528 loop hole

May 7, 2013

I was just thinking today as I had to move coords for one of my caches about 40 ft. Can a cacher get within the 528 if they update coords at a later date? Just curious, not planning on it.

1.1k · May 7, 2013

I was just thinking today as I had to move coords for one of my caches about 40 ft. Can a cacher get within the 528 if they update coords at a later date? Just curious, not planning on it.

You do realize you are now on a list, right?

May 7, 2013

Are you just talking of the review list? I'm seriously asking.

If you are just talking of a list because I made this post, I couldn't care less since I wouldn't be doing what this post is asking about.

May 7, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

Edited May 7, 2013 by worstcaster

1.1k · May 7, 2013

Are you just talking of the review list? I'm seriously asking.

If you are just talking of a list because I made this post, I couldn't care less since I wouldn't be doing what this post is asking about.

Guess I should have stolen your tag line.

May 7, 2013

If you update your coordinates and move within 528' of an existing cache, you may find your cache temporarily disabled. Your local reviewer will then likely give you some time to readjust the location of your cache so that it's far enough away from other caches.

If you have a cache which is initially disabled for being too close to another cache then subsequently published after you submit new coordinates for it, you may find your listing retracted if a) you immediately update the coordinates back to the original location, or you keep the updated coordinates but never actually moved the container to that spot and are directing finders to "search 40 feet to the east".

Edited May 7, 2013 by Edward Rooney

May 7, 2013

Are you just talking of the review list? I'm seriously asking.

If you are just talking of a list because I made this post, I couldn't care less since I wouldn't be doing what this post is asking about.

Guess I should have stolen your tag line.

My bad.

May 7, 2013

I recently accidentally found a puzzle cache while I was searching for the final stage of a multi. Found the puzzle cache first, then found the multi about 10 feet away. Looks like the puzzle CO mis-typed the coords initially and it was reviewed and published with the wrong coords. CO caught the mistake after it was published and put in the correct ones - which were right next to the final of the multi. Since it was less than a 528 foot move the reviewer didn't have to re-review it, so yes, it appears that that's a potential loophole.

Luckily the puzzle CO is an honest guy and once I mentioned the issue in my log he immediately disabled the cache and started looking for a different place to put it.

6k · May 7, 2013

If you update your coordinates and move within 528' of an existing cache, you may find your cache temporarily disabled. Your local reviewer will then likely give you some time to readjust the location of your cache so that it's far enough away from other caches.

If you have a cache which is initially disabled for being too close to another cache then subsequently published after you submit new coordinates for it, you may find your listing retracted if a) you immediately update the coordinates back to the original location, or you keep the updated coordinates but never actually moved the container to that spot and are directing finders to "search 40 feet to the east".

I am not so sure about the statement in the first paragraph. There have been several forum topics where someone did that and they were not dealt with which means no notice went out to the reviewer. There was one last month by a Noob (who did not know he was going to bring the wrath of reviewers down on the CO of the two caches) where two caches had been placed and then moved immediately after publishing. Before any log of any type and they stayed in service for considerable time. When a reviewer did some research on the Noob's comment (why are these so close) action was taken.

So it appears that is a little loop hole.

3.6k · May 7, 2013

You are now on the hit list. The reviewers will be watching every move you make.

7.5k · May 7, 2013

Can a cacher get within the 528 if they update coords at a later date?

So to sum up, a cacher can get a cache within the 528' limit, but a cacher is not allowed to have a cache within the 528' limit.

3.2k · May 7, 2013

I once got approval for a cache that "technically" didn't meet the 528' restriction. On a straight line it didn't quite make the cut. On the shortest possible route (without walking down the middle of a stream) it fit within the distance requirement. You can get approval in the same way for a cache that's on the other side of a canyon or on the other side of a mountain if there is no possible way to get to the cache without taking a longer route.

I certainly wouldn't push the limit needlessly.

7.9k · May 7, 2013

There is almost always a way to fudge the system...especially when humans are a key element in the system.

Not 'you' the OP, but the general 'you'.

You can fool all of the people some of the time, but once your reviewer finds out (and they will) that 'one has been slipped past them', they will be watching your every edit, and going over your listings with a fine-toothed comb.

8.3k · May 7, 2013

If I can move my cache around inside the original 528 foot circle without reviewer intervention I don't see why that it is a problem if I move it within that bounds and end up 300 foot from another cache. Both were originally placed according to the rules and both have freedom of movement. If there was a concern that the 528 foot rule would be broken on a cache move, then the ability of a CO to move the cache should be revoked and only reviewers can move a cache.

May 7, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

This ^^^

I have found several of these in my hometown so I suspect it is a prevalent practice.

2.8k · May 8, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

This ^^^

I have found several of these in my hometown so I suspect it is a prevalent practice.

If I found one of these I think a note to the reviewer would be in order.

7.8k · May 8, 2013

If you update your coordinates and move within 528' of an existing cache, you may find your cache temporarily disabled. Your local reviewer will then likely give you some time to readjust the location of your cache so that it's far enough away from other caches.

If you have a cache which is initially disabled for being too close to another cache then subsequently published after you submit new coordinates for it, you may find your listing retracted if a) you immediately update the coordinates back to the original location, or you keep the updated coordinates but never actually moved the container to that spot and are directing finders to "search 40 feet to the east".

I am not so sure about the statement in the first paragraph.

Psst, that's a reviewer you quoted. They probably know what they're talking about.

Based on past discussions and my own experiences, I was under the impression that reviewers are notified of any "Update coordinates" logs and will look over them at some point to make sure the cache hasn't run afoul of the proximity guideline. I've seen a couple of examples around here where a CO updated the coordinates, and the cache was promptly disabled by a reviewer for being too close to another cache. Here's one such example. Scroll down to the logs in June 2012.

8.9k · May 8, 2013

There have been several forum topics where someone did that and they were not dealt with which means no notice went out to the reviewer.

Unless you're monitoring the inbox of the reviewer, you're not privy to what they get notice of and what they don't. All you are seeing is that there is no APPARENT action that has been taken...

3.8k · May 8, 2013

There have been several forum topics where someone did that and they were not dealt with which means no notice went out to the reviewer.

Just because no-one did anything about it doesn't mean no-one knows about it...

There are two things here. One I place a cache and maybe the co-ords are off and I update them, or there's construction and I move it across the street. These caches may then be, for example 10 or 20 feet inside the 528 feet. A reviewer could look at it, maybe send me a PM why and I tell him honestly and he lets it slide.

Two. I want a cache within the 528 feet. I put it where I want it and it gets denied. So I put fake co-ords, and move it 200 feet at a time until I get within the 528 feet. The reviewer looks and sees I am obviously trying to skirt the rules. My cache gets archived.

It's intent and distance. If it's an honest mistake in the co-ords and the cache is only a couple feet within the distance it's more likely to be allowed then if I am trying to skirt the rules intenionally, or if its, say 100 feet within the distance.

And then there's times when a reviewer may have made a mistake and published it, or old puzzles(the final didn't have to be revealed) so the final location of the puzzles can be 5 feet away from a brand new cache.

In short there are ways around the rule, but they will know about it.

3k · May 8, 2013

Reviewers recievereceive notice when a cache they published recievesreceives an Update Coords log. A friend found this out when he "walked" the fake cords for a puzzle cache to a new location more than 528 ft away.

If you make a move right after publication or of substantial distance or multiple moves then it should usually raise a red flag for the Reviewer to check.

10.1k · May 8, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

This ^^^

I have found several of these in my hometown so I suspect it is a prevalent practice.

If I found one of these I think a note to the reviewer would be in order.

There was one like that nearby. Someone pointed it out to the reviewer and it was archived.

2.8k · May 9, 2013

One strategy I recently learnt through a discussion at an event but will not use is to post soft coordinates and give an explicit hint if you really need to be closer. You'll get the odd "coordinates out" log but for the most part no one will be the wiser.

7.8k · May 9, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

5k · May 9, 2013

There is almost always a way to fudge the system...especially when humans are a key element in the system.

Not 'you' the OP, but the general 'you'.

You can fool all of the people some of the time, but once your reviewer finds out (and they will) that 'one has been slipped past them', they will be watching your every edit, and going over your listings with a fine-toothed comb.

Seriously?

This happens every so often around here and it it almost always a simple mistake where the CO had no idea that he was encroaching on another cache. The bush their cache was in got chopped down so the replaced their cache in the existing one 75' away. We have a reviewer that is obviously watching for this and it's a simple disable, you have 30 days to fix it type deal. I don't even think our reviewers own a fine toothed comb. Prior to our third reviewer coming on board, it was never addressed which leads me to believe that the reviewers are not automatically notified.

To answer the original question as I understood it, there is no automatic system in place to stop you from intentionally or inadvertently changing your coordinates to a spot within 528' of another cache. The only system is that a reviewer may actually review the coordinate change and if it creates a problem, ask you to fix it.

7.8k · May 9, 2013

Prior to our third reviewer coming on board, it was never addressed which leads me to believe that the reviewers are not automatically notified.

As was mentioned eariler, lack of action does not necessarily mean the reviewers haven't been notified. It sounds like the two reviewers were just overworked, and when the third one came on board, the resources were then available to deal with such issues.

Edit to add: Oh, and I bet when the two reviewers were overworked, they were more lenient with minor encroachments. Once they had the resources to deal with encroachments, they became more strict and started to crack down on them. Just a theory.

Edited May 9, 2013 by The A-Team

1.2k · May 9, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

This ^^^

I have found several of these in my hometown so I suspect it is a prevalent practice.

If I found one of these I think a note to the reviewer would be in order.

Agreed...

May 9, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements. Annoyed some of the people who found it because they only got a traditional listed on their statistics.

Yeah we have one of those here we got there and than it had three steps and it was exactly like a multi

May 9, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

2.3k · May 9, 2013

But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Not all geocachers. Please don't count me in that group.

I'm ignoring for the sake of avoiding arguments the obvious distinctions between "illegal" and "not complying with the guidelines".

On the other hand, I also try not to support caches that violate the guidelines....

--Larry

May 9, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

QFT

5k · May 9, 2013

Prior to our third reviewer coming on board, it was never addressed which leads me to believe that the reviewers are not automatically notified.

As was mentioned eariler, lack of action does not necessarily mean the reviewers haven't been notified. It sounds like the two reviewers were just overworked, and when the third one came on board, the resources were then available to deal with such issues.

Edit to add: Oh, and I bet when the two reviewers were overworked, they were more lenient with minor encroachments. Once they had the resources to deal with encroachments, they became more strict and started to crack down on them. Just a theory.

It's hard to say. It's also possible that a notification was added at about the same time.

5k · May 9, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

It's interesting how your perception of your geocaching landscape is so vastly different than that of the other forum regulars that live in your area.

3.7k · May 9, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Could you list some GC codes?

2.8k · May 10, 2013

...post soft coordinates...

^Grounds for immediate disable or archive. Don't do it.

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Could you list some GC codes?

Nope, I'm not going there. This advice came from some pretty advanced cacher(s).

As I stated I wouldn't do it, if fact I placed a cache that was a half hour steep hike only to find it 10 meters to close to another, I actually went back and moved it another 100 yards.

7.8k · May 10, 2013

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Could you list some GC codes?

Nope, I'm not going there.

I'm pretty sure she was asking Off Grid, since that's who she quoted. Both she and I live in the same area as Off Grid.

3.7k · May 10, 2013

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Could you list some GC codes?

Nope, I'm not going there.

I'm pretty sure she was asking Off Grid, since that's who she quoted. Both she and I live in the same area as Off Grid.

Yep, sorry Roman! I'm just curious to know where all the nasty rule-breaking, trespassing caches are in town...so I can....you know...

1.6k · May 10, 2013

To the OP: There are provisions for updating coordinates after publication. They are there to permit COs to provide more accurate coordinates when that is required. Any other use is considered abuse. There are provisions to permit caches closer than 528 feet. If you have a valid exception to the guideline, make your reviewer aware. The 528 foot guideline was established to prevent cache saturation and the potential confusion it could create ( I go out searching for cache 1, find and sign cache 2 that is 40 feet away, log cache 1 online, the CO doesn't find my sig on the cache 1 log, deletes my find, I go out and verify I have signed the log, I complain, reviewers get involved, the frog gets involved, I hunt you down at an event; you get the idea). The guidelines are in place to promote the enjoyment of all that participate in the game. Please respect them.

2.8k · May 10, 2013

Hahahaha we should be disabling and archiving half the caches around here for not following the rules. But heck what's wrong with another illegal cache geocachers love it

Could you list some GC codes?

Nope, I'm not going there.

I'm pretty sure she was asking Off Grid, since that's who she quoted. Both she and I live in the same area as Off Grid.

Yep, sorry Roman! I'm just curious to know where all the nasty rule-breaking, trespassing caches are in town...so I can....you know...

No worries, I got it a bit too late.

The island is a cesspool of caches breaking the rules, I know, I have about a thousand finds there, I even heard about caches where homeless people had to get evicted from

Edited May 10, 2013 by Roman!

7.8k · May 10, 2013

The island is a cesspool of caches breaking the rules, I know, I have about a thousand finds there, I even heard about caches where homeless people had to get evicted from

...and don't forget the cacher that publicly posted in the forums that they were planning on hiding a cache that looks like a bomb.

Wait, I'm seeing a common denominator here...

May 10, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements.

All physical elements of a multi cache are supposed to be 528 feet from physical elements of other caches, not just the first stage. However, the stages of a multi cache do not have a minimum distance from each other.

Of course, it has just been in the last few years one has needed to list the coordinates of other stages and the finals of unknown type caches as additional waypoints on the submittal page.

3.7k · May 10, 2013

The island is a cesspool of caches breaking the rules, I know, I have about a thousand finds there, I even heard about caches where homeless people had to get evicted from

...and don't forget the cacher that publicly posted in the forums that they were planning on hiding a cache that looks like a bomb. pipe bomb

Wait, I'm seeing a common denominator here...

Edited May 10, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

6.1k · May 10, 2013

Yep, sorry Roman! I'm just curious to know where all the nasty rule-breaking, trespassing caches are in town...so I can....you know...

The hollow tree that you that you have a cache hanging from on the inside breaks the defacement guideline, but don't worry I wont mention it.

7.3k · May 10, 2013

One of the reasons for the .1 mile saturation guideline is to allow for a bit of cache drift. If a cache owner innocently moves their cache a bit into the .1 mile radius of a nearby cache, that would probably be fine. If the cache moves too far into the .1 mile radius of a nearby cache and a reviewer finds out about it, something may happen at that point. I couldn't say how close is too close, as every reviewer will interpret that a bit differently.

5k · May 10, 2013

I won't list the name but there is a cache near me that is a multi listed as a traditional. This way only stage one has to meet the distance requirements.

All physical elements of a multi cache are supposed to be 528 feet from physical elements of other caches, not just the first stage. However, the stages of a multi cache do not have a minimum distance from each other.

Of course, it has just been in the last few years one has needed to list the coordinates of other stages and the finals of unknown type caches as additional waypoints on the submittal page.

Okay, imagine this situation. I stop at a roadside turnout to grab a LPC or a pill bottle under a pile of rock. I decide to explore a bit and and follow a game train and 300' away I come to an absolutely incredible cliff-side viewpoint. I want to place a cache here so others can see what I have discovered, but I can't because there is already a cache 300' away. No problem, I'll just game the system. I'll put another micro on the roadside a .1 mile away and I'll put a note in it saying that people have to go to the coordinates of where my cache actually is. I'll list it as a traditional and the reviewer will never know the difference. Surprisingly, dozens of people will find it and no one will say anything. Some will post stuff like, "clever trick", "neat twist", or, "I was in a hurry and couldn't get to the final, I'll be back".

I have seen more than one cache like this and it is almost always by newer cachers that either thinks that they found an acceptable loophole, or they thought that it would be allowed. I've never had the impression that they intentionally intended to deceive the reviewer.

So, why would a cache like this or others that violate the guidelines exist, have dozens of finds and no one reports them? Most geocachers do not spend years discussing the guidelines on the forums. Most geocachers haven't hidden caches and have not gone over the guideline thoroughly. Others that know the guidelines will evaluate the situation and determine that it's not a big enough issue to create a controversy in the community. Some simply don't care because as soon as they log their smiley, it's off the RADAR and they never have to think about it again.

3.7k · May 10, 2013

Yep, sorry Roman! I'm just curious to know where all the nasty rule-breaking, trespassing caches are in town...so I can....you know...

The hollow tree that you that you have a cache hanging from on the inside breaks the defacement guideline, but don't worry I wont mention it.

That's a good example, although the hook (which was placed by the original cache owner) has fallen off and the cache moved now.

May 10, 2013

To the OP: There are provisions for updating coordinates after publication. They are there to permit COs to provide more accurate coordinates when that is required. Any other use is considered abuse. There are provisions to permit caches closer than 528 feet. If you have a valid exception to the guideline, make your reviewer aware. The 528 foot guideline was established to prevent cache saturation and the potential confusion it could create ( I go out searching for cache 1, find and sign cache 2 that is 40 feet away, log cache 1 online, the CO doesn't find my sig on the cache 1 log, deletes my find, I go out and verify I have signed the log, I complain, reviewers get involved, the frog gets involved, I hunt you down at an event; you get the idea). The guidelines are in place to promote the enjoyment of all that participate in the game. Please respect them.

I do respect the guidelines and follow them as best I can.

The question was only asked because of one of my caches that fell close between to existing caches and I had to move it about 40 ft and after doing so thought, "Could that be a loop hole for some people?" Since this topic was made, my reviewer has contacted me and we've discussed the issue. Thanks for the input though.

1.1k · May 10, 2013

I don't know why anyone would want to place caches closer than the .1 mile minimum.

But I do know of a town in Missouri that some friends just moved to; so I looked up what GCs were there, for when I go to visit them. And I found a bunch of caches that are much less than the .1 mile minimum. Don't know how they got through.

5k · May 10, 2013

I don't know why anyone would want to place caches closer than the .1 mile minimum.

Sometime today, I expect our reviewer to archive an abandoned/missing parking lot LPC. After he does, I'll be able to hide a cache at the side of a creek, 480' away. I have wanted to hide this cache for over a year. There are lots of reasons why someone would want to hide a cache within .1 of an existing cache.

May 10, 2013

I don't know why anyone would want to place caches closer than the .1 mile minimum.

Easy, the placed cache is an LPC, water drainage or micro and the new GZ is a unique location.

10.1k · May 10, 2013

I don't know why anyone would want to place caches closer than the .1 mile minimum.

Sometime today, I expect our reviewer to archive an abandoned/missing parking lot LPC. After he does, I'll be able to hide a cache at the side of a creek, 480' away. I have wanted to hide this cache for over a year. There are lots of reasons why someone would want to hide a cache within .1 of an existing cache.

Yeah. I was contemplating a cache at 50 Miles on the old canal. (I was going to call it Sal.) The problem is that it was not an especially attractive place. Homeless camp a short distance off. Lots of garbage. I had some trouble convincing my QA Department that this would be an interesting historical spot and a great name! "I had a mule and her name was Sal. 50 Miles on the Morris Canal." (The puzzle would have been to find where 50 Miles on the Morris Canal was...) Then someone put a magnetic keyholder in the cart return stall at the

local supermarket. 228' off. Oh, well. First come, first served.

528 loop hole

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment