many puzzles. I am one of may cachers that I know of that simply ignore puzzle caches. I'm not real big on multi-caches either, but if I wanted to know where the final was so I could hide a cache of my own, at least I know that I would be able to do it. Not always so with puzzle caches.

 

ETA: Finals of multi's can sometimes be miles from the posted coordinates, too. You may not even be a multi around to know that you need to solve. Sure, you can ask the reviewer about a spot, but not practical to you or the reivewer to do it for each and every cache you want to hide.

 

Unfortunately, the multis around here are puzzles. Go get a number off a box and then apply some trigonometric function to it, which will bring you to another box with another number where you have to perform algebra on it's prime factors, etc. I'd rather be out finding caches then running back and forth to my computer trying to learn the advanced features of Excel.

 

Ewwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!! I see what you mean!! And usually just a nano at the end of that?

[+The_Incredibles_]

This is a pretty common (and frustrating!) problem. If you want to hide caches, best thing to do is find as many multis and puzzles in that area before you go to place yours. You can email your reviewer the proposed coordinates ahead of time to make sure they're OK.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

Lol, I live outside of town. There is a mountain drive 'loop' that is 10 minutes from me and its my 'get away' place thats close. There were a few good caches out there,in the trees and trails, and I thought "I wish there were a few more out here"...well, someone placed one about every 528ft, just off the road - not really what I had in mind. Now the GOOD (IMO) caches will have to find someplace farther out. Just be carefull what you wish for.

 

Shawn.

Ya, that sucks. The only thing about GC that can get me a bit edgy is when a silly roadside cache knocks out some prime hiking spots.

You mean the trails for a hike are less than 528 feet? Yeah, it can be a bit of a drag when you have a prine hike only 250 feet long.

 

Ha! Picture a nice river. Now picture a nice wooded area with some trails, cliffs etc alongside that river that stretches for miles. Now picture this wooded area sandwiched between the river and a road that follows the river for miles. Now picture magnetic key holders all along the guardrail. Kinda knocks-out the whole river hike...so ya, it's a drag.

[+Don_J]

Here's the deal. If unknown stages/caches are creating that much angst in an area, the area probably has enough caches. I think I'm going to hide a cache 20 miles outside of town. What a great thing it would be if everyone in town did this.

 

No angst here. I have come to terms with it long ago. However, I understand how a newer cacher that would like to be a part of the hiding game can throw their hands up in frustration and simply give up.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Moving it a few hundred feet should not be such a big hassle as to stop setting caches out.

Sometimes that's true, sometimes it is simply not possible for any of a variety of reasons, and yet other times the hiding spot is unique enough that moving the location would change the hide completely.

 

Yep. I just had to archive one of my hides due to some recent construction that compromised the original location and prevented me from hiding a cache within 200' in the same manner. I *could* hide another container about 20' away but I'm just not going to stick a nano in a stop sign. Unfortunately, I just have to let it go, even though the cache holds some sentimental value. It was my first hide.

[+stijnhommes]

Yes, the proximity guideline can be a pain. I wanted to encourage someone in LA to place a cache in front of their door, but when I calculated the proximity of two nearby caches, it turned out there was only a thin strip of free space between them without any useful hide locations. I guess I have to wait until one of them gets archived before I can make that suggestion...

[+Mike & Jess]

Recently I placed a new cache for others pleasure to find. I received a rejection because it is 302 feet from the end of a multicache. There is no way to determine any parts of a multicache after the starting coords. Potentially, multi caches can hog up multiple sites because of the multi terms but it cannot be predetermined where these sites are. I would agree that it may be wrong to place a cache within a tenth of a mile from any other posted cache but not any other multicache locations. I am discouraged enough to no longer set out caches due to my frustration with this rejection. Is there a way to change these rules?

I had this same issue a year or two ago. The Reviewer had given me the name of the cache I was having issues with, so I was able to contact the CO and ask them approximately how far my cords was from their stages. Funny enough, in the dense bush, I was only about 10ft from their final.

 

Moving it a few hundred feet should not be such a big hassle as to stop setting caches out.

Sometimes that's true, sometimes it is simply not possible for any of a variety of reasons, and yet other times the hiding spot is unique enough that moving the location would change the hide completely.

Very true. My example above... The original location was a great spot (hollowed out tree, large enough for a child along a river bank). The alternative location was nothing compaired to the first spot and in my mind, looked like a toss in the bush cache.

[+Baad Daata]

If I understood your issue and frustration I would like to add the fact that puzzle finals are not available to most of us unless we are smart enough to solve them. If we find a great spot for a cache, engineer it, hide it and submit it it is very frustrating to find that the work and hours resulted in a denial because of proximity. Some caches are perfect for a very specific spot. I understand the spirit of the rule but puzzles present a unique problem. If am missing something here please straighten me out. Some things go right over my head.

[+The_Incredibles_]

If I understood your issue and frustration I would like to add the fact that puzzle finals are not available to most of us unless we are smart enough to solve them. If we find a great spot for a cache, engineer it, hide it and submit it it is very frustrating to find that the work and hours resulted in a denial because of proximity. Some caches are perfect for a very specific spot. I understand the spirit of the rule but puzzles present a unique problem. If am missing something here please straighten me out. Some things go right over my head.

 

You can always ask for a hint if you're having trouble with a puzzle. As well, if you place a cache too close to a puzzle and it gets rejected, this is a huge advantage as you now know the approx area where the puzzle final is. Often, just knowing that, you can do a search of the area and find the puzzle final.

[+WarNinjas]

It is a huge advantage in some puzzles as you know a lot of the numbers in the coords to catch a theme. I am always happy to help anyone who wants to figure out one of our puzzles so I would just ask the CO. I agree they are a pain when hiding a cache and have had more caches denied then I like to think about. I just mark it up as part of the game and move on. I would be OK with the game if there was no puzzles but there are some who really like puzzles and only find our puzzle caches.

Once you get one published there is even more things that will probibly frustrate you. It is great fun to see the email of the experience of someone finding your cache though. We have fun with it. Just know there is a lot of work involved at times. It gives you more reason to appreciate a good cache when you find it.

-WarNinjas

[+Isonzo Karst]

If I understood your issue and frustration I would like to add the fact that puzzle finals are not available to most of us unless we are smart enough to solve them. If we find a great spot for a cache, engineer it, hide it and submit it it is very frustrating to find that the work and hours resulted in a denial because of proximity

 

In the third post in this thread, Pup Patrol linked to this article, Checking for Cache Saturation. You might want to read it, all the way to the end, before you do a lot engineering on another hide.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you re puzzles, indeed, not only are some/many of them beyond me, I don't enjoy them, even the simple ones that mostly involve research for answers. If I wanted to work puzzles, I'd be visiting a dedicated puzzle site.

[+juc_cacher]

This is a pretty common (and frustrating!) problem. If you want to hide caches, best thing to do is find as many multis and puzzles in that area before you go to place yours. You can email your reviewer the proposed coordinates ahead of time to make sure they're OK.

This.

 

I usually do this as a matter of course now, having been burnt once by GZ for a Puzzle which was about 10 metres from the hide I had placed my Cache near.

[+bflentje]

Recently I placed a new cache for others pleasure to find. I received a rejection because it is 302 feet from the end of a multicache. There is no way to determine any parts of a multicache after the starting coords. Potentially, multi caches can hog up multiple sites because of the multi terms but it cannot be predetermined where these sites are. I would agree that it may be wrong to place a cache within a tenth of a mile from any other posted cache but not any other multicache locations. I am discouraged enough to no longer set out caches due to my frustration with this rejection. Is there a way to change these rules?

 

Wouldn't it be easier to just complete the nearby multicache rather than complain about HOGGING and RULES CHANGING? This new-age Me-Mentality is just simply flabbergasting, and it's not limited to geocaching.

[+PSJKids]

We had this kind of an issue as well and ended up having to spend the $$ to become Premium members just to find out what direction we needed to move our cache to so it could be accepted. It sucks but that's the way the game is played so we conformed and spent the $.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

We had this kind of an issue as well and ended up having to spend the $$ to become Premium members just to find out what direction we needed to move our cache to so it could be accepted. It sucks but that's the way the game is played so we conformed and spent the $.

You needn't have done that, really..... but, if that's what you see as a Premium benefit, so be it.

 

You will still be blocked by the "invisible" stages of multi-caches.

 

Your reviewer can see these things we cannot. A (relatively) simple correspondence with him/her can take care of it.

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

WARNING: BLASPHEMY FOLLOWS!

 

IF your cache idea and location is really that good, you could always list your cache on another cache listing website.

[+The_Incredibles_]

WARNING: BLASPHEMY FOLLOWS!

 

IF your cache idea and location is really that good, you could always list your cache on another cache listing website.

 

This is certainly one option..if you're happy with it only being found a few times a year at most.

[+Don_J]

WARNING: BLASPHEMY FOLLOWS!

 

IF your cache idea and location is really that good, you could always list your cache on another cache listing website.

 

True, but I hide and list caches because I want people to FIND them.

[+juc_cacher]

Seriously...email your reviewer, supply proposed coordinates, reviewer will tell you if it's OK or not.

 

Problem solved.

 

Satisfaction with the outcome not guaranteed, but at least you'll know BEFORE you spend too much time on the hide or camo.

[+HEADLANDERS]

What I do is to create the new cache page and enter the coordinates for the final and any physical intermediate stages if a multi. Then make the title 'PROXIMITY CHECK ONLY and submit it for review and add an appropriate 'Reviewer Note' to repeat the reason for the check.

 

Reviewers in my area prefer this way as it is less work for them than manually checking coordinates given in an email communication.

 

If the check reveals no issues then proceed to develop the cache page further.

[+TomToad]

You could also ask the CO of the multi to move a stage or give you a hint as to where you can move your cache.

[Clan Riffster]

If we find a great spot for a cache, engineer it, hide it and submit it it is very frustrating to find that the work and hours resulted in a denial because of proximity.

If you are planning on spending hours engineering and building, wouldn't it make sense to first spend seconds emailing your Reviewer to see if your desired location is viable?

[+BAMBOOZLE]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

Only the first stage of a multi was used for proximity.

For many reasons I don't care for puzzles or multi's.

My definition of a " cache from hell " would be a Puzzle- Multi where all stages were nano's and all were located in high muggle ( stealth required )areas littered with garbage, dead animals, and broken glass.

 

To the OP, I feel your pain.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

 

I hid a multi a few years ago, and I inadvertantly placed my final less than 10' from the final of a multi I hadn't completed. After the FTFers let me know about the issues, I modified the cache.

 

There's no way finals that close should ever be allowed.

 

(Edit for typos)

Edited October 3, 2012 by BBWolf+3Pigs

[+Manville Possum]

If we find a great spot for a cache, engineer it, hide it and submit it it is very frustrating to find that the work and hours resulted in a denial because of proximity.

If you are planning on spending hours engineering and building, wouldn't it make sense to first spend seconds emailing your Reviewer to see if your desired location is viable?

 

That is very good advise. Reviewers volunteer their time to help us get our listings published.

On a side note, my 5/5 multi was logged today by a fellow geocacher. They contacted me some time back and let me know that stage one was missing. It's a Tennessee historical marker that has been taken down for construction. I was still able to keep my listing up and running by posting a link to the marker on the Waymarking.com site. Hopefully the marker will be replaced soon in the same location?

[+wimseyguy]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

Only the first stage of a multi was used for proximity.

For many reasons I don't care for puzzles or multi's.

My definition of a " cache from hell " would be a Puzzle- Multi where all stages were nano's and all were located in high muggle ( stealth required )areas littered with garbage, dead animals, and broken glass.

 

To the OP, I feel your pain.

 

Really? I've been caching as long as you have and don't recall that being the case.

I'm not a big fan of poorly done multis or most puzzles, but not for the same reasons.

And trads in nasty locations like you describe aren't any fun either.

Edited October 3, 2012 by wimseyguy

[+The A-Team]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

Only the first stage of a multi was used for proximity.

 

Really? I've been caching as long as you have and don't recall that being the case.

Using the Wayback Machine, it looks like the guideline changed to include stages and finals of puzzles and multis somewhere between March and November 2005.

[+palmetto]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

Only the first stage of a multi was used for proximity.

 

Really? I've been caching as long as you have and don't recall that being the case.

Using the Wayback Machine, it looks like the guideline changed to include stages and finals of puzzles and multis somewhere between March and November 2005.

 

Saturation was added in 2003. It always referred to all physical placements, but reviewers tended not to ask about stages and finals. And even when they did ask, the info wasn't in the database, it was text in an email, or in an archived note type log to the cache page.

 

The waypoints tool, that allowed stages to be in the database didn't happen until 2005. It took a couple of years for most caches to have hidden stages added that way, and even now, there are old multis and puzzles with no final coords.

 

Nov 2005 specifically referenced hidden stages, "This guideline applies to all stages of multicaches and mystery/puzzle caches, except for any "bogus" posted coordinates for a puzzle cache" but it was always true, just unenforceable as a practical matter - those coords often weren't available.

Edited October 3, 2012 by palmetto

[+PSJKids]

We had this kind of an issue as well and ended up having to spend the $$ to become Premium members just to find out what direction we needed to move our cache to so it could be accepted. It sucks but that's the way the game is played so we conformed and spent the $.

You needn't have done that, really..... but, if that's what you see as a Premium benefit, so be it.

 

You will still be blocked by the "invisible" stages of multi-caches.

 

Your reviewer can see these things we cannot. A (relatively) simple correspondence with him/her can take care of it.

 

Well, in this case our cache was about 250ft from this stage 1 cache that had a number in it needed for the next stage cache. With it being an "Unknown Cache" I did not know where it was at and the reviewer did tell me I was within the 528' limit but that he couldn't tell me what direction or anything.

We decided on going ahead and doing the Premium after all since we could see a lot of other Premium Caches in this area on the basic member "Map This Location" map when zoomed out and we have since found quite a few of them so the money was definitely not a waste.

 

I enjoy the hell out of this and so do my kids and it gives me something to do with them that we all enjoy together; the wife tolerates it because she see we have fun doing it. The heat and the bushwhacking is what turns her off but when it finally starts to cool down here in Central Florida, I know she won't mind it as much.

[+DanOCan]

I still say the answer is an automated proximity checker to take the load off the reviewers and to reduce the angst caused when someone gets blocked by a Puzzle or Multi. Multis are especially annoying because the initial stage might not be anywhere near your location so you don't even know you need to find it until after your placement is blocked.

 

I shall now prepare for the chorus of "but people would use the proximity checker to 'battleship' the final locations of puzzles" to which my answer always remains the same -- "I know and I still don't care."

[+Harry Dolphin]

A few years ago you could put a cache as close to the final stage of a multi as you wanted.....it should still be that way.

Only the first stage of a multi was used for proximity.

 

Really? I've been caching as long as you have and don't recall that being the case.

Using the Wayback Machine, it looks like the guideline changed to include stages and finals of puzzles and multis somewhere between March and November 2005.

 

I have seen the first stage of a multi and a traditional within 100'. But they are both over ten years old, and presumably grandfathered (at least, I hope they are.)

I found a nice multi, pre-2005. Final coords were never entered into the system. Someone hid a cache about 10' from the final. When that was pointed out, the newer cache was retracted. Likewise, a mystery cache with the final about 75' from a traditional was retracted. (But, I suspect that that owner may not have given the proper coords for the final. I think that owner lost the race by a few weeks.)