Is it possible to choose a different reviewer?

[+spyder72]

I'm having a difficult time to get my hides published, so I sent the reviewer an email and I was very frank on how I felt. The cache I am trying to place is an easy one that is handicap accessible. I am a volunteer of Wounded Warriors Foundation and thought it would be nice to get some of our soldiers out and about. And this offended him and was told 1 email was enough and tested his patience too far. I could have been nicer in the email, but I was only stating facts. So I was sent to another reviewer. But he does not reply to me. The caches I placed all meet Federal, State, State Forest, County, and township guidelines. I am relatively new to caching I don't have the clout others have. I really enjoy caching and gives me the exercise I need.

[+Sapience Trek]

One of your caches was published same day as being submitted, another within 2 days. The third seems to have a land manager policy your reviewer is asking for more info on. Where exactly is the difficulty?

Edited May 25, 2016 by Sapience Trek

[Keystone]

Your three cache listings tell a different story. I just read them, including the archived logs and the pending notes on your cache that hasn't been published yet.

 

My assessment, as a reviewer in a different state, is the same as your state's reviewer who you wrote to with complaints about the first reviewer. Your three submissions have received the same very basic form letters used with all other caches with similar issues. You've leapt to conclusions well beyond those notes. Don't personalize the listing guideline notes as negative statements about you personally.

 

The two Minnesota reviewers are your only two choices, so I'd suggest learning how to make the best of the relationship. The only other alternative is for the reviewers to refer all your cache submissions to the staff at Geocaching HQ, who are paid to do things that the volunteers are no longer willing to do. It's not like you can just switch to a reviewer from Virginia, who's unfamiliar with the local land manager regulations that your reviewer is asking you about on your unpublished cache.

 

Your emailed threat to "call people out" isn't helpful in that regard. And, you won't succeed in doing that with this forum thread.

[+Sapience Trek]

Your emailed threat to "call people out" isn't helpful in that regard. And, you won't succeed in doing that with this forum thread.

 

Well, this forum thread will succeed in bringing out the truth in the reviews.

[Keystone]

So I was sent to another reviewer. But he does not reply to me.

Tip: you need to follow the instructions provided by your reviewer when he disabled your May 22nd submission on May 23rd. Until you enable your listing, he will not see yesterday's log that you wrote in response.

 

Here again are the instructions:

 

You can post your answer to the cache page as a Reviewer Note by going to your cache page, clicking on "log your visit", and selecting "post reviewer note". Don't reply to this email as I won't receive your response.

 

After acknowledging that the cache meets the guidelines, please reactivate the listing so I will see it in the review queue.

[+spyder72]

Your three cache listings tell a different story. I just read them, including the archived logs and the pending notes on your cache that hasn't been published yet.

 

My assessment, as a reviewer in a different state, is the same as your state's reviewer who you wrote to with complaints about the first reviewer. Your three submissions have received the same very basic form letters used with all other caches with similar issues. You've leapt to conclusions well beyond those notes. Don't personalize the listing guideline notes as negative statements about you personally.

 

The two Minnesota reviewers are your only two choices, so I'd suggest learning how to make the best of the relationship. The only other alternative is for the reviewers to refer all your cache submissions to the staff at Geocaching HQ, who are paid to do things that the volunteers are no longer willing to do. It's not like you can just switch to a reviewer from Virginia, who's unfamiliar with the local land manager regulations that your reviewer is asking you about on your unpublished cache.

 

Your emailed threat to "call people out" isn't helpful in that regard. And, you won't succeed in doing that with this forum thread.

[+spyder72]

"calling out" Is meant to show the hypocrisy of their own caches. I assumed they should be held to the same standards as everyone else. I found one the reviewers caches yesterday. it didn't meet any of the requirements that I am asked to do.

[Keystone]

Like that reviewer said, give us a cache name and GC Code.

 

EDIT: Never mind, I located the cache in question.

 

Vindictive much?

Edited May 25, 2016 by Keystone

[+spyder72]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them. I get no response I'm guessing it is because he caught wind of the email I sent to the other reviewer. http://mngca.org/node/174 Here is the link to the regulations I complied with.

[+Sapience Trek]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them. I get no response I'm guessing it is because he caught wind of the email I sent to the other reviewer. http://mngca.org/node/174 Here is the link to the regulations I complied with.

 

... or it could be because you didn't respond to the note as requested, as Keystone indicated in bold.

[+spyder72]

I suppose I did more harm than good by posting here. I think my hiding days over, I'm sure I'm blacklisted with every reviewer in North America.

[+Ladybug Kids]

Reviewers that share a territory (such as the state of Minnesota) work closely together to assure they are consistent in applying local caching policy and so they don't "step on each others' toes." If one Reviewer is already working on a cache, the other Reviewer won't step in and take over unless asked by the first. This allows for efficient execution of the volunteer Reviewer duties and prevents cachers from attempting end runs around the volunteer Reviewers. There is enough volunteer work to do without two volunteers working on the same cache.

 

Reviewers do not blacklist cachers. Instead, they do their best to work with cachers to publish their caches because they like to publish caches. When a cacher and a Reviewer reach an impasse, an appeal can be filed with Groundspeak via the Help Center.

 

If you have read any local land manager policies and described your compliance in a Reviewer Note posted on the cache page, be certain to click the "Submit for Review" button in the upper left corner of the cache page to return the cache to the Review Queue. If you don't do that, the Reviewer won't know if you are ready for another review cycle.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Ladybug Kids

[Keystone]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them.

It's worth noting that the "Caribou Park" cache is not located in a Minnesota State Forest like your cache is. So, if you're bothered by the fact that the Caribou Park cache does not comply with every provision of the Minnesota State Forest geocaching policy, that's how come. If you're bothered by the fact that the cache was wet when you found it, you were the first find after a thing in Minnesota called "winter." Report the maintenance issue in a polite, matter-of-fact way, and the owner will take care of it.

[+spyder72]

Like that reviewer said, give us a cache name and GC Code.

 

EDIT: Never mind, I located the cache in question.

 

Vindictive much?

[+spyder72]

That's his cache. Mine is Indian Lake GC6JB1N

[Keystone]

Right. "Indian Lake" is the cache in the MN State Forest, which thus must comply with the MN State Forest guidelines. Once you've told your reviewer that you've met those guidelines (regulating labeling, size, contents, etc.), then it's likely that your reviewer will destroy your conspiracy theories by publishing your cache. So could you enable your listing please?

 

In contrast, "Caribou Park" (the cache hidden by your reviewer) is not hidden in a MN State Forest and thus is not subject to the size and labeling requirements that apply to "Indian Lake."

[+spyder72]

Right. "Indian Lake" is the cache in the MN State Forest, which thus must comply with the MN State Forest guidelines. Once you've told your reviewer that you've met those guidelines (regulating labeling, size, contents, etc.), then it's likely that your reviewer will destroy your conspiracy theories by publishing your cache. So could you enable your listing please?

 

In contrast, "Caribou Park" (the cache hidden by your reviewer) is not hidden in a MN State Forest and thus is not subject to the size and labeling requirements that apply to "Indian Lake."

I have, it only shows 2 the third must have been deleted, we emailed each about 4 hrs. ago and I gave him all the information he asked for. Edit: I'll try again now.

Edited May 25, 2016 by spyder72

[+spyder72]

Like that reviewer said, give us a cache name and GC Code.

 

EDIT: Never mind, I located the cache in question.

 

Vindictive much?

If dumping out water and drying out the log is vindictive, I'm guilty.

[Keystone]

The actions you took in the field to help out the wet cache container were good geocaching etiquette. Your log entry was not.

[+Lil Devil]

If dumping out water and drying out the log is vindictive, I'm guilty.

You were the first finder after a Minnesota winter. I'm sure there are lots of wet caches there. So what?

[+spyder72]

The actions you took in the field to help out the wet cache container were good geocaching etiquette. Your log entry was not.

You read his email... he asked for me to post the find on his cache page since he asked me not to email him anymore.

[+spyder72]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them.

It's worth noting that the "Caribou Park" cache is not located in a Minnesota State Forest like your cache is. So, if you're bothered by the fact that the Caribou Park cache does not comply with every provision of the Minnesota State Forest geocaching policy, that's how come. If you're bothered by the fact that the cache was wet when you found it, you were the first find after a thing in Minnesota called "winter." Report the maintenance issue in a polite, matter-of-fact way, and the owner will take care of it.

Your a moderator that has called me "vindictive" and condescends me about a "Minnesota winter"

[Tassie_Boy]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them.

It's worth noting that the "Caribou Park" cache is not located in a Minnesota State Forest like your cache is. So, if you're bothered by the fact that the Caribou Park cache does not comply with every provision of the Minnesota State Forest geocaching policy, that's how come. If you're bothered by the fact that the cache was wet when you found it, you were the first find after a thing in Minnesota called "winter." Report the maintenance issue in a polite, matter-of-fact way, and the owner will take care of it.

Your a moderator that has called me "vindictive" and condescends me about a "Minnesota winter"

 

Take the hint mate, they are trying to help you out here.

[+niraD]

"If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."

- Will Rogers

[Keystone]

Once you've told your reviewer that you've met those guidelines (regulating labeling, size, contents, etc.), then it's likely that your reviewer will destroy your conspiracy theories by publishing your cache. So could you enable your listing please?

Following up, the OP enabled the listing in question last evening after reading the advice given in this thread. And, as I predicted, once the Minnesota reviewer actually saw the enabled cache in their queue and read the OP's response to questions, he published the cache this morning without comment or incident.

[+NCreviewer]

<snip>The cache I am trying to place is an easy one that is handicap accessible. I am a volunteer of Wounded Warriors Foundation and thought it would be nice to get some of our soldiers out and about. And this offended him... <snip>

 

Don't post total BS in the forums looking for false sympathy. You will get called out on it. You never even mentioned your volunteering in the email sent to the reviewer. The response you got said your overall tone of the email was offensive.

[+bflentje]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them. I get no response I'm guessing it is because he caught wind of the email I sent to the other reviewer. http://mngca.org/node/174 Here is the link to the regulations I complied with.

 

I am pretty sure MN.Fruitcake isn't sitting in front of his PC waiting for your compliance. Being from MN, I know that this particular volunteer reviewer is quite busy with his young family and is quite successful at properly reviewing caches within the guidelines that Groundspeak expects of him.

[+bflentje]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them.

It's worth noting that the "Caribou Park" cache is not located in a Minnesota State Forest like your cache is. So, if you're bothered by the fact that the Caribou Park cache does not comply with every provision of the Minnesota State Forest geocaching policy, that's how come. If you're bothered by the fact that the cache was wet when you found it, you were the first find after a thing in Minnesota called "winter." Report the maintenance issue in a polite, matter-of-fact way, and the owner will take care of it.

Your a moderator that has called me "vindictive" and condescends me about a "Minnesota winter"

 

Here's where I am embarrassed to be a Minnesotan.

[Keystone]

Don't worry, bflentje. I live in Pittsburgh, where "Needs Archived" is grammatically correct. ("Yinz know your car needs worshed?")

 

So in the grand scheme of things, verbing "condescends" brought a smile to my face.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Keystone

[+cheech gang]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

[+The A-Team]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

 

Disclaimer: I don't recommend actually doing this.

[+Ladybug Kids]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

If things get bad enough, a cacher gets the privilege of working directly with the highly competent paid staff at Groundspeak.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

 

Or, on the other fin, you could work with the reviewer handling your cache. (Yes. To OP.)

I've worked with a number of different reviewers. And worked with them. They all operate differently, and you learn to deal with that. After explaining to the reviewer how to solve the puzzle came into effect, the reviewer asked something like: "You expect anyone to solve that?" "Well, it is 5* difficulty." "Okay. We'll see what the geocachers think."

The only time I complained was when my reviewer eloped. After a couple of weeks, I enquired of the Help Desk, and someone from Seattle reviewed and published the cache.

[+cheech gang]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

 

I forgot to add the "just kidding" emoji.

[+colleda]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

If things get bad enough, a cacher gets the privilege of working directly with the highly competent paid staff at Groundspeak.

Here I was thinking that was a perk for platinum members only.

[+Sapience Trek]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

If things get bad enough, a cacher gets the privilege of working directly with the highly competent paid staff at Groundspeak.

Here I was thinking that was a perk for platinum members only.

 

Platinum members don't need to have their caches reviewed.

[Keystone]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

 

I forgot to add the "just kidding" emoji.

Way to kill a dream, dude.

[+Team_Vod]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

If things get bad enough, a cacher gets the privilege of working directly with the highly competent paid staff at Groundspeak.

Here I was thinking that was a perk for platinum members only.

 

Platinum members don't need to have their caches reviewed.

 

How does one become a platinum member?

[+ODragon]

How does one become a platinum member?

The first rule of Platinum Membership is: you do not talk about Platinum Membership!

[+T.D.M.22]

Where do I apply for a new reviewer?

Apparently all you need to do is send one or more nasty emails to your current reviewer. When they get fed up dealing with you, you'll get pawned off on another unfortunate reviewer.

If things get bad enough, a cacher gets the privilege of working directly with the highly competent paid staff at Groundspeak.

Here I was thinking that was a perk for platinum members only.

 

Platinum members don't need to have their caches reviewed.

 

How does one become a platinum member?

 

One of 3 options. Be the family member of a platinum member. Save the life of one. Or ruin their sacred document by using it as a napkin, be forced to walk naked with a giant rock chained to yourself in punishment, have a birthmark on your butt seen by everyone who then thinks you are the chosen one (because it's the symbol of the platinum membership) and are now the leader of all platinum members.

 

 

Wait, that's the Stonecutters.

[+cheech gang]

I've been at this a long time but have only been able to achieve tungsten level.

[+Mn-treker]

The new reviewer sent me the MN State Forest regulations, I have complied with all of them.

It's worth noting that the "Caribou Park" cache is not located in a Minnesota State Forest like your cache is. So, if you're bothered by the fact that the Caribou Park cache does not comply with every provision of the Minnesota State Forest geocaching policy, that's how come. If you're bothered by the fact that the cache was wet when you found it, you were the first find after a thing in Minnesota called "winter." Report the maintenance issue in a polite, matter-of-fact way, and the owner will take care of it.

Your a moderator that has called me "vindictive" and condescends me about a "Minnesota winter"

The Fruitcake can be a bit testy at times. But before you gripe about rules

you need to check to see what they are. In Isanty county no rules the park department

actually welcomes geocaching. But the city of Isanti makes you register any hide be it

in a city park or a street sign. Champlin also has this rule. Go to Coon Rapids no rule.

Anoka county parks lots of rules .25 spacing among them. Just because you see something

not familiar to your ideas of rules does not mean a violation.

I even brought to his attention a new Blaine city parks rule that nobody knew about.

The rule was written so badly that it could have banned all geocache in the city.

A fellow geocacher TopGear was able to get with the city to rewrite the rule.

I have had my own share of troubles with Fruitcacke. I spelled out my obedience of the State forest rules

on my first forest hide and he got after me about obeying The State forest rules.

He did not even read the cache page or my reviewer notes. Now a few years latter he his not

so testy to me but still there is attitude at times. He tries to jump me about the law at times.

Problem I work for the state and know them better than he does. So at times I have had to jump back.

Before making a hide you need to check what rules you need to follow. Also the reviewers need to make sure that they

are up on them as well.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

Wait until you reach Unobtainium level. That's where the fun really begins.

[+Touchstone]

Wait until you reach Unobtainium level. That's where the fun really begins.

I have to admit, the perks are pretty good, and it sure beats flying coach:

 

[+noncentric]

Wait until you reach Unobtainium level. That's where the fun really begins.

I find that level pretty tough to achieve.

 

I'm quite content with my Adamantium membership. It's quite Marvelous.

[+TriciaG]

How does one become a platinum member?

And now to give a straightforward answer:

 

Platinum membership doesn't exist. It's a long-running joke.

[+bflentje]

How does one become a platinum member?

 

nevermind. Covered right above me.

Edited May 26, 2016 by bflentje

[+Sapience Trek]

How does one become a platinum member?

And now to give a straightforward answer:

 

Platinum membership doesn't exist. It's a long-running joke.

 

That's what all the non platinum members are led to believe.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

How does one become a platinum member?

And now to give a straightforward answer:

 

Platinum membership doesn't exist. It's a long-running joke.

<smirk>

[+Manville Possum]

How does one become a platinum member?

 

2B1ASK1