Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Team_Vod

Requesting an earth cache be re-enabled

27 posts in this topic

.

Edited by SUX_VR_40_Rider
0

Share this post


Link to post

.

Edited by SUX_VR_40_Rider
0

Share this post


Link to post

I was going to ask this same thing about this earth cache: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC1RY3W_sioux-city-sioux-quartzite

 

I filed an NM report on it because of wrong info about the building. The building in question once served as the Sioux City Public Museum but that changed in 2009. This building is being changed back into a period home from when one of Sioux City's historical figures owned the home and built it in the 1890's. The listing has been disabled because there is a question as to whether or not it is still public property. It looks like the listing was disabled by the CO.

 

I am going to find out if it is public property or not. I know who to ask with the city. If it is I am going to file another NM to notify that it still is so it can perhaps be re-enabled. But even if it is not people can still legally take photographs from the public right of way of any property in Sioux City. As that was a requirement for this earth cache perhaps the requirement/description can be changed to have the photographs/seflies taken in front of the this historic Sioux City home from the public right of way.

 

This isn't your cache.

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

Edited by SUX_VR_40_Rider
0

Share this post


Link to post

That earthcache needs to be archived because it's not compliant with the guidelines regarding photo requirements.

 

Thanks for bringing it to the forums. :ph34r:

 

(Seriously... I'm not an earthcache reviewer, so I don't care and won't be doing anything other than pointing out the problem.)

0

Share this post


Link to post

I was going to ask this same thing about this earth cache: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC1RY3W_sioux-city-sioux-quartzite

 

I filed an NM report on it because of wrong info about the building. The building in question once served as the Sioux City Public Museum but that changed in 2009. This building is being changed back into a period home from when one of Sioux City's historical figures owned the home and built it in the 1890's. The listing has been disabled because there is a question as to whether or not it is still public property. It looks like the listing was disabled by the CO.

 

I am going to find out if it is public property or not. I know who to ask with the city. If it is I am going to file another NM to notify that it still is so it can perhaps be re-enabled. But even if it is not people can still legally take photographs from the public right of way of any property in Sioux City. As that was a requirement for this earth cache perhaps the requirement/description can be changed to have the photographs/seflies taken in front of the this historic Sioux City home from the public right of way.

 

This isn't your cache.

 

I know that, thank you.

 

I am trying to get it re-enabled so it can continue to be enjoyed by geocachers as the building is still public building/property of the city.

 

It is also an earth cache I would like to get credit for participating in.

 

It is up to the cache owner to reconfirm permission and have it re-enabled.

0

Share this post


Link to post

That earthcache needs to be archived because it's not compliant with the guidelines regarding photo requirements.

 

Thanks for bringing it to the forums. :ph34r:

 

(Seriously... I'm not an earthcache reviewer, so I don't care and won't be doing anything other than pointing out the problem.)

 

And that's the real problem with that Earthcache.

 

Posting a NM on it at least got the cache owner's attention. Let's see if he is able to enable, despite it's being not compliant with the Earthcache Guidelines.

 

Unless the Earthcache Reviewer also notices it now.

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache

3. Creating EarthCaches

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=51

 

B.

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

Edited by SUX_VR_40_Rider
0

Share this post


Link to post

I am moving this thread from the Geocaching Topics forum to the EarthCache forum. As I noted in another thread, the listing guideline violation is the bigger issue here. (Photo logging requirements were disallowed years ago, and older listings are NOT grandfathered.)

0

Share this post


Link to post

I was going to ask this same thing about this earth cache: https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC1RY3W_sioux-city-sioux-quartzite

 

I filed an NM report on it because of wrong info about the building. The building in question once served as the Sioux City Public Museum but that changed in 2009. This building is being changed back into a period home from when one of Sioux City's historical figures owned the home and built it in the 1890's. The listing has been disabled because there is a question as to whether or not it is still public property. It looks like the listing was disabled by the CO.

 

I am going to find out if it is public property or not. I know who to ask with the city. If it is I am going to file another NM to notify that it still is so it can perhaps be re-enabled. But even if it is not people can still legally take photographs from the public right of way of any property in Sioux City. As that was a requirement for this earth cache perhaps the requirement/description can be changed to have the photographs/seflies taken in front of the this historic Sioux City home from the public right of way.

 

This isn't your cache.

 

I know that, thank you.

 

I am trying to get it re-enabled so it can continue to be enjoyed by geocachers as the building is still public building/property of the city.

 

It is also an earth cache I would like to get credit for participating in.

 

1) It's not your cache.

2) The owner is still active. (See the April 5, 2016 log entry)

3) Your comments should have been sent as email to the cache owner.

4) It is not necessary to post your every caching activity to the forums.

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

Edited by SUX_VR_40_Rider
0

Share this post


Link to post

Is archiving really necessary? Couldn't the CO fix the requirements to be compliant before enabling? I'm sure I've seen that done on other ECs (for that matter some of my first ECs from 2 years ago still show photo requirements).

0

Share this post


Link to post

Since this EarthCache was being discussed in two separate threads in two separate forum sections, I moved the off topic posts from a thread in the Geocaching Topics forum and placed them into this thread.

0

Share this post


Link to post

It is also an earth cache I would like to get credit for participating in.

 

Then send the ECO the required email, save you a copy, and log your find. The photo needs to be optional, but I enjoy posting my geocaching photos.

 

As for requesting the EC re-enabled, you can't do that. Maybe you could ask the CO to adopt it to you?

0

Share this post


Link to post

It sounds more like a Virtual disguised as an Earthcache.

 

In the description along with the photo log it also requires this:

 

2)Touch the surface of the building and describe it in an email to the cache owner.

 

As such it still meets the requirements of an earth cache, correct?

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache

3. Creating EarthCaches

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=51

 

Groundspeak Guidelines

https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

EarthCache.org Guidelines

http://community.geosociety.org/earthcache/guidelines/guidelines2

 

B.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Under today's more comprehensive EarthCache Guidelines, the cache would not have been published due to the relatively light Earth Science/geology lesson. It would be relatively easy to make the lesson and logging tasks more robust, but that will not be required of the Cache Owner at this time.

 

However, the photo requirement does need to be optional. Caches before that requirement was written into the EarthCache Guidelines are NOT grandfathered. EarthCache Reviewers have been instructed not to go on "search and destroy" missions to find all non-compliant EarthCaches, but we have been told to request the EarthCache Owner to update their logging tasks when we become aware of a photo requirement.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Is archiving really necessary? Couldn't the CO fix the requirements to be compliant before enabling? I'm sure I've seen that done on other ECs (for that matter some of my first ECs from 2 years ago still show photo requirements).

 

Now that the photo issue has been brought to a reviewer's notice, I expect the owner will be given some time to fix the listing.

 

Whether or not the owner cares to fix that issue and confirm permission with the landowner before reenabling is up to them.

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

 

Not sure why people remove their content when it's been quoted in its entirety later in the thread.

 

B.

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

 

Not sure why people remove their content when it's been quoted in its entirety later in the thread.

 

B.

 

Attempting to hide content after the reviewer posted a note on the cache? No need to be embarrassed for playing this game accordingly. :anicute:

0

Share this post


Link to post

.

 

Not sure why people remove their content when it's been quoted in its entirety later in the thread.

 

B.

 

Attempting to hide content after the reviewer posted a note on the cache? No need to be embarrassed for playing this game accordingly. :anicute:

 

This isn't the only thread where the OP wiped the opening content. (Another thread was requested to be locked.)

 

B.

0

Share this post


Link to post

OP, I realize that in some....way you feel you're being helpful, but this example is what sometimes happens when you get involved in something that's (really) none of your business.

You don't really want to be "that guy..." within the community, do you?

 

Curious why this thread's still going, since the OP deleted anything to respond to.

0

Share this post


Link to post

OP, I realize that in some....way you feel you're being helpful, but this example is what sometimes happens when you get involved in something that's (really) none of your business.

You don't really want to be "that guy..." within the community, do you?

 

Curious why this thread's still going, since the OP deleted anything to respond to.

 

I don't see any harm in the OP posting a note on the cache that did not meet guidelines, as now a reviewer has stepped in after the ECO temp disabled their listing. Maybe they are just checking facts before re-enabling, maybe they will just do nothing and let it be archived, but that is not the OP's problem. I do feel the OP was helpful by posting their note on the cache page. They are new to the game, and blogging seems more in their interest than actually geocaching.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The integrity of the game is dependent of cachers helping maintain that integrity. It is absolutely proper for cachers to raise Guidelines issues that appear after a cache is published because the Volunteer Review Team can't possible monitor every single cache.

 

From a Reviewer's perspective, it reflects more negatively on the cachers who logged a cache that has Guidelines issues that they did not call attention to than on the Cacher who brought the issue forward. Guideline violations are everybody's business.

 

Cachers may raise Guideline issues by logging a Needs Archived log on the cache page or contacting the local Reviewer via their profile. They can also contact Groundspeak through the Help Center.

 

It is grossly unfair to label a cacher who points out a Guideline issue as "that guy." That guy is typically being a pretty good steward of the game.

Edited by GeoawareUSA4
0

Share this post


Link to post

The integrity of the game is dependent of cachers helping maintain that integrity. It is absolutely proper for cachers to raise Guidelines issues that appear after a cache is published because the Volunteer Review Team can't possible monitor every single cache.

 

From a Reviewer's perspective, it reflects more negatively on the cachers who logged a cache that has Guidelines issues that they did not call attention to than on the Cacher who brought the issue forward. Guideline violations are everybody's business.

 

Cachers may raise Guideline issues by logging a Needs Archived log on the cache page or contacting the local Reviewer via their profile. They can also contact Groundspeak through the Help Center.

 

It is grossly unfair to label a cacher who points out a Guideline issue as "that guy." That guy is typically being a pretty good steward of the game.

:)

If it was only this cache, I might agree, but along with the other threads "calling out" caches/cachers here in the forums (as well as locally, some unfairly), seems that the main interest in this hobby is searching for, or creating issues.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The integrity of the game is dependent of cachers helping maintain that integrity. It is absolutely proper for cachers to raise Guidelines issues that appear after a cache is published because the Volunteer Review Team can't possible monitor every single cache.

 

From a Reviewer's perspective, it reflects more negatively on the cachers who logged a cache that has Guidelines issues that they did not call attention to than on the Cacher who brought the issue forward. Guideline violations are everybody's business.

 

Cachers may raise Guideline issues by logging a Needs Archived log on the cache page or contacting the local Reviewer via their profile. They can also contact Groundspeak through the Help Center.

 

It is grossly unfair to label a cacher who points out a Guideline issue as "that guy." That guy is typically being a pretty good steward of the game.

:)

If it was only this cache, I might agree, but along with the other threads "calling out" caches/cachers here in the forums (as well as locally, some unfairly), seems that the main interest in this hobby is searching for, or creating issues.

 

You have a point. :laughing:

0

Share this post


Link to post

If it was only this cache, I might agree, but along with the other threads "calling out" caches/cachers here in the forums (as well as locally, some unfairly), seems that the main interest in this hobby is searching for, or creating issues.

That's why I didn't list calling out caches and cachers in these Forums as a means of raising Guidelines issues. The means I listed are ways to discretely and properly raise an issue with the correct people who can actually address the situation. Vetting things in these Forums ends up involving a whole lot more people than necessary.
0

Share this post


Link to post

The integrity of the game is dependent of cachers helping maintain that integrity. It is absolutely proper for cachers to raise Guidelines issues that appear after a cache is published because the Volunteer Review Team can't possible monitor every single cache.

 

From a Reviewer's perspective, it reflects more negatively on the cachers who logged a cache that has Guidelines issues that they did not call attention to than on the Cacher who brought the issue forward. Guideline violations are everybody's business.

 

Cachers may raise Guideline issues by logging a Needs Archived log on the cache page or contacting the local Reviewer via their profile. They can also contact Groundspeak through the Help Center.

 

It is grossly unfair to label a cacher who points out a Guideline issue as "that guy." That guy is typically being a pretty good steward of the game.

:)

If it was only this cache, I might agree, but along with the other threads "calling out" caches/cachers here in the forums (as well as locally, some unfairly), seems that the main interest in this hobby is searching for, or creating issues.

 

Also, the issue this user was worried about was that the Earthcache wasn't yet enabled for him to find. He wasn't interested in (or even aware of) the obvious guideline issue, nor was he interested in giving the cache owner time to confirm for him/herself whether or not the permission issue was solved.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0