Jump to content

Can anyone HELP?


Recommended Posts

I would like to get some input from the community on an issue.....

 

I found a 200+ acre property that I would like to put some caches on. It houses a wildlife viewing area. The owner has given permission for several caches to be placed on a perimeter road that runs around the viewing area.

This is private property, but let me explain....

 

There is a big entrance gate, but it is never closed. There is no entry fee....you drive in, make the circle to get the caches, and leave. There is no kiosk to check into, no one to speak to, no contact has to be made with any of the employees.

 

If you want to, you can pay to go into the viewing area, rent a golf cart, and interact with the animals. There are no caches in this part because of the ban on commercial-type caches. There is a restaurant, cabins, and a campground, but again, the caches are not near those areas.

 

The owner has assured me that cachers are welcome to drive in, make the circle to get the caches, and leave. No interactions with employees, no money spent anywhere.

 

In fact, the 'business' parts of this property....the restaurant, the interior of the viewing area, the cabins and campground are taxed as such by the local county tax assessors office. The rest of the property, the part with the caches, is considered the owner's homestead and is taxed at a different rate.

Our reviewer denied my caches, saying that they were on private property. When I explained the difference between the business/homestead properties, he would not answer me.

 

I don't know about you guys, but I sure have done a lot of caches on private property with permission from the owner.

 

So I sent in an appeal to Groundspeak, and their answer was that upon further investigation, they found out that upon entering the property, it would be necessary to interact with employees to get in. Huh? I don't know where they got that information, but it is not true.....there is no one to interact with anywhere along the way.

 

They also said there are other security gates that are not accessible by cachers. Huh, again? There are no security gates....just barbed wire across a couple of dirt roads that lead to other properties.

 

I don't know where in the world they got this erroneous information, but it is absolutely not true. I responded to their email, but they have not answered me yet.

 

I am floored that they would think I'm lying about this without giving me a chance to prove that I'm telling the truth. Should I make a video that shows the drive onto the property, the road where the caches are, and the exit with no interaction with anyone? I could have the owner submit a notarized letter saying that no interaction with employees is necessary?

I have no idea how to proceed.....does anyone have a similar experience?

What to do? Thanx, everyone

Sounds about right reviewer think there all knowing probably told ground speak not to publish could have lied

Link to comment

I don't mind taking no for an answer if I've done something wrong.......if I am given a chance to explain the placement and it still doesn't meet the guidelines, then fine.

In this case, I think they jumped the gun without giving me a chance to clarify with the owner and then to them.

There were misunderstandings on both sides....I had no idea they had a picture of a closed gate. That gave me a chance to talk to the PO again and clarify the misunderstandings. They misunderstood when they saw the closed gate.

OK, that's all water under the bridge now.......can we proceed with.....open gate during summer and weekends, no interaction with the staff, no pressure to buy anything.....

 

Is it OK now? Does everyone understand? Isn't it within the guidelines? Don't they approve...'private property with permission from the owner' all the time?

 

What's the problem now? Hurt feelings? OK, let me apologize to everyone who got their feathers ruffled over anything I said....mea culpa, I'm sorry, my bad...

 

If I can admit I made a mistake, can't GS say, ok, we misunderstood because of that picture, it's ok as long as no interaction with the staff takes place.....if there are complaints in the logs that they had to interact with anyone, we will shut this down.

 

Great....that's fair.......no complaints on my end about that......can we give it a go?

Link to comment

Sounds about right reviewer think there all knowing probably told ground speak not to publish could have lied

 

<_<:unsure:

 

I sincerely hope that your reviewer sees this and keeps it in mind the next time you try to publish a cache. Bad form.

 

The young lady ALWAYS has an interesting negative perspective. However, I don't think that would adversely influence a reviewer if her proposed hide is within guidelines. They are better than that.

Link to comment

Sounds about right reviewer think there all knowing probably told ground speak not to publish could have lied

 

<_<:unsure:

 

I sincerely hope that your reviewer sees this and keeps it in mind the next time you try to publish a cache. Bad form.

 

The young lady ALWAYS has an interesting negative perspective. However, I don't think that would adversely influence a reviewer if her proposed hide is within guidelines. They are better than that.

 

No, but they might be a little more "by the letter" if you will, to make sure the hide falls within the guidelines. She certainly shouldn't be asking for any special exemptions or favors from her reviewer with an attitude like that.

Link to comment

All the fuss hardly seems worth the effort. Seeing that picture, even if that gate was wide open I'd probably be hesitant to drive in unless I was a guest or had a resort-related reason to be in there. I don't see any signage indicating that it's open to the public 24/7 etc etc...therefore I would probably not just wander in, even for a geocache.

 

I think you ought to just move on. Perhaps place one nearby and mention some of the local attractions in the description.

 

My feelings exactly. Unless things have changed since the Google photo was taken, I'd probably pass on by. It has the look of, "you shouldn't be here", all over it. Of course, I'm not comfortable going onto any enclosed plot of land to find a cache, even with permission.

Link to comment

OK, I just talked to Josh and as it turns out, the property is only open on weekends after the summer. During the summer, or on school breaks, the gate is always open. When the kiddos are in school, it is only open on the weekends. He guesses the picture was taken on one of the days that the property was not open. He said when they are open, the gate is never closed. He gave me the gate code if for some reason the gate was closed when the property is open.

The months/days that the caches are available can be posted on the cache page. So then cachers would only go looking for them on the weekends or summer, whatever the case may be.

 

There are no other gates of any type.

If you look at a birds eye view of this area you can plainly see a perimeter road that leads all around the property and the caches are nowhere near the restaurant, animals, or cabins.

 

It sounds like your bad idea just got worse.

Link to comment

I don't think so since I'm the one who approached him and asked if it was for real that anyone could come in and drive around for free without having to go into the paid areas. I explained geocaching to him and he was like, yeah sure, whatever.

I asked him about the gate and he said it's open all the time, it's never supposed to be closed. Now I guess that was my fault for not asking him about the year round thing, but I just didn't think of it at the time. My bad.

 

So he told you that the gate is never supposed to be closed... except when it's closed?

 

Are you sure that this is the guy that you need to be talking to about this?

Link to comment

OK, I just talked to Josh and as it turns out, the property is only open on weekends after the summer. During the summer, or on school breaks, the gate is always open. When the kiddos are in school, it is only open on the weekends. He guesses the picture was taken on one of the days that the property was not open. He said when they are open, the gate is never closed. He gave me the gate code if for some reason the gate was closed when the property is open.

The months/days that the caches are available can be posted on the cache page. So then cachers would only go looking for them on the weekends or summer, whatever the case may be.

 

There are no other gates of any type.

If you look at a birds eye view of this area you can plainly see a perimeter road that leads all around the property and the caches are nowhere near the restaurant, animals, or cabins.

 

I don't know the specific rules about this, but this statement above makes me feel that the cache shouldn't be there. Nevermind the fact that many, if not most, cachers don't read the cache page before searching, and therefor wouldn't know when it was available or not. No, I think these caches are better left unpublished.

 

I asking about something like this here awhile back that I am still considering creating. It would be a mulit cache and the location of the first stage has limited availability. It *is* open to the public (and is *not* a business) but you just have to show up at a couple of specific times of the day (and only on weekdays) to access the area. I did get a response from a reviewer that said that based on my description there wasn't a guideline violation.

 

I have no idea what you have in mind for your cache but I have confidence that you would have a higher standard then 'it doesn't violate the guidelines'. There are plenty of caches that don't violate the guidelines but are really bad ideas nonetheless. "It doesn't violate the guidelines" is why we no longer have Virtual or ALR caches.

Link to comment

I explained geocaching to him and he was like, yeah sure, whatever.

 

Sounds like a ringing endorsement!

 

In other words, he didn't seek me out, he was not looking for a revenue stream from me, he has no anticipation that these geocaches are going to affect his business one way or another. In all honesty I doubt that any cachers will spend any money in there at all. The restaurant is only open for dinner and the prices are exhorbitant. The cabins are way expensive. The jeeps are expensive too.

 

And yes, this is a perfect example of a higher standard for quality caches. We have no federal lands in Texas. I wish I had a dime for every person who comes through from another state laughing at us because we have ammo cans chained to a tree on the side of the road. Or making fun of us because we have a film canister at every lamppost at WalMart and Home Depot in sight.

Regular sized caches in Texas are NOT the norm....it's hard to find something large enough at times to put a travel bug into.

Our parks are scarce....those that we have are filled with caches. Where else do we have to put things? Cemeteries and private property are popular here........why? Cause we don't have anything else!

 

Why not take advantage of 200 acres to put out some nice regular sized caches?

Link to comment

 

Is it OK now? Does everyone understand? Isn't it within the guidelines? Don't they approve...'private property with permission from the owner' all the time?

 

The issue (as you know) is that the location looks to the reviewer like a business where you would likely have to interact with (to get in the gate). It is not the private property which is the issue.

 

I would contact your reviewer again, and very politely provide as much evidence as you can about the gate being open during times you will specify, the permission of the owner, etc.

 

Personally I wouldn't have any concerns as a finder going in there if it was clear on the cache page that there was permission. If anyone from the business questioned what I was doing there I would tell them.

Link to comment

Was there some incident in the past which precipitated this no-commercial-interaction rule guideline?

 

I am told that the existence of the "$" attribute is indicative of the possibility of having to interact with someone at a national park type of deal, presumably for entrance fees etc.

 

What's up with that?

 

(I ask, because I had no problems getting an interact-with-staff cache published elsewhere).

 

EDIT for terminology

Edited by frinklabs
Link to comment

Was there some incident in the past which precipitated this no-commercial-interaction rule guideline?

 

I am told that the existence of the "$" attribute is indicative of the possibility of having to interact with someone at a national park type of deal, presumably for entrance fees etc.

 

What's up with that?

 

(I ask, because I had no problems getting an interact-with-staff cache published elsewhere).

 

EDIT for terminology

 

I don't know about any incidents personally, but I can certainly see why you wouldn't put something out with the expressed purpose of bringing business to a particular location. The $ sign, to my knowledge, is to indicate that there is an admission fee, for example a state park. In this particular case, the $ wouldn't be part of my listing at all.

Link to comment

Was there some incident in the past which precipitated this no-commercial-interaction rule guideline?

 

I am told that the existence of the "$" attribute is indicative of the possibility of having to interact with someone at a national park type of deal, presumably for entrance fees etc.

 

What's up with that?

 

(I ask, because I had no problems getting an interact-with-staff cache published elsewhere).

 

EDIT for terminology

 

I don't know about any incidents personally, but I can certainly see why you wouldn't put something out with the expressed purpose of bringing business to a particular location. The $ sign, to my knowledge, is to indicate that there is an admission fee, for example a state park. In this particular case, the $ wouldn't be part of my listing at all.

 

It is unfortunate, because this excludes many interesting places which would be awesome for a cache. The cache I had published elsewhere is in a for-pay facility, but the entrance fee is waived for anyone seeking the cache (the owners are friends).

 

This isn't the location of which I speak, but wouldn't it be cool to seek a cache here?

 

CN Tower Edgewalk

 

movie_ph.jpg

Link to comment

Sounds about right reviewer think there all knowing probably told ground speak not to publish could have lied

 

Nice. Throw around baseless accusations as if they were the truth and throw reviewers under the bus at the same time. You might want to rethink your opinion and offer up an apology.

 

Do you have any evidence of reviewers taking out their scorn on CO's by not publishing their caches? Or was this just another example of mud-slinging in your dubious forum career?

 

 

Why not take advantage of 200 acres to put out some nice regular sized caches?

 

From the sound of it, you have loose ends all over the place on this one. First the gate is always open. Then the owner doesn't know why it was closed. Now it's only open during certain days/seasons. You haven't even gotten cachers through the gate and there is plenty of confusion. I would concentrate on getting straight-forward answers from someone in the know and then presenting those facts to GS.

Link to comment

Was there some incident in the past which precipitated this no-commercial-interaction rule guideline?

 

I am told that the existence of the "$" attribute is indicative of the possibility of having to interact with someone at a national park type of deal, presumably for entrance fees etc.

 

What's up with that?

 

(I ask, because I had no problems getting an interact-with-staff cache published elsewhere).

 

EDIT for terminology

 

I don't know about any incidents personally, but I can certainly see why you wouldn't put something out with the expressed purpose of bringing business to a particular location. The $ sign, to my knowledge, is to indicate that there is an admission fee, for example a state park. In this particular case, the $ wouldn't be part of my listing at all.

 

It is unfortunate, because this excludes many interesting places which would be awesome for a cache. The cache I had published elsewhere is in a for-pay facility, but the entrance fee is waived for anyone seeking the cache (the owners are friends).

 

This isn't the location of which I speak, but wouldn't it be cool to seek a cache here?

 

CN Tower Edgewalk

 

movie_ph.jpg

 

I think that at some point in time Groundspeak decided that they didn't want caches listed on their site to be used to promote other people's businesses. Even though your friends would wave the entrance fee, they still have the opportunity to turn a casual geocacher into a potential customer.

 

As far as the $ attribute. I have plenty of caches that have it. All on state park or conservation land where you have to pay a fee to park. Groundspeak makes a distinction between such areas and commercial enterprises.

Edited by Don_J
Link to comment

We have tons of caches, and I mean tons, in cemeteries here in Texas. There are always explicit rules about only going on this property-type during certain times of the day. This same reviewer also, just recently, published a series of caches in downtown Austin where the some of the caches take you into museums and you have to ask 'someone' to give you a folder. These are free museums, but the second one we went to knew 'something' about it and then went and got someone else. These museums have very strict hours and not everyone is in on the game. The thing is, the cache description tells you that some of the caches on this series can only be gotten at certain times of day, but you don't know which ones until you've spent all morning solving that puzzle only to go to the location and find it's closed. That's it for that day...and that was it for me for that series.

 

Anyway,I think if you can get explicit detail about gate opening times and put that on the page you should be able to publish those caches. There do seem to be different rules for different caches.

Link to comment

those are bathrooms, a jeep storage shed and a pavilion. The cache is nowhere near the restaurant. Let's see the rest of the map.........

 

The restaurant is the largest building off to the right in the top corner of the picture. The restaurant is at the back of that building. The cacher would not see the restaurant. The patrons of the restaurant would not see the cacher. The restaurant does not even open until 6:30PM.

Link to comment

See, this is what I'm talking about. You just ASSUME that there are problems here without even giving me a chance to explain and clarify any misunderstandings.

 

Just BOOM! NO!

 

Not....well, I see a possible problem here......let me talk with her and see if I can clarify this.......maybe this is workable....or maybe not....let's have some back and forth on this......

 

IS COMMUNICATION about a cache placement possible instead of just NO!?

 

If that one was too close for you, I could have left that one out and just placed the other 8.

 

No one likes this heavy handed approach.......people are perfectly willing to be accommodating and work WITH you if you would just give them a chance.

Link to comment

No one likes this heavy handed approach.......people are perfectly willing to be accommodating and work WITH you if you would just give them a chance.

I agree. You could start off with a clear apology for your accusations early on in the thread. As I stated in my first reply, I'd have absolutely no motivation to be at all helpful to you after reading about the "ego problem" and so forth. Dial that back, and you'll find that your reviewer will be much more happy to work with you. We make our livings publishing caches, not by saying "no."

Link to comment

Looks like it's a little bit near the parking lot for my taste as well.

 

Between your reviewers denial, then GS's denial, and your accusatory attitude throughout this thread, I'd guess you're pretty well SOL when it comes to these caches being published. I think it's a shame, because if things are the way you describe them as far as the area is concerned then I think it would be an interesting little series of caches. Good luck in your future endeavors.

Link to comment

Fair enough. Prime Reviewer, I apologize for insinuating that the denial of my caches was from a challenge to your ego.

However, to be fair, I had NO IDEA that you were looking at a picture of a closed gate because you WOULD NOT TALK TO ME about it.

Your first objection was that it was on business property. When I explained the difference in the two types of properties there.......homestead and business, you refused to answer me.

 

When I filed an appeal, the panel said the problem was NOT that it was on private property, but that cachers would have to interact with the staff. Huh? Where did they get THAT idea? I had told you there was no one to interact with.

 

This has been nothing but misunderstandings all the way around. I tried to clarify an issue you had about the 'business' portions of this property and then you would not answer me.

 

If there had been an honest attempt at a two way discussion or communication here, this whole mess could have been avoided.

Link to comment

those are bathrooms, a jeep storage shed and a pavilion. The cache is nowhere near the restaurant. Let's see the rest of the map.........

 

The restaurant is the largest building off to the right in the top corner of the picture. The restaurant is at the back of that building. The cacher would not see the restaurant. The patrons of the restaurant would not see the cacher. The restaurant does not even open until 6:30PM.

 

I'm curious, how far away is the perimeter road you claim the caches are on?

Link to comment

I 'claim' the caches are on? Seriously?

 

I don't know how to put a map on here with the caches marked........maybe you can ask PR to do that for you. I see he's good at cropping out pictures so you can't see the whole area.....

Link to comment

One look at that gate and I can understand why reviewers might have a problem with accepting the cache placement. Like it or not, it's up to the reviewers to make the call. You can always try to show them that the cache will be accessible certain days listed on the cache page, but once it's been passed up by the reviewers and Groundspeak you'll have to accept the denial.

Link to comment

I 'claim' the caches are on? Seriously?

 

I don't know how to put a map on here with the caches marked........maybe you can ask PR to do that for you. I see he's good at cropping out pictures so you can't see the whole area.....

 

Luckily, reviewers are well vetted and are of the mindset that doesn't take public personal attacks into account when it comes to publishing caches.

 

Your reviewer has not posted to this thread. Another reviewer was trying to be helpful by pointing out one of the inconsistencies, (locked gate), that you'll have to overcome if you want to get your caches published. I'm guessing that you'll also have to overcome your lack of diplomacy.

Link to comment
I don't know how to put a map on here with the caches marked.

How about a link to a Google view showing the road, and a verbal description of where things are (if needed)?

 

...Keeping in mind that even if all of us regular joes agree with you, that doesn't mean GS will change their minds.

Edited by TriciaG
Link to comment
I don't know how to put a map on here with the caches marked.

How about a link to a Google view showing the road, and a verbal description of where things are (if needed)?

 

...Keeping in mind that even if all of us regular joes agree with you, that doesn't mean GS will change their minds.

 

408 Fuller Dr., Bergheim,TX

Link to comment

It doesn't matter.....they've already given their final decision. They will not change their minds, because if they did it would set a bad precedent.

I just hope that someone, somewhere along the way has decided that maybe they should LISTEN a little more and encourage more 2 way communication between the submitter and the reviewer.

 

In my mind, lack of diplomacy is evidenced when people don't listen to you, don't encourage you to communicate or clarify something that might trigger a red flag, don't give you any respect and make it seem that you are lying. Lack of diplomacy is rubber stamping something NO before listening to all sides. Lack of diplomacy is ignoring a question that's asked again and again. Lack of diplomacy is cropping a picture and posting it on here to insinuate that the submitter is lying, ASSUMING that they know the answer when actually, they never even asked you. Lack of diplomacy is saying.....your caches are denied because cachers would have to interact with the staff, when that is an absolute lie. And the worst lack of diplomacy is not even letting you defend yourself against ANY false assumption.

I've been caching since 2001 and I've never had a problem with Groundspeak....not any reviewer, nobody. When you get one story about why your caches are denied from your reviewer and a different story from the appeals panel, I think it is time to wonder what's going on. That is not a lack of diplomacy.

And yes, my reviewer has posted on this thread.

Link to comment

It doesn't matter.....they've already given their final decision. They will not change their minds, because if they did it would set a bad precedent.

I just hope that someone, somewhere along the way has decided that maybe they should LISTEN a little more and encourage more 2 way communication between the submitter and the reviewer.

 

In my mind, lack of diplomacy is evidenced when people don't listen to you, don't encourage you to communicate or clarify something that might trigger a red flag, don't give you any respect and make it seem that you are lying. Lack of diplomacy is rubber stamping something NO before listening to all sides. Lack of diplomacy is ignoring a question that's asked again and again. Lack of diplomacy is cropping a picture and posting it on here to insinuate that the submitter is lying, ASSUMING that they know the answer when actually, they never even asked you. Lack of diplomacy is saying.....your caches are denied because cachers would have to interact with the staff, when that is an absolute lie. And the worst lack of diplomacy is not even letting you defend yourself against ANY false assumption.

I've been caching since 2001 and I've never had a problem with Groundspeak....not any reviewer, nobody. When you get one story about why your caches are denied from your reviewer and a different story from the appeals panel, I think it is time to wonder what's going on. That is not a lack of diplomacy.

And yes, my reviewer has posted on this thread.

 

My apologies. I thought that post #69 was by someone else. After using the address provided to look at the area, I'm at a loss as well. If you were putting a cache in the parking lot, and they thought that was too close to the commercial structures, then deny that cache. The rest of the roadways are well away and isolated from that spot.

 

Did you write back directly to the person that reviewed the caches on appeal? A dialog with that person, consisting of facts only, is probably the only way to make this happen.

Link to comment

I 'claim' the caches are on? Seriously?

 

I don't know how to put a map on here with the caches marked........maybe you can ask PR to do that for you. I see he's good at cropping out pictures so you can't see the whole area.....

 

If pushpin "A" in the aerial view is a proposed cache then my question and comment stand.

 

If it is not, then please accept my public apology for the snarky remark.

Link to comment

Yes, I replied to the appeal email. My response was that their answer was final. No dialog. No chance for explanations. No 2 way communications. NADA. Zip.

Yes, I wrote again to the reviewer pleading my case again explaining everything, trying to show how everything is above board and not in violation of anything.

His response was no response. No dialog. No chance for explanations. No 2 way communications. NADA. Zip.

 

A large cache outside the gate is not possible, so there is a micro there with an explanation on the cache page of what is inside. I have listed most of the other ones on Open Caching and a couple are in the queue. So hopefully the word will get out what a great place this is for a family to spend the day.

 

And oh yes, that one on the tree in the parking lot was to show people where the bathrooms were since all the other caches were so far away, they might not have been aware that there was a bathroom anywhere. I purposely put it there at that angle so no one would even SEE the restaurant.

Edited by cybercat
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...