Jump to content

528' Annoyance


JohnX
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Just a rant: OK, carelessness on my part caused this problem: I placed a cache and submitted it to be published. It turns out it was closer than 528' to other caches. This is the reply I got from the reviewer:

 

I regret to inform you that I cannot publish your cache at this time. It seems to be 352 feet from an existing active cache site(GCxxxx) AND 502 feet from another nearby cache (GCxxxx). Cache density limits require a minimum of 0.1 mile or 528 feet separation between caches. The following is taken from the guidelines you agreed to when submitting this cache.

 

Cache Saturation:

 

The reviewers use a rule of thumb that caches placed within .10 miles (528 feet or 161 meters) of another cache may not be listed on the site. This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another. This guideline applies to all stages of multicaches and mystery/puzzle caches, except for any “bogus” posted coordinates for a puzzle cache.

 

Fair enough, however notice the reviewer says 528' distance is a requirement while the then quoting the Geoaching guidelines that state very clearly that this distance is "a rule of thumb" and "is just a guideline". I know this might be nit picking semantics and the reviewer has the final decision to allow the cache. Just please don't tell me something is a requirement when the guidelines state it is a rule of thumb.

 

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

Link to comment

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

 

When you go to submit a new cache, there's a tool right there for you.

http://www.geocaching.com/hide/planning.aspx

 

Note: this does not show true locations of physical stages or final coordinates of '?' caches.

Edited by J Grouchy
Link to comment

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

 

When you go to submit a new cache, there's a tool right there for you.

http://www.geocaching.com/hide/planning.aspx

 

Note: this does not show true locations of physical stages or final coordinates of '?' caches.

 

Or Multis.

Link to comment

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

 

When you go to submit a new cache, there's a tool right there for you.

http://www.geocaching.com/hide/planning.aspx

 

Note: this does not show true locations of physical stages or final coordinates of '?' caches.

 

Or Multis.

 

Like I said..."physical stages". Didn't think I actually had to state the obvious...

Link to comment

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

 

When you go to submit a new cache, there's a tool right there for you.

http://www.geocaching.com/hide/planning.aspx

 

Note: this does not show true locations of physical stages or final coordinates of '?' caches.

 

Or Multis.

 

But multis are a bit more of a challenge if they have virtual stages since proximity does not apply to virtual stages. The proximity rules also don't apply to earthcaches.

Link to comment

See also the Help Center article:

Checking for Geocache Saturation

 

Yes, it's a guideline, and yes, the reviewers occasionally make exceptions. But in general, it's best to consider it a rule. Don't count on the reviewer making an exception for your cache.

 

The reviewers used to make more exceptions, but with the advent of modern numbers run trails (interchangeable containers placed every 529ft along a rural highway), they've had to stop being so flexible.

Link to comment

You could always use the app, or download the closest caches to your GPS, and when you get to the area, look at the closest caches. Won't work for PMO, ?, and other hidden stages, but it's a start. And you can always ask for a co-ord check before you place the cache. Make up he page, but don't place the cache, and submit it with the reviewer not asking if you're good based on the co-ords, or email the reviewer asking that. Different reviewers will do it differently, so she may ask you to do it their way...

Link to comment

Fair enough, however notice the reviewer says 528' distance is a requirement while the then quoting the Geoaching guidelines that state very clearly that this distance is "a rule of thumb" and "is just a guideline". I know this might be nit picking semantics and the reviewer has the final decision to allow the cache. Just please don't tell me something is a requirement when the guidelines state it is a rule of thumb.

I was a bit surprised that the reviewer's note quoted from such an old version of the guidelines.

 

The guidelines are guidelines and the reviewer can in rare instances make exceptions. But don't expect this to happen often. In the past reviewers were much more likely to make exceptions, especially to the 528' guideline. People started to expect exceptions, especially in certain situations that were similar to some exception that was made in the past. It is much easier for the reviewer to treat 528' as rule and never make an exception.

 

In fact under the old guidelines things swung both ways. The guidelines contained a phrase that allowed reviewers to deny caches place up to 600' a part (Just because you can place a cache every 600' doesn't mean you should ...). Now just as reviewers are reluctant to grant an exception to caches less than 528' apart, they are not going to reject caches that are exactly 528' apart, or that are 600' feet apart.

 

The new reality should make much harder for someone to come to forums and complain that the are being treated unfairly. Yet it doesn't to seem to have had much of an effect. :unsure:

Link to comment

Just a rant: OK, carelessness on my part caused this problem: I placed a cache and submitted it to be published. It turns out it was closer than 528' to other caches. This is the reply I got from the reviewer:

 

I regret to inform you that I cannot publish your cache at this time. It seems to be 352 feet from an existing active cache site(GCxxxx) AND 502 feet from another nearby cache (GCxxxx). Cache density limits require a minimum of 0.1 mile or 528 feet separation between caches. The following is taken from the guidelines you agreed to when submitting this cache.

 

Cache Saturation:

 

The reviewers use a rule of thumb that caches placed within .10 miles (528 feet or 161 meters) of another cache may not be listed on the site. This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another. This guideline applies to all stages of multicaches and mystery/puzzle caches, except for any “bogus” posted coordinates for a puzzle cache.

 

Fair enough, however notice the reviewer says 528' distance is a requirement while the then quoting the Geoaching guidelines that state very clearly that this distance is "a rule of thumb" and "is just a guideline". I know this might be nit picking semantics and the reviewer has the final decision to allow the cache. Just please don't tell me something is a requirement when the guidelines state it is a rule of thumb.

 

In the Guidelines section titled "Physical elements of different geocaches should be at least 0.10 miles (528 ft or 161 m) apart.", http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx , in addition to the explanation and diagram, there is this statement:

 

Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

 

Also, requesting some help here. Is there a online tool where I can type in the proposed coordinates of the cache and see if it falls in the 528' rule of thumb?

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache → Review Process: Hiding a Geocache

1.12. Checking for Geocache Saturation

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

 

Important: This list will not show you hidden stages of geocaches in the area, puzzle solutions, stages of multi-caches, Wherigo finals.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

You could always use the app, or download the closest caches to your GPS, and when you get to the area, look at the closest caches.

Yes. You can't beat being there on foot, because you may even find a cooler spot in the general area.

 

By the time I scout a new spot, I've already found nearby caches. I also ask the Land Manager, people at Events, and caching friends about my selected spot. If there may be a cache stage I didn't know about, they will clue me in. They may also suggest a reason that amazing spot is available (that it's constantly muggled or whatever). "Online tools" are only the start of a good cache investigation.

Link to comment

Just today I found an awesome and very tricky spot for a new hide, but when I pulled the average it had me 516' from the nearest cache. I suppose I could have fudged the number to make it avoid the saturation guideline, but instead I decided I could find an equally good spot outside of the radius. Not every "ideal" spot will work out for you and you kind of have to expect stuff like this to be an issue...especially in a more densely populated area. GS did limit the distance to finals to two miles or less to help minimize the impact of the saturation rule...but the onus is on you to make sure you aren't bumping up against those imaginary lines when you place the cache.

Link to comment

The secret purpose of the 528' guideline is to have the distance coincide with the spiritual harmonic balance of all things 528. Recently more than a few people have changed the tuning of musical notes very slightly which has been found to repair DNA and clean polluted water. :D

 

Today, we have a similar situation that began in 1938 when the music industry was conned into a prison of A=440/F#=741 "standard tuning." "Blue Meanies" imposed this "concert tuning" that suppressed the good vibration of your heart--LOVE/528--nature's choice for energizing oxygen and the air you breathe. This is why most music lovers "feel something is not quite right" with today's music. The spiritual suppression is felt, and is at the heart of our most urgent problems.

 

528 music is the solution to bring peace to earth.

 

Lennon performed "Imagine" in 528, and McCartney's Band on the Run transitioned into 528, too. They knew something we know, and audiences experience about 528. It is the "key" to unlocking the "good vibration" in your heart, generating joy, faith, bravery, love and the "peace paradigm,", destined for revolutionizing everything globally, musicially (mathematically) to the most healing and uplifting frequency in the nature (universally)--LOVE/528.

 

http://www.soundhealingcenter.com/love.html

http://www.528revolution.com/528-frequency-that-killed-john-lennon-528-frequency/

http://www.528records.com/pages/dna-repair-frequency-revealed-bible-intrigues-scientists-and-religious-scholars

 

supergreen-vata.jpg

 

 

Then there is the flip side which insists 528 is the hallmark of SATAN and the illuminati.. :P

 

http://atrueott.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/truth-revealed-528-is-the-frequency-of-saturnsatan-not-of-christian-love/

 

PLEASE DON’T BE DECEIVED BY LEONARD HOROWITZ AND HIS DECLARATIONS THAT 528 IS THE “GREEN-YELLOW” FREQUENCY OF LOVE. It is not. 528 hz is the single most powerful “magic window frequency” employed by the biblical “Horites” (where the surname “Horowitz” originated) ancestry to perform black magic sorcery since the days of Cain. Follow the bloodline trail in Genesis and throughout the entire Pentateuch and this becomes readily apparent. This is the progeny of Esau (who is Edom) as recorded in Genesis Chapter 36. The Horites made a strategic alliance with the Demons of antiquity, according to the Holy Bible. They have used Enochian Magic since it was first revealed to Enoch, the SON OF CAIN (Genesis 4:17) in order to consult and direct the demonic entities into this “earth plane” to further their Luciferian agenda. THIS IS THE GRAND SECRET!! The “Horites” have been the scourge of planet earth for thousands of years. The agenda is quite simple, really. It is to capture the heart, mind and souls of all mankind in the Luciferian/Edomite blasphemies.

 

Don’t be deceived, Christians. Hor-witz of the Horites did not invent the wheel with his “book” on 528 hz. This DNA-altering frequency (the key to “shape-shifting” and DNA alteration in “shamanism”) has been used by Mother Goddesses and Sorcerers of the Dark Arts since it was first revealed to Enoch the son of Cain. Here is just one example — a “Mother Goddess” taking the Edomite black-sorcery title “Shekinah” (who in the Kaballah invokes the ARCH-DEMON Azazel) shows how the 528 hz had been historically invoked via the human vocal chords, or “Cantors” (the origins of the word in-cant-ation involves “cantor”). This was practiced in Egypt by the Pharaoh (Pharisee) Annubis – who could walk the earth as either a wolf/jackal, or a man. This is the origins of Native American “Skin-walkers” — called Innupits by the Utes and Piute Tribes (phonetically identical to Annubis oddly enough.)

 

Somehow I suspect someone by the name of Vinny may be behind some of this..

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment
528 is the hallmark of SATAN

There's a local park that's kind of saturated with caches, so when one cache was archived, I went to scout a new spot. After the archival, the remaining caches are way closer than "528". So "528" is a rule of thumb, but many existing caches have been grandfathered much closer together.

Link to comment

GS did limit the distance to finals to two miles or less to help minimize the impact of the saturation rule

It was my understanding that this limit was put in place to reduce the error in trackable travel distances. People were dipping/dropping TBs in puzzles that had the posted coordinates thousands of miles from the actual container, significantly skewing the distance it had traveled. Its effect on determining if a location satisfies the saturation guideline is incidental.

 

However, as Toz has pointed out repeatedly, Groundspeak doesn't provide the rationale behind the guidelines. Unless you were around while the trigger for a new guideline (ie. the last straw) was being discussed, you won't know their reasoning behind a guideline.

Link to comment
you won't know their reasoning behind a guideline.

"528 feet" is 1/10th of a mile: ".10". Simple, understandable (at least in the US it is :ph34r:). So now you'll ponder "Ah yes, Grasshopper, but why not 1/11th? Or 1/9th?". Metaphysical randomness is cool. Groundspeak may have actually used 4wheelin_fool's SATAN wheel, who knows. But when I'm scouting a spot and GyPSy switches from feet to miles, every distance from then on is golden. At ".10", I can check my preferred hiding spot, and see if there's an even better one. No guessing, no remembering how to convert "1/9th of a mile", since ".10" it's a nice easy number to understand.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

GS did limit the distance to finals to two miles or less to help minimize the impact of the saturation rule

It was my understanding that this limit was put in place to reduce the error in trackable travel distances. People were dipping/dropping TBs in puzzles that had the posted coordinates thousands of miles from the actual container, significantly skewing the distance it had traveled. Its effect on determining if a location satisfies the saturation guideline is incidental.

 

However, as Toz has pointed out repeatedly, Groundspeak doesn't provide the rationale behind the guidelines. Unless you were around while the trigger for a new guideline (ie. the last straw) was being discussed, you won't know their reasoning behind a guideline.

 

You're correct...my wording should have been "GS did limit the distance to finals to two miles or less which helps minimize the impact of the saturation rule". No way to be sure of the intent behind it, but it does have that effect...

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

Now that's funny.

Link to comment

 

You're correct...my wording should have been "GS did limit the distance to finals to two miles or less which helps minimize the impact of the saturation rule". No way to be sure of the intent behind it, but it does have that effect...

 

But that's still not true as it does not apply to multi caches which have finals too.

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

 

Sounds like you could make it a virtual stage in a multi or mystery cache.

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

Now that I know it was not just another LPC I feel your pain. :( I have at least one listing where there are two other geocaches less than 528 feet away, but mine is on top of a cliff a few hundred feet higher than the other caches. B)

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

 

Would this feature be a topic for an earthcache? If you want to put some work into it, and if there's no earthcache with a same/similar topic nearby this might be an option.

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

 

Would this feature be a topic for an earthcache? If you want to put some work into it, and if there's no earthcache with a same/similar topic nearby this might be an option.

 

I was going to suggest the exact same thing. The 528-foot rule applies to physical caches and stages. It does not apply to earthcaches. With a little homework, you might be able to put an earthcache together: problem solved.

Link to comment

What is super annoying is the cache has to be placed in this exact location because the payoff is not the cache itself but a geological feature that requires a direct sight line from the location. The other annoying thing is that I actually placed one of the conflicting caches myself years ago and someone adopted it. I forgot all about it. I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it a viable cache.

 

Would this feature be a topic for an earthcache? If you want to put some work into it, and if there's no earthcache with a same/similar topic nearby this might be an option.

 

I was going to suggest the exact same thing. The 528-foot rule applies to physical caches and stages. It does not apply to earthcaches. With a little homework, you might be able to put an earthcache together: problem solved.

 

+1

 

Links for reference:

 

Creating an Earthcache

 

Creating an EC: Additional Tips

 

Limiting some Earcache Types

 

GSA Earthcache Guidelines

Link to comment

A few years ago we were caching in a town and went for a cache that was placed inside an historical bell in a park. The cords were off by about 20 meters. We then went for a cache 160 meters away on an historical train caboose. The cords were also off by about 20 meters. It seems the two caches were actually only 125 meters apart rather than the allowable 161 meters (528 feet).

 

We have two approved caches about 100 meters apart on opposite sides of a river where a railroad bridge was removed 50 years ago.

 

We are aware of a situation where 2 caches are even closer than that. It was obviously a mistake. Cachers love finding them because they are kind of illegal. Nobody has reported them.

 

PAul

 

.

 

.

Link to comment

Last year I found two caches that were only about 40 ft apart from one another. One is a traditional (GC3R5JN) and one a mystery final. There is a guardrail in front of this small port, and the cache containers were both magnetic micros at either end of this guardrail (not very creative...).

 

The story behind this is: the predecessor of the current traditional was there in the first place. About a year later the mystery final was placed in addition to it. Both of them coexisted for almost 3 years until the traditional was archived, because its owner had moved to the US an could thus not maintain the cache. Later the current traditional was placed by a new owner at the same spot as a reload. Again both caches coexisted for 1.5 years. Occasionally people would mention the proximity in their logs, but most found it amusing. So did I (made up for the crappy hiding spots and containers). Nobody reported it to the reviewers who had published a cache within a few steps to another not once but twice! And this was in Germany, the land of rules an regulations - go figure B) !

 

Earlier this year the mystery was archived by its owner (along with the other 2 caches of this mini-series). Not because of the distance issue, but because someone had complained about the quality and the fact that they'd gotten themselves dirty during the search :blink: .

 

Edit: "guardrail" is the correct term (copied from the previous poster).

Edited by FloGH12
Link to comment

Last year I found two caches that were only about 40 ft apart from one another. One is a traditional (GC3R5JN) and one a mystery final. There is a guardrail in front of this small port, and the cache containers were both magnetic micros at either end of this guardrail (not very creative...).

 

Multi's and Unknowns with hidden waypoints worked out from clues like A=1 B=2 etc., worked out from the location, and placed into an equation to find the final coords, have only 'recently' been required to have the coordinates posted on the webpage for the reviewer to see. (eg. Hidden waypoints)

 

It was possible at one time to 'move' your final container, if the coordinates were worked out with an equation, just by changing the equation, so the coords were in a new location...

As the 'final' coordinates were not on the cache page to be seen by a reviewer, no-one would be any the wiser as to where the cache actually was!

Edited by Bear and Ragged
Link to comment

I know of 2 caches that are on guardrails on a bridge, one at one end one at the other. They are about 60ft apart. They are both traditional,

Don't know how that happened.

 

An interesting situation arose a while back in an area I cached fairly frequently at the time.

 

A cache was hidden underneath an angled information board. It was a nice enough spot, so nice in fact that someone else hid a cache under the very same board. Somehow they slipped through the net and the result was two caches under the same board, barely three feet apart.

 

It caused a fair bit of confusion and before long the later-placed cache was archived.

Link to comment

I know of 2 caches that are on guardrails on a bridge, one at one end one at the other. They are about 60ft apart. They are both traditional,

Don't know how that happened.

 

I know of a similar situation involving two traditionals. Everyone finds it amusing and loves to log them both.

 

I also know of a situation where a traditional on a guardrail was approved and was 40 meters across the road from a puzzle cache. A cacher mentioned the situation, and soon everyone was able to log the puzzle.

 

PAul

 

.

.

Link to comment

Last year I found two caches that were only about 40 ft apart from one another. One is a traditional (GC3R5JN) and one a mystery final. There is a guardrail in front of this small port, and the cache containers were both magnetic micros at either end of this guardrail (not very creative...).

 

The story behind this is: the predecessor of the current traditional was there in the first place. About a year later the mystery final was placed in addition to it. Both of them coexisted for almost 3 years until the traditional was archived, because its owner had moved to the US an could thus not maintain the cache. Later the current traditional was placed by a new owner at the same spot as a reload. Again both caches coexisted for 1.5 years. Occasionally people would mention the proximity in their logs, but most found it amusing. So did I (made up for the crappy hiding spots and containers). Nobody reported it to the reviewers who had published a cache within a few steps to another not once but twice! And this was in Germany, the land of rules an regulations - go figure B) !

 

Germany, the country of the supertrick? *ducks and runs away*

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...