Jump to content

Posted coordinates on unknown caches


Recommended Posts

My area has a new reviewer, who insists that the posted (that is, bogus) coordinates of unknown caches be on public property. I have never seen such a restriction published by Groundspeak. Is there such a restriction? I'm in the middle of constructing a geo-art and this restriction pretty much wrecks it.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, The Snowdog said:

My area has a new reviewer, who insists that the posted (that is, bogus) coordinates of unknown caches be on public property. I have never seen such a restriction published by Groundspeak. Is there such a restriction? I'm in the middle of constructing a geo-art and this restriction pretty much wrecks it.

Can't comment on the inception of such a guideline but can see the sense in it as people who don't know better might go looking for a cache at the bogus coordinates and end up trespassing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I couldn't find anything on this in that new help center format, but that's nothing new these days...   :huh:

Similar to Team Microdot  maybe, around here many go in groups (often after events) to do a geoart run.

Guess I can see how a group of fifteen or better people  accessing private property might/could present an issue.

 - But since we don't know the whole story (what was actually said, where you intend to place...) , this is  just a guess.  :)

Link to comment

I've worked on solving/finding a couple geoart series when I visit my dad in Florida. In most cases, the geoart was placed in an area that didn't have caches such as my dad's large private community. No one could get in if they tried but if cachers aren't smart enough to know about this type of cache, maybe that's why they don't allow the free app users to see them and only see traditional. 

You can fix stupid and I'm not sure why everyone tries. 

Link to comment

The majority of the time, the whole point of using puzzle caches for geoart is because traditional caches can't be placed in the spots needed to make the map art. Since GS seems to like stifling cache creativity, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they were behind the restriction.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Mudfrog said:

The majority of the time, the whole point of using puzzle caches for geoart is because traditional caches can't be placed in the spots needed to make the map art. Since GS seems to like stifling cache creativity, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they were behind the restriction.

One might argue that they are actually encouraging creativity by requiring people who want to put geoarts together to do so in a way that doesn't result in people trespassing blindly over private land...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

One might argue that they are actually encouraging creativity by requiring people who want to put geoarts together to do so in a way that doesn't result in people trespassing blindly over private land...

I understand the private property concern but i doubt geoart dummy coordinates have been much of a problem. If problems have occurred, it comes back to the person making the mistake because they didn't take the time to learn and/or didn't use common sense.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Mudfrog said:

I understand the private property concern but i doubt geoart dummy coordinates have been much of a problem. If problems have occurred, it comes back to the person making the mistake because they didn't take the time to learn and/or didn't use common sense.

So Groundspeak employs common sense by asking the CO to ensure their dummy coordinates are on public property, reducing or removing opportunities for anyone to make a mistake.

Seems simple to me.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Quote

When I view your posted bogus coordinates on Google Maps (satellite view), the location is in the backyard of a private residence. While I realize experienced cachers will know better than to go there to search for the cache AND you clearly state that the cache is not at the posted coordinates, it is still possible that "newbies" will not realize that your cache is a puzzle cache, will not read the description, and will try to go to that location to look for your cache. I have seen this happen in the past. So, to avoid this from happening, please change your posted coordinates so that they are away from the property of a private residence. A big change in the coordinates is not needed.

 

This is the actual reviewer request.  

I expect you could work with the reviewer here, and it'll all be fine. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
9 hours ago, J Grouchy said:

Only similar request I've gotten is to not put posted coordinates on anything like an interstate highway or active rail line...I guess major state or federal rights-of-way?

Around here, there's a tradition of putting the posted coordinates of puzzles in impossible locations, like the middle of the San Francisco Bay. Hopefully that doesn't cause any nautical accidents.

Edited by niraD
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Sometimes the posted coords are key to the puzzle, and there are precious few starting coords to choose from, for a given puzzle technique.


I have a puzzle like that, and can think of at least one other in my town. Such a rule would make the puzzle impossible.


The theoretical people this supposed rule is trying to protect shouldn't be allowed outside unescorted.  Your society is going insane.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

I understand the private property concern but i doubt geoart dummy coordinates have been much of a problem. If problems have occurred, it comes back to the person making the mistake because they didn't take the time to learn and/or didn't use common sense.

So should we forward all the land manager/ land owner complaints to you? 

"Why is there a cache icon right on top of my house? PLEASE REMOVE IT."

"Why is there a cache icon in our nature preserve?  WE DID NOT GIVE PERMISSION FOR THIS UNDER OUR POLICY."

"Three teenagers with smartphones were in my backyard looking for one of your geocaches.  MAKE THEM GO AWAY!"

Reviewers don't make up new rules for the fun of it.  New rules fill the void left by the absence of common sense or understanding of how geocaching works, or both.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment

I've not seen that restriction in our area (yet?). Also, if there's nothing at the posted coordinates, that concern over people going to them is typically assuaged by the required disclaimer that "the cache is not at the posted coordinates" added to the start of the description.  I suppose one could argue that "no one reads the description any more" and so maybe they're starting to pre-emptively combat that same concern... but I can certainly see how it can make geoart a little more difficult to create.

Alternatively, as mentioned you could place the art out on open water.

Or find a large park... or find a network of roads on which you could 'creatively' place the coordinates and still present the intended art shape.

 

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Viajero Perdido said:

The theoretical people this supposed rule is trying to protect shouldn't be allowed outside unescorted.  Your society is going insane.

Which people?

Players? Cache owners? Those who blithely fly the it's only a game flag at the concerns of others but immediately lose their minds at the slightest obstacle to their specific way of playing the game?

Those who dance are considered insane by those who cannot hear the music

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Viajero Perdido said:

The theoretical people this supposed rule is trying to protect shouldn't be allowed outside unescorted.  Your society is going insane.

It does happen. Someone new to the game went searching for one of my puzzles at the listed coordinates, in spite of the "cache is not at the listed coordinates" at the top of the description. Luckily in this case it was in the same public reserve as the cache although it'd be tough to reach through the thick scrub. He quickly learnt that lesson and is now an active and well respected member of the local caching community.

Link to comment

 Send all the complaints you want,, i'm certainly not worried about my mailbox being overwhelmed.

If this has come from GS, then it's yet another change in guidelines that inhibits cache placement. It sure seems strange that there's worry about this but then it's perfectly fine for a person to place all the parking lot caches (without permission) they want.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I think the text of the Mystery Cache Stages page in the Hide A Geocache “form” used to explicitly state that both the listed coordinates and cache coordinates had to have the approval of the land managers (or something along those lines.)  I hid my first mystery cache in April, so I was carefully reading through the instructions.  I had considered placing the listed coordinates on a sewage plant, and I didn’t expect to be able to get permission to do that so I selected another location.

 

The new text on the Mystery Cache Stages is no longer explicit and only says “All geocache and stage locations will be reviewed before they are published.”

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Joe_L said:

I think the text of the Mystery Cache Stages page in the Hide A Geocache “form” used to explicitly state that both the listed coordinates and cache coordinates had to have the approval of the land managers (or something along those lines.)

Um, so how would that work when the listed coordinates are over water, even the ocean in some cases here? Or a parking spot on a public road for that matter. I'd feel a bit of a goose fronting up to the local council seeking written permission to bring people to a public road.

Edited by barefootjeff
Link to comment

I've not seen this come up as an issue locally.    If it is a policy change that unknown posted coordinates must be on "public property" it will make it very difficult to publish such caches in the UK, there is very little "public property".     

It isn't clear if this is a global policy change, or a reviewer with a concern about a specific location.    

Edit:  I missed Palmetto's earlier reply.  Looks like this is a specific case, and a request to avoid the icon being in a backyard.   

Edited by redsox_mark
Missed a post
Link to comment
14 hours ago, palmetto said:
Quote

When I view your posted bogus coordinates on Google Maps (satellite view), the location is in the backyard of a private residence. While I realize experienced cachers will know better than to go there to search for the cache AND you clearly state that the cache is not at the posted coordinates, it is still possible that "newbies" will not realize that your cache is a puzzle cache, will not read the description, and will try to go to that location to look for your cache. I have seen this happen in the past. So, to avoid this from happening, please change your posted coordinates so that they are away from the property of a private residence. A big change in the coordinates is not needed.

This is the actual reviewer request.  

I expect you could work with the reviewer here, and it'll all be fine. 

"away from the property of a private residence" doesn't sound the same as "on public property".  If the OP's bogus coords were on someone's house, then the Reviewers request doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

I guess we're lucky around here because we have several bodies of water that provide a convenient canvas for GeoArt.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
19 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

Can't comment on the inception of such a guideline but can see the sense in it as people who don't know better might go looking for a cache at the bogus coordinates and end up trespassing.

I could understand that as well.  I've solved a puzzle cache that published coordinates in the middle of an apartment building used by women college students. I have also solved a very difficult puzzle that led to a set of coordinates on the 50 yard line of a professional football team.  The final coordinates required an offset but that wasn't obvious at that stage in the puzzle.  At the end of the day, no matter what the coordinates say, we should use common sense and shouldn't trespass even if there *might* be a cache there.  We can assume that for the final location, that permission has been obtained but not necessarily for the published coordinates of a mystery cache.  New cachers might not make the distinction and nothing good could come from geocachers searching on private property or even very near a private residence.  There is nothing specific in the guidelines about this but perhaps working with the reviewer and obtaining permission from the property just to use coordinates on the property might get the cache published.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

There is nothing specific in the guidelines about this but perhaps working with the reviewer and obtaining permission from the property just to use coordinates on the property might get the cache published.

I'm very happy that there are people looking out for me and helping to reduce the likelihood of me tripping over my own appendage :)

It still blows me away that they continue to do this for free, despite having to endure what must be an uphill struggle most days.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
15 hours ago, Keystone said:

New rules fill the void left by the absence of common sense or understanding of how geocaching works, or both.

I guess geocaching is a good measure of the reverse evolution of humans.  It took 15-17 years of this working ok to get to the point where humans have gotten less intelligent to the point this rule needs to be enacted. 

Soon there won't be any caches or logs and we just participate in an online logging experience so everyone can log and feel good about it. Maybe instead of a participation medal we can call it participation logging - create an account and log. Maybe we can all get a virtual hug after the log is submitted. At least there won't be any maintenance threads with no caches to maintain.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Team DEMP said:

I guess geocaching is a good measure of the reverse evolution of humans.  It took 15-17 years of this working ok to get to the point where humans have gotten less intelligent to the point this rule needs to be enacted. 

Soon there won't be any caches or logs and we just participate in an online logging experience so everyone can log and feel good about it. Maybe instead of a participation medal we can call it participation logging - create an account and log. Maybe we can all get a virtual hug after the log is submitted. At least there won't be any maintenance threads with no caches to maintain.

This is, unfortunately, where geocaching is heading. So much hand holding, the push for easy, and the stifling of creativity because of the many humans that choose not to put in any effort to educate themselves or take responsibility for their own actions.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

You do see, don't you, how raging against a measure intended purely to save people from accidentally trespassing on private property is more of an argument for hand holding than against it.

 

I've read your reply more than once and can't figure out what you're saying. I guess my response should be, no, i don't see this.

What i am saying is that i don't need GC.com to protect me from trespassing. For instance, if my gpsr arrow points into someone's backyard, then i have a pretty good idea that something is wrong and that i would be trespassing if i went into that backyard.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Mudfrog said:

What i am saying is that i don't need GC.com to protect me from trespassing.

You might not - others might. I'd err on the side of caution - especially in a country with a population with the right to bear arms.

Remember also that the act of trespass might not be as obvious to those involved as the example you offer.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I don't have an issue with the reviewer asking for the posted coordinates to be elsewhere.    

I'm sure some new cachers wrongly look at the posted coordinates.    

However, I'm not sure how that compares to what I think is a more common case.. wrong coordinates on a puzzle or multi.   Many times I've found myself with coordinates taking me someplace which I should not enter.    Often it is a puzzle which I thought I solved but didn't (and no geochecker).    Sometimes a multi where I do the math wrong.   Most recently it was a multi which the formula was wrong.   Of course I used my judgement and concluded that my coordinates must be wrong. 

I suspect these kind of cases happen more often than cachers looking at the posted coordinates.

Link to comment

Reviewers often point out specific things that are cause for concern with a particular cache listing. That doesn't mean there is a new secret rule or that Groundspeak is deliberately trying to ruin things out of malice. Moving posted coordinates out of someone's yard is a reasonable request.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
23 hours ago, Team DEMP said:

I guess geocaching is a good measure of the reverse evolution of humans.  It took 15-17 years of this working ok to get to the point where humans have gotten less intelligent to the point this rule needs to be enacted.

 

It all has to do with the "dumbing down" of the hobby. Just look at what happened to the challenges (easy enough so almost anyone can do them) and some souvenirs (find x caches, where "x" is always low enough for all to qualify).

What's not to understand about BOGUS coordinates and " there's no cache at the above coordinates..."?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, on4bam said:

 

It all has to do with the "dumbing down" of the hobby. Just look at what happened to the challenges (easy enough so almost anyone can do them) and some souvenirs (find x caches, where "x" is always low enough for all to qualify).

What's not to understand about BOGUS coordinates and " there's no cache at the above coordinates..."?

 

You're assuming everyone reads and understands the cache page.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Imagine if GPS providers stopped producing GPS solutions because a handful of morons turned onto a private/restricted road or a road their vehicle wasn't suited for? I'm glad they didn't react by removing roads unless everyone could drive on them.

Edited by Team DEMP
Link to comment
41 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

You're assuming everyone reads and understands the cache page.

 

How is it any different from someone not reading it's a 5 difficulty? Are we eliminating those caches because some moron caused himself or someone else harm by selecting an icon on a map, pressing start, and walking off a cliff?

 

Let's make everything a 1/1 light post ... until someone gets in an accident in a parking lot and we can then get rid of those.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Team DEMP said:

How is it any different from someone not reading it's a 5 difficulty? Are we eliminating those caches because some moron caused himself or someone else harm by selecting an icon on a map, pressing start, and walking off a cliff?

 

Let's make everything a 1/1 light post ... until someone gets in an accident in a parking lot and we can then get rid of those.

You make a fair point.

Let's remember though that in the context of this thread no caches are being eliminated, rather a request has been made to change the bogus coordinates of one to a location which is public property.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Team Microdot said:

You make a fair point.

Let's remember though that in the context of this thread no caches are being eliminated, rather a request has been made to change the bogus coordinates of one to a location which is public property.

 

If the way many of these caches are possible is due to finding space where there is a block not using caches, in the end you are eliminating these caches. An example is here at https://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx?lat=26.38033&lng=-80.15792#?ll=26.38034,-80.15792&z=14 or I hope it is as I've solved them all (corrected coords) so I'm not looking at what others would see. I'd go as far to say it would be impossible to provide this popular series with the new policy. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Team DEMP said:

If the way many of these caches are possible is due to finding space where there is a block not using caches, in the end you are eliminating these caches. An example is here at https://www.geocaching.com/map/default.aspx?lat=26.38033&lng=-80.15792#?ll=26.38034,-80.15792&z=14 or I hope it is as I've solved them all (corrected coords) so I'm not looking at what others would see. I'd go as far to say it would be impossible to provide this popular series with the new policy. 

Eliminating pretty pictures on the map that bear no relation to the actual cache locations - perhaps.

Eliminating the caches themselves - less so.

If people choose not to place caches because they can't incorporate them into a pretty picture on the map then that's their choice.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
3 hours ago, on4bam said:

It all has to do with the "dumbing down" of the hobby.

Oh man... we so live in a growingly "dumbed down" world. And the victims are the providers of products and services, not the "dumbed down".  If "Caution: HOT" has to be plastered on, you know, hot coffee, so as not to be sued if someone spills it on themselves, we might live in a dumbed down culture. If "Do not use while sleeping" has to be disclaimed with a hair dryer... we might live in a dumbed down culture. If "Do not eat" has to be disclaimed with the iPod Shuffle... we might live in a dumbed down culture.

Groundspeak has to take reasonable action for the sake of dumbness.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

You might not - others might. I'd err on the side of caution - especially in a country with a population with the right to bear arms.

Remember also that the act of trespass might not be as obvious to those involved as the example you offer.

And there you go,,,if that's not obvious to someone, then they suffer from a severe lack of common sense. In a situation like this, i'd immediately think something was wrong with the coordinates or i was doing something wrong. As i was trying to figure out what was wrong, i'd have a few options. Looking at the cache page again would be the logical thing to do, to see if the yard/backyard was even mentioned. If nothing was found there, then i could always go up to the front door (i've done this a few times), knock on it, and ask if i'm in the right place. I could always just leave if no one answered or if i didn't feel comfortable knocking in the first place.

I do know there are times when trespassing is not obvious and there have been lots of instances brought up here in the forums. But i don't remember any of them being because someone followed bogus mystery cache listed coordinates.

Link to comment

Thought i'd post about my personal experience. I'm not that much into geoart since many of them consist of the same ole cache type and hide over and over. Getting my geoart smilies on a map is not a big thing for me either. However, i do realize that geoart usually provides a different and better experience for most geocachers than the routine stuff hidden around here.

Our area had no art so i decided to hide one myself. It's definitely not the greatest, pretty lame actually (a smiley face of about 25 caches) but it has been fun for people dong it. Our city had a new park open up in 2012, so the first thing i did was to go and ask for permission from the city manager. Got the OK from him so i commenced to planning. Found out real quick, even with my tiny art plan, that traditional caches would not fit in the park boundaries. My only course of action was to make them puzzle caches, some of them with offset coordinates. The listed coordinates put the offsets into the surrounding woods, which i'm sure someone owns, This has never caused an issue, at least to my knowledge.

Sure, i didn't have to place the art in the first place. However, i can safely say from reading the logs, that most have enjoyed finding the caches.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, narcissa said:

Reviewers often point out specific things that are cause for concern with a particular cache listing. That doesn't mean there is a new secret rule or that Groundspeak is deliberately trying to ruin things out of malice. Moving posted coordinates out of someone's yard is a reasonable request.

It's even mentioned in the guidelines: "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed. The reviewer may bring these additional concerns to your attention and offer suggestions so that the geocache can be published."

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

Thought i'd post about my personal experience. I'm not that much into geoart since many of them consist of the same ole cache type and hide over and over. Getting my geoart smilies on a map is not a big thing for me either. However, i do realize that geoart usually provides a different and better experience for most geocachers than the routine stuff hidden around here.

Our area had no art so i decided to hide one myself. It's definitely not the greatest, pretty lame actually (a smiley face of about 25 caches) but it has been fun for people dong it. Our city had a new park open up in 2012, so the first thing i did was to go and ask for permission from the city manager. Got the OK from him so i commenced to planning. Found out real quick, even with my tiny art plan, that traditional caches would not fit in the park boundaries. My only course of action was to make them puzzle caches, some of them with offset coordinates. The listed coordinates put the offsets into the surrounding woods, which i'm sure someone owns, This has never caused an issue, at least to my knowledge.

Sure, i didn't have to place the art in the first place. However, i can safely say from reading the logs, that most have enjoyed finding the caches.

I guess I was lucky that I put my (since archived) GeoArt in the Hudson River!  No one to complain.  The finals were along the Hudson River Walkway in Hudson County, NJ.  Most cachers seemed to have enjoyed the puzzles, the walk, and the views of New York City.  

Link to comment
8 hours ago, niraD said:

It's even mentioned in the guidelines: "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed. The reviewer may bring these additional concerns to your attention and offer suggestions so that the geocache can be published."

 I guess accepting that it's a one-off request from a reviewer regarding a particular cache doesn't provide much of a springboard for conspiracy theories and irrelevant rambling about the good old days.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
6 hours ago, narcissa said:

 I guess accepting that it's a one-off request from a reviewer regarding a particular cache doesn't provide much of a springboard for conspiracy theories and irrelevant rambling about the good old days.

I take offense to irrelevant rambling. Don't participate in a discussion if you just want to criticize other cachers.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...