Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
*Triforce*

New Hide, No Reaponse from Reviewer

Recommended Posts

Hi,

Back on April 20 my caching partner and I posted 36 Hides. Initially the reviewer posted a note for a few of them. I responded immediately and since then there has been no response. How do I get to help with this issue?

 

*triforce*

Share this post


Link to post

Note that I did IM "CathyH" back on May 11, however I have yet to receive a response.

You should really use the contact link (see post above) when writing to Geocaching HQ about cache review issues. Be sure to specify that your inquiry is meant for the "Appeals" team (choice #9).

 

If you select a member of the Appeals team personally, like CathyH, you do run the risk that the selected Lackey is off traveling somewhere exotic, finding caches and attending events instead of doing office work.

Edited by Keystone

Share this post


Link to post

Note that I did IM "CathyH" back on May 11, however I have yet to receive a response.

 

Did you try contacting your Reviewer before heading to a Lackey at HQ?

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol

Share this post


Link to post

So I used the link as suggested. I chose the Appeals option and posted my note with details. I then got the spam response that said to contact your reviewer. I responded but have yet to receive a response. What is going on!!?

Share this post


Link to post

Aren't reviewers volunteers? CathyH probably has lots of caches to review and publish on top of the 36 you want published.

Share this post


Link to post

No, Cathy was the HQ person I sent a message to after no response from reviewer after 3 weeks.

Share this post


Link to post

So I used the link as suggested. I chose the Appeals option and posted my note with details. I then got the spam response that said to contact your reviewer. I responded but have yet to receive a response. What is going on!!?

What's going on is that you're not the only geocacher on the planet who has reached out to Groundspeak for help on something. There is not, to my knowledge, a fast lane or stovepipe process for geocache appeals versus any other issue one can contact Groundspeak about. They should get back to you within the timeframe given in the automatic response.

 

Until then, take a deep breath and look to other areas of your life to sustain you (family, religion, excessive drinking, whatever works for you) until this deep-seated crisis has been resolved.

Share this post


Link to post

It wasn't the amount of time, just that the site tells you to choose the Appeals option if you have already attempted to contact your reviewer. You do that and it just sends you the same message. That's what is frustrating.

If you took the time to read my message and got off of your high horse, you may have understood my comment.

Peace and luv, peace and luv.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

I was going to contact the CO directly regarding this, but felt it might be helpful to others well.

There was a series of 36 caches submitted which requested the entire series be published at the same time. All caches were reviewed within approximately one week. Several had issues and were sent reviewer notes. 2 had other issues and the CO archived them including a note he will look for a better location. No new caches in the series were listed in the review queue so the initial request of holding all until the series was complete, it did not seem that locations had been found for the others and the rest held.

All of the others that were set to publish were added to a list for publishing. When added to the list, they are removed from the watchlist. If they are not on the watchlist, the reviewer is not notified of any postings.

As a suggestion to all, if you post a reviewer note and do not get a response in a week, try e-mail and or use the messaging system. Please include the name and GC# in these correspondences. This can also be very helpful if there are computer glitches, etc (experienced this some time back when reviewer notes were sent but the system did not forward them; fortunately, this was corrected quickly.

My apologies for the inconvenience.

 

-CM

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

I was going to contact the CO directly regarding this, but felt it might be helpful to others well.

There was a series of 36 caches submitted which requested the entire series be published at the same time. All caches were reviewed within approximately one week. Several had issues and were sent reviewer notes. 2 had other issues and the CO archived them including a note he will look for a better location. No new caches in the series were listed in the review queue so the initial request of holding all until the series was complete, it did not seem that locations had been found for the others and the rest held.

All of the others that were set to publish were added to a list for publishing. When added to the list, they are removed from the watchlist. If they are not on the watchlist, the reviewer is not notified of any postings.

As a suggestion to all, if you post a reviewer note and do not get a response in a week, try e-mail and or use the messaging system. Please include the name and GC# in these correspondences. This can also be very helpful if there are computer glitches, etc (experienced this some time back when reviewer notes were sent but the system did not forward them; fortunately, this was corrected quickly.

My apologies for the inconvenience.

 

-CM

 

Thanks so much for the full story and the helpful information.

Share this post


Link to post

Triforce informed me of this message thread.. letting me know that in certain cases a cache could be removed from the queue if there are questions or concerns about it. And when this occurs it is futile to post reviewers notes on the page because the reviewer will not see them.

 

Just in case that is the reason why my new cache is still awaiting review - and since there's been no word from the reviewer since I submitted it last week on Tuesday - I'm writing here to see if someone could take a peek and see if something similar is fouling my submission.

 

The GC code for my cache is GC75R4V.

 

Thanks in advance! icon_smile_approve.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Triforce informed me of this message thread.. letting me know that in certain cases a cache could be removed from the queue if there are questions or concerns about it. And when this occurs it is futile to post reviewers notes on the page because the reviewer will not see them.

 

Just in case that is the reason why my new cache is still awaiting review - and since there's been no word from the reviewer since I submitted it last week on Tuesday - I'm writing here to see if someone could take a peek and see if something similar is fouling my submission.

 

The GC code for my cache is GC75R4V.

 

Thanks in advance! icon_smile_approve.gif

 

 

As a suggestion to all, if you post a reviewer note and do not get a response in a week, try e-mail and or use the messaging system. Please include the name and GC# in these correspondences.

 

-CM

Edited by Pup Patrol

Share this post


Link to post

The GC code for my cache is GC75R4V.

Your cache, "Wrong side of the tracks," is properly awaiting review. It is common for reviewers to publish caches without issues quickly, while saving the ones needing further study for later on.

 

I expect that the delay is due to the need to study the nature of the railroad line where your cache is hidden. Typically when a railroad line is formally "abandoned" (a legal process), the track markings disappear from Google maps. There is a difference between "nobody seems to be using these train tracks anymore" and "the railroad has given up ownership of their right-of-way." Until ownership is relinquished, the trespassing concern remains.

 

If you have additional information about the formal abandonment process, I'd encourage you to post that to your cache listing as a new reviewer note.

Share this post


Link to post

The GC code for my cache is GC75R4V.

Your cache, "Wrong side of the tracks," is properly awaiting review.

 

Thank you for your note Keystone. I finally heard back from my local volunteer reviewer today - the reason they were unable to tend to the backlog of caches needing review was because of a family emergency (everyone took ill). I was assured that the review of my cache will continue later today.

 

Happy belated "Thank a Community Volunteer Day".. THANK YOU KEYSTONE FOR ALL YOU AND WHAT ALL THE GC.com VOLUNTEERS DO!

 

icon_smile_approve.gif

 

PS: Where do I go to provide my feedback about the new Drafts process (previously known as Field Notes). I've been a faithful user of Field Notes, but I found the new Drafts method severely lacking in functionality compared to the normal way of composing a log entry. There's no preview of what you are writing. There's no reference for how to format text or what key combinations are for which emojis, etc.

Share this post


Link to post

PS: Where do I go to provide my feedback about the new Drafts process (previously known as Field Notes). I've been a faithful user of Field Notes, but I found the new Drafts method severely lacking in functionality compared to the normal way of composing a log entry. There's no preview of what you are writing. There's no reference for how to format text or what key combinations are for which emojis, etc.

The Release Notes thread about the changes has been locked, but you might try HERE.

Share this post


Link to post

The GC code for my cache is GC75R4V.

Your cache, "Wrong side of the tracks," is properly awaiting review. It is common for reviewers to publish caches without issues quickly, while saving the ones needing further study for later on.

 

I expect that the delay is due to the need to study the nature of the railroad line where your cache is hidden. Typically when a railroad line is formally "abandoned" (a legal process), the track markings disappear from Google maps. There is a difference between "nobody seems to be using these train tracks anymore" and "the railroad has given up ownership of their right-of-way." Until ownership is relinquished, the trespassing concern remains.

 

If you have additional information about the formal abandonment process, I'd encourage you to post that to your cache listing as a new reviewer note.

 

Keystone is GOAT.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...