cache titles not accepted

[+armadillogal]

Why would a reviewer not accept new caches for a series that was published no problem last year for an annual event?  This will ruin the series...and all the caches are already in place.

[+barefootjeff]

You might do better asking your reviewer that question. Without further information I can only guess, but maybe it's seen as promoting a business or brand name or has overtones of an agenda.

[+armadillogal]

they were Under the Gun:  Springfield, etc. Last year he did the same thing...different names and they were fine.  There is no description on the c ache page...only BYOP.

[+niraD]

Well, clearly it's all a ruse to trick you into exposing the fact that your second cousin twice removed was turned into a chihuahua by aliens. That's the only possible reason, given the thoroughly complete information you've provided.

[+arisoft]

2 hours ago, armadillogal said:

Why would a reviewer not accept new caches for a series that was published no problem last year for an annual event?

 

Popular culture references are allowed in cache descriptions but, generally, busines references are not.

Last year firearms were part of popular culture in US. I think that some recent incidents made the reviewer change his/her mind about this matter and they are not so popular any more. The empty description makes this even worse because it seems more like a commercial than informative.

Edited November 4, 2019 by arisoft

[+DerDiedler]

2 hours ago, armadillogal said:

.....no problem last year for an annual event

No precedents

There are no precedents for placing geocaches. Past publication of a similar geocache is not justification for publication of a new geocache. If a geocache was published that you feel violated the guidelines, you may report it. However, the existing geocache may have been placed prior to a guideline change, and may be grandfathered.

 

[+GerandKat]

First of all, there are no precedents for placing geocaches.

And where we are reviewing, we would only allow buisnesses and commercial products to mentionend in the listing if the product or buisness name has a direct influence on the spoken language, e.g. most Germans say "Tesa" (<- a popular brands name) if they mean a gerneric adhesive tape.
Or if the brand or buisness name has a world/nation/regionwide popular meaning, e.g. sportsclubs, musicbands or movies (if they are not beeing played in the cinemas any more).

 

But that won't match your buisness names: Standard, Thompson Center, Heizer, Heritage and Sig Sauer.

 

 

[+arisoft]

Local reviewers seems to accept business names if the business is already ended. In this case the name has only historical aspect. Some historical firearm brands may fall in this category.

[+Isonzo Karst]

The, "Under the Gun: product name or brand name", titles from 2017 and 2018 violate the commercial guideline.  The reviewer ( now retired) may have simply  missed it. 

The current reviewer did not.

 

 

[Keystone]

5 hours ago, armadillogal said:

There is no description on the c ache page...only BYOP.

Then it should be a fairly quick process to open each cache page, change the title to something that doesn't mention the name of a business or any variant, and then resubmit for review.  I'm not understanding why "[t]his will ruin the series."  The experience of finding the cache out in the environment is unchanged.

[+cerberus1]

8 hours ago, armadillogal said:

they were Under the Gun:  Springfield, etc.

 

Why not simply change it to firearm types,  or calibers.  

 

[+Mudfrog]

Under the Gun and Springfield can be anything from a popular phrase to a name of a city. I can't understand how they would go against any guideline if they stayed generic in nature. I'll bet there's more to this than what we know. 

 

 

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, Mudfrog said:

Under the Gun and Springfield can be anything from a popular phrase to a name of a city. I can't understand how they would go against any guideline if they stayed generic in nature. I'll bet there's more to this than what we know. 

 

I thought "maybe" in the beginning, but then a simple search showed Walther, Taurus, Rossi, Marlin, Mossberg, Kimber, High point, High Standard, Charter Arms,  and quite a few others...

[+Michaelcycle]

You (or your partner) could use more generic terms like "six shooter" "revolver" "12 gauge"

Even the proper name Deringer has passed into common usage as "derringer"

With a little effort you could come up with a dozen terms to extend the series.

 

eta: while I was typing this a couple of other posters had similar ideas and faster fingers...

Edited November 4, 2019 by Michaelcycle

[+dprovan]

10 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I thought "maybe" in the beginning, but then a simple search showed Walther, Taurus, Rossi, Marlin, Mossberg, Kimber, High point, High Standard, Charter Arms,  and quite a few others...

But are they really commercial? I'm guessing that you consider that list a smoking gun because it's a list of gun manufacturers, but I would have no idea, so the titles have no commercial meaning to me. So what's the rule here: "Springfield" cannot be in any cache title? Or only cache titles that also have the word "gun" in them? Or what?

 

I hate to second guess reviewers, but I suspect a political motive here. I have a hard time believing that a cache with the title "Read a Book: Penguin" would be rejected. But...eh, whatever.

[+barefootjeff]

7 minutes ago, dprovan said:

I hate to second guess reviewers, but I suspect a political motive here. I have a hard time believing that a cache with the title "Read a Book: Penguin" would be rejected. But...eh, whatever.

 

From the stories I've heard locally at events of cache pages that have been returned for editing because of incidental mentions of brand names, it wouldn't surprise me at all if "Read a Book: Penguin" was rejected.

[+arisoft]

18 minutes ago, dprovan said:

But are they really commercial?

 

If the reviewer says

 

18 minutes ago, dprovan said:

I have a hard time believing that a cache with the title "Read a Book: Penguin" would be rejected

 

Rejected - yes - but the reason is different what you think. Books are part of popular culture and allowed. The problem is agenda. You are not allowed to ask players to do something, for example, to read a book.

Edited November 4, 2019 by arisoft

[+Michaelcycle]

Just for fun I ran a search for "Macy's" "Walmart" and "CVS" in cache titles. Macy's had a few returns but all were in reference to children or dogs. CVS has several returns that were at or very near pharmacies of that company. Walmart had the most returns, some were at Walmarts and some were at abandoned Walmarts (they still seem like commercial violations to me)

 

I don't think Walmart and CVS should get a pass on "cultural" grounds although the multi about the grave of the founder of Walmart might be OK (to me)

[+Michaelcycle]

1 minute ago, arisoft said:

 

If the reviewer says

 

 

Rejected - yes - but the reason is different what you think. Books are part of popular culture and allowed. The problem is agenda. You are not allowed to ask players to do something, for example, to read a book.

Penguin is a book publisher

[+arisoft]

6 minutes ago, Michaelcycle said:

I don't think Walmart and CVS should get a pass on "cultural" grounds although the multi about the grave of the founder of Walmart might be OK (to me)

 

According to Wikipedia, corporate branding is part of popular culture. There is some leeway in the guidelines. Some could say that Coca-Cola is part of popular culture.

Edited November 4, 2019 by arisoft

[+arisoft]

3 minutes ago, Michaelcycle said:

Penguin is a book publisher

 

In this case it has two possible problems.

[+Mudfrog]

8 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I thought "maybe" in the beginning, but then a simple search showed Walther, Taurus, Rossi, Marlin, Mossberg, Kimber, High point, High Standard, Charter Arms,  and quite a few others...

 

Yes, I just looked and it's obvious what the titles are referring to. On this same note though, there are tons of caches with brand names in their titles. As mentioned above, the disallowance here may be politically motivated.

[Keystone]

20 minutes ago, Mudfrog said:

 

 As mentioned above, the disallowance here may be politically motivated.

If you knew the truth about the gun ownership/gun rights views of the Reviewer whose actions are being questioned in this thread, you'd be laughing as loudly as I am right now.  But by all means, keep on enjoying your baseless speculation.

 

One of the hallmarks of a good, impartial reviewer is their ability to enforce the listing guidelines even when their personal opinions are opposite.  I get the same jollies when someone accuses me of being a godless atheist heathen when I apply the "no agendas" guideline to a cache with religious content.

[+Isonzo Karst]

15 hours ago, Michaelcycle said:

Just for fun I ran a search for "Macy's" "Walmart" and "CVS" in cache titles. Macy's had a few returns but all were in reference to children or dogs. CVS has several returns that were at or very near pharmacies of that company. Walmart had the most returns,

 

Some thoughts on this

• guideline didn't specify no business or product names until late (?) 2012. Prior to that  the language was, " direct or indirect (either intentional or non-intentional) attempt to solicit customers"   - and I recall a lot of business name cache titles, guy in my area specialized in them. 
• caches get text edits after publication
• there's an error rate, especially for stuff that's so ubiquitous that it just slides by - think of teflon, or velcro - both are actually brands ® , both used generically.  I bet there's tons of caches with velcro in the listing ;-)  I expect that some of this stuff just didn't rise to the level of conscious response by either the CO or the reviewer.

[+Mudfrog]

9 hours ago, Keystone said:

If you knew the truth about the gun ownership/gun rights views of the Reviewer whose actions are being questioned in this thread, you'd be laughing as loudly as I am right now.  But by all means, keep on enjoying your baseless speculation.

 

One of the hallmarks of a good, impartial reviewer is their ability to enforce the listing guidelines even when their personal opinions are opposite.  I get the same jollies when someone accuses me of being a godless atheist heathen when I apply the "no agendas" guideline to a cache with religious content.

 

There's no need to be rude here. If you read it again, my statement included the word "may" in it. No speculation, I simply stated that this "might" be the case here. 

 

So let me ask this, with so many active caches already using brand™ names in their titles, what would be a reason you'd not publish with the titles submitted? As you can see by the posts in this thread, people are curious about this and it'd be nice if a real reason were given. Knowing would not only quench some of the curiosity, but could also help the next time one of us wants to place a cache.

[+Isonzo Karst]

17 minutes ago, Mudfrog said:

what would be a reason you'd not publish with the titles submitted?

 

Listing guidelines, cache page content

No commercial content

Some language omitted to get the relevant language:

 

Commercial content includes any of the following characteristics

Name, links, or logos of the following

• Businesses
• Commercial products
• Competing games or cache listing services

In short, business and product names cannot be on a cache page (modest exception for Event listings, found in that section) . 

 

Caches published in the past with business or product names  either predate this language, were edited post-publication, or were published in error.

 

[+igator210]

Without rehashing what others have stated, I could see where a cache title "Tiffany" is perfectly acceptable on its own. It is generic and has a wide range of interpretation. Add a second cache, "Claire", and I might not jump to any conclusion. Add a third, "Macy", and now a commercial connection between all three can be made. If this is made into a series of a dozen or more caches, I could see where a review would reject them all.

[BlueRajah]

12 hours ago, Keystone said:

If you knew the truth about the gun ownership/gun rights views of the Reviewer whose actions are being questioned in this thread, you'd be laughing as loudly as I am right now.  But by all means, keep on enjoying your baseless speculation.

 

One of the hallmarks of a good, impartial reviewer is their ability to enforce the listing guidelines even when their personal opinions are opposite.  I get the same jollies when someone accuses me of being a godless atheist heathen when I apply the "no agendas" guideline to a cache with religious content.

Thanks keystone, people often forget this..  

You also assume that the reviewers in question realized that the caches were commercial.  Often i do not notice until after publishing, that a series is commercial.   Tossing an obscure firearm name, a business know to locals, or a name that is common or have other uses (colt for example) may not even make me think about a commercial overtone.  Just because you got away with it in the past, does not mean that it is ok going forward.   I want to say I would have caught the commercial overtones on all these, I had to check a few to see if I may have published them.   

[+Mudfrog]

9 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

 

Listing guidelines, cache page content

No commercial content

Some language omitted to get the relevant language:

 

Commercial content includes any of the following characteristics

Name, links, or logos of the following

• Businesses
• Commercial products
• Competing games or cache listing services

In short, business and product names cannot be on a cache page (modest exception for Event listings, found in that section) . 

 

Caches published in the past with business or product names  either predate this language, were edited post-publication, or were published in error.

 

 

Well try inserting a brand name into a search and see what comes up. I tried a few different searches and only two came up empty. As mentioned, Walmart comes up with 21 results. One search I did was with the word Chevrolet. Similar to the guns here, the Chevrolet search came up with different models of Chevrolets. Pepsi and Coca Cola come up with caches that specifically mention what they're referring to.

 

Not that it's a biggie, I just don't understand the inconsistency.

[+DerDiedler]

8 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

I just don't understand the inconsistency.

Explanation: Humans involved.

[+IceColdUK]

On 11/4/2019 at 5:49 AM, armadillogal said:

Why would a reviewer not accept new caches ...

What reason did the reviewer give you?

[+niraD]

4 hours ago, DerDiedler said:

12 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

I just don't understand the inconsistency.

Explanation: Humans involved.

Canines are involved, too. Don't forget that some volunteer reviewers are dogs.