Does changing D/T now need reviewer approval

[+NYPaddleCacher]

One would hope that some sort of communication from GS is in the works about the major overhaul/massive changes occurring in the Help Center.

 

Haven't received this week's newsletter yet...maybe it's in there?

 

And hopefully the incorrect bit about D/T ratings has been fixed.

 

Trying to find stuff in the Help Center is a bit of a struggle now. Article titles have been changed so it's not as easy to find what you're looking for now.

 

B.

 

I have suggested more than a couple of times that it would be really nice to have a forum section similar to existing Release Notes section, but to announces changes to the Guidelines and could be used for changes to the Help section/knowledge book as well.

 

 

[+niraD]

Trying to find stuff in the Help Center is a bit of a struggle now. Article titles have been changed so it's not as easy to find what you're looking for now.

Yeah, and the search function has never worked well for me when I entered multiple words, so if I'm searching for a Help Center page, then I need a single fairly specific keyword that I know is in the article I want, but not in many other articles.

[+The Magna Defender]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

[+narcissa]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

You want to NA it because you can't solve it? That's harsh.

[+colleda]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

[+LFC4eva]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

If it was a D5 puzzle which you solved within 30 seconds - would you want to have it archived?

 

That's happened to me loads of times!

 

If caches could be archived for having fantasy ratings - there would be a lot of space opened up on my map.

[+narcissa]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

 

It seems unlikely that D1 for any T rating would be a valuable grid space, but who knows. These ratings have always been somewhat subjective. Around here, if the puzzle solution isn't really obvious, the reviewer will ask for more information about it before publication.

 

It is fairly obvious that putting out a tricky cache with a low D rating is far less egregious than trying to have the cache archived for it.

[Pup Patrol]

While skimming through the Help Centre looking for something else, I came across page 4.15: Change a listing after publication. This now divides changes into Minor and Major, with the following text about major changes:

 

Major changes can alter the geocaching experience and are discouraged. You must get approval from a volunteer reviewer before you make major changes. Without approval, your cache may be archived.

 

Major changes include

•Difficulty and terrain rating

•Time, date, or location of your geocaching event

 

 

I know changing D/T ratings can upset finders' statistics and mess with challenge qualifications, but on the other hand I thought the D/T was supposed to accurately represent the cache. For common-as-mud D/T combinations like 1.5/2, I've sometimes bumped the difficulty up half a notch if it's proving harder for people to find than I expected, and likewise terrain can change over time if a cleared track becomes overgrown or vice-versa, a tree or rock fall blocks easy access or a road or bridge is opened or closed. Isn't keeping the D/T rating up to date one of the owner's responsibilities?

 

Is this requirement to get reviewer approval to make such changes something new, and if so, shouldn't the UI be changed to only allow reviewers to do it, particularly when the penalty for doing it without approval is archival?

 

The bit about events is also disconcerting. I recently had to postpone an outdoor event due to inclement weather, so just posted an announcement and changed the date field on the cache page. Such postponements can happen at relatively short notice and there may not be time to get reviewer approval.

 

Well, the Help Center article quoted in the original post has changed substantially...again.

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache → Geocache ownership: A long-term relationship

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=201

 

4.15. Edit a listing after publication

 

In order for other cachers to have a consistent experience when they find your cache, try to avoid editing your listing after publication.

 

However, if you need to make small edits after publication select Edit from the Admin Tools menu on your cache page. Your listing must still follow the geocaching guidelines.

 

Edits can include

 

Cache name

Description

Hint

Coordinate changes less than 0.1 miles (161 meters)

 

If edits to your listing change the experience of your geocache fundamentally, it may be appropriate to archive the listing and submit a new cache.

 

Tip: If you are unsure if your listing will continue to follow the listing guidelines, contact a community volunteer reviewer for advice. If your changes do not follow the listing guidelines, the cache may be archived.

 

B.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Pup Patrol

[+NYPaddleCacher]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

You want to NA it because you can't solve it? That's harsh.

 

The way I read the post was that he was suggesting that the puzzle might be unsolvable, and that the CO was just giving the coordinates to friends. Still, not a reason for a NA, but still not a cool thing to do.

 

[+Team Microdot]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

You want to NA it because you can't solve it? That's harsh.

 

The way I read the post was that he was suggesting that the puzzle might be unsolvable, and that the CO was just giving the coordinates to friends. Still, not a reason for a NA, but still not a cool thing to do.

 

I've only ever known of one cacher who was sad enough to do that.

[+Touchstone]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

Just some food for thought....

 

...the puzzle should be solvable from the information provided on the cache page.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

You want to NA it because you can't solve it? That's harsh.

 

The way I read the post was that he was suggesting that the puzzle might be unsolvable, and that the CO was just giving the coordinates to friends. Still, not a reason for a NA, but still not a cool thing to do.

 

I've only ever known of one cacher who was sad enough to do that.

 

I am aware of a few events that have occurred where solutions to puzzles were just handed out to attendees of the event. That included a few puzzles that I tried, but gave up on. Although the puzzles are solvable (I just haven't guessed what the CO was thinking), giving out solutions as an incentive to get people to attend an event isn't a far cry from a CO handing out solutions to there best mates.

[+CanadianRockies]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

It seems unlikely that D1 for any T rating would be a valuable grid space, but who knows.

Some D1 puzzles could be valuable for people working on Unknown-Only Fizzy challenges. So far, I've only found a single Unknown for each of: D1/T3, D1/T3.5, and D1/T4. Of the 21,000+ Unknowns in Canada, only 4 are D1/T4.5 and 7 are D1/T4.

[+narcissa]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

Just some food for thought....

 

...the puzzle should be solvable from the information provided on the cache page.

 

That's true regardless of the difficulty level. If the reviewer shrugged off the complaint then it seems unlikely that the puzzle is unsolvable. It may be rated inappropriately but trying to get it archived for that is needless.

[+dprovan]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

You want to NA it because you can't solve it? That's harsh.

The way I read the post was that he was suggesting that the puzzle might be unsolvable, and that the CO was just giving the coordinates to friends. Still, not a reason for a NA, but still not a cool thing to do.

Well, if the puzzle really is D5 yet rated D1, I see that as being as invalid as bad coordinates, so the normal NM followed by NA sequence would be justified.

 

Furthermore, if the puzzle literally cannot be solved except by getting coordinates from the CO, then that's grounds for an immediate NA.

 

The problem, of course, is that we can't prove any of that. For all we know, the coordinates are just hidden in white text and the person that thinks the puzzle is impossible is just chasing some red herring. Because of the unknown, the solution is to ask the CO for help in order to get a clearer picture why there's appears to be such a discrepancy between the rating and the number of people that have solved it. To be honest, from the simple description of the cache presented by The Magna Defender, my guess is that the ratings were accidentally reversed: it was supposed to be rated D5/T1 but the CO got it backwards as often happens. And -- to get back on topic -- that would normally be easily fixed by the CO correcting the mistaken ratings, if that's allowed...

[+Touchstone]

How hard can a D1 puzzle be? Perhaps there's a grid filling agenda in play?

Just some food for thought....

 

...the puzzle should be solvable from the information provided on the cache page.

 

That's true regardless of the difficulty level. If the reviewer shrugged off the complaint then it seems unlikely that the puzzle is unsolvable. It may be rated inappropriately but trying to get it archived for that is needless.

Hmmm...hadn't thought of log entries as being part of the Puzzle, but I suppose it's possible. Other elements on the page to consider might be the Watchers (or at least the number of Watchers, since you can't see who is doing the watching). Something like log entries is a little hard to control, it would seem, but through the judicious use of sock puppet accounts and/or friends, it might be workable.

 

Or the entire topic of D/T could be a red herring. Who knows?

[+bflentje]

There's a puzzle near me thats listed as a D1 T5, only the COs best mates have solved it and its been out for six months. 2 people to have solved a D1 cache. I even emailed the reviewer asking if I had grounds for NA but its not something they can control.

 

You'd fit in perfectly here in the US..

[+hzoi]

Or perhaps TMD and the puzzle owner just don't get along, judging from posts in other threads.

[+WearyTraveler]

Wouldn't the easiest test be to change the D/T and see if it works? Then change it back (ASSuming it works...) after?

[Pup Patrol]

Wouldn't the easiest test be to change the D/T and see if it works? Then change it back (ASSuming it works...) after?

 

Did you miss a Reviewer's post back on page 1?

 

Any reviewers willing to clarify the D/T change with regard to reviewer approval? MUST we now run it past the reviewer for our area or are we still OK to change/modify it a bit (I'm talking .5 either way because I think anything over +/- 1 warrants a new cache listing, IMO) due to unperceived difficulty or ease or a change in terrain due to construction or vegetative growth in the area?

 

Geocaching HQ is in the middle of a comprehensive update to the Help Center, to make it more... well... helpful. It's a great project! Obviously this article was updated. Sometimes wording changes produce unintended results.

 

Several Reviewers, myself included, read this forum thread today and dashed off to ask HQ if we'd missed a Memo. That's why no Reviewer has posted to the thread until now, as we were equally surprised. After discussions with HQ today, I am pleased to confirm that no policy change was intended by this update. Reviewers and Lackeys are now working on a revised version of the article, which will be posted to the Help Center within a week or so.

 

Most of the Help Center updates are being made with direct reviewer input on the proposed text. Somehow, this advice about major changes to a cache listing slipped into the Help Center. Sorry for the confusion!

 

Finally, I'd like to thank barefootjeff for starting this thread. Your question will lead to clearer guidance in the near future.

 

Help Center → Hide a cache → Ownership after publication

6.2. Edit a listing after publication

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=201

 

B.