Confused on Using a Virtual Location that Points to Final Location

[+Chipper3]

I submitted a new Cache that gives a set of Chords to a Starting Location.  Once the cacher is at that location, then they follow directions in the description to follow a certain bearing for a certain distance to find the actual location of the Cache.   The reviewer has rejected the cache application due to insufficient use of a GPS in finding the cache.

 

From the Geocache "Learn About Cache Types", it would seem that the requirement is met by the bullet that says,  "Follow a projection starting from coordinates in the field. A GPS is used to find a set of chords and then a projection is used from that spot."

 

What Am I missing?  The cacher uses a GPS to be positioned at a location from which they use a compass to walk to the cache.   

 

Most caches just list a set of chords and a GPS is used to find a spot and then they bushwhack around and use their "Cache-Intuition" to find the actual cache.

 

I don't see the difference.  Please help me understand and Thanks!

[+arisoft]

It took a while to understand that this is not a musical cache.

 

I guess that you tried to publish this as a multi-cache. Projection cache with predefined bearing and distance should be published as a mystery cache.

 

[+niraD]

2 hours ago, Chipper3 said:

The reviewer has rejected the cache application due to insufficient use of a GPS in finding the cache.

I think you need to ask your volunteer reviewer to explain why your cache listing has insufficient GPS use.

 

None of us can see your listing. All we can do is guess.

[Keystone]

1 hour ago, arisoft said:

It took a while to understand that this is not a musical cache.

 

I guess that you tried to publish this as a multi-cache. Projection cache with predefined bearing and distance should be published as a mystery cache.

 

 

It's fine to set up a "projection" cache as a multi-cache, per the Help Center.  From the posted coordinates, project a waypoint along X bearing for Y distance to the next stage.

Edited January 7, 2020 by Keystone

[+Chipper3]

I have asked reviewer but no response yet .

 

Simple version -

I have classified cached a multi-cache.

There is a posted set of bogus chords. 

The cacher uses a GPS to navigate to those chords.

The cacher is given in the posted directions  a bearing and distance as well as to look for a solar light (Fairy Light as part of the cache theme)  that is located on the projected spot.  

The cacher uses the sighting to navigate to final location.  (Where the light is.)

 

Should this be a Multi-cache or should it be a Mystery Cache.

 

Chipper 3

 

[+niraD]

3 minutes ago, Chipper3 said:

Simple version -

I have classified cached a multi-cache.

There is a posted set of bogus chords. 

The cacher uses a GPS to navigate to those chords.

The cacher is given in the posted directions  a bearing and distance as well as to look for a solar light (Fairy Light as part of the cache theme)  that is located on the projected spot.  

The cacher uses the sighting to navigate to final location.  (Where the light is.)

 

My guess (and keep in mind that it is only a guess) is that the volunteer reviewer thought one could navigate to the solar light without GPS, and then use the sighting at the light to get to the final location without GPS.

[+Chipper3]

Thank you niraD!  I guess the answer will be communicated from the reviewer.

 

But, It seems that every Simple Cache would not require a GPS to locate a cache.  The chords are posted but so is a map indicating exactly where the cache is located. Just use the map and bushwhack to find the cache.  Or plug in the chords into Google Map or other mapping program and just use the map to navigate to the cache location and then bushwhack.

 

With the advent of mapping programs that use chords, A GPS is never needed to find a cache. Well not exactly true - If I am out in the woods where terrain and visibility and topography makes it pretty difficult to navigate to a map location, then a GPS to keep us on-track is a necessity.   But for all the park, city caches that I see and have found, Give me the chords and Google Map will take me there without a GPS.

 

Chipper3

 

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Chipper3

[+niraD]

22 minutes ago, Chipper3 said:

But, It seems that every Simple Cache would not require a GPS to locate a cache.  The chords are posted but so is a map indicating exactly where the cache is located.

The question isn't whether it can be done without a GPS-capable device (e.g., a smartphone, a handheld GPS receiver). The question is whether accurate GPS coordinates are used as an integral part of the geocache design. I found hundreds of caches using online maps and satellite images before I finally bought a handheld GPS receiver. That didn't mean that the caches I found didn't use accurate GPS coordinates.

[+Chipper3]

niraD, I agree with you.  And I am enjoying the dialog.

 

My confusion is over the rejection of a cache because it uses insufficient GPS techniques.  Solid and accurate chords were determined and were published  as part of the cache design for a GPS device to hone in on.    

 

Well, I guess my puzzlement may evaporate after I get a response from reviewer.  I'm just trying to get some opinions and facts to present as maybe I must be missing something  as an old participant returning to the game.

 

Chipper3

Edited January 7, 2020 by Chipper3

[+arisoft]

6 hours ago, Chipper3 said:

Should this be a Multi-cache or should it be a Mystery Cache.

 

Multi-cache is not acceptable here because player is not required to visit the posted coordinates.

 

6 hours ago, Chipper3 said:

The cacher is given in the posted directions  a bearing and distance as well as to look for a solar light

 

When you submit the cache for reviewing you should explain that projected coordinates points exactly to the cache. Looking for a solar light is additional hint. All kind of hints, including images of the cache, are allowed but coordinates must be accurate.

 

You should post this as a mystery cache because there is no reason to visit the posted coordinates.

 

[+Isonzo Karst]

Hard to say for sure without the cache page.  However, IF you change the type to Mystery, then the final waypoint will be lost! not that it's hard to add it back, but just FYI. If you've any text with that waypoint, save it.  Any other waypoints, if you convert to reference point before the change, they'll stay on the page. After the change of cache type, you can change them back to whatever they were before.

 

You're missing the point about gps use.  It's not,"couldn't  find cache from map". Often you could.  See LPC on SW corner of shopping mall on map. Find it sans gps. I've done exactly that.

What's important is an accurate set of coords, to a specific place, necessary to finding the cache.

 

You call the coords "bogus".   For a multi-cache, the posted coords MUST be a place that the seeker has to visit! not bogus.

Projection is okay in multi, but hard to know from what you've posted.

 

Good luck with this, in any case, and thanks for hiding 

[+Chipper3]

Thanks to all for the advice and insights!

 

The cache has been accepted as a multi-cache based on the definitions in Section 2.2 in the Help section on Types of Caches.

2.2 clears up 1.) the point of having only two stages with the first stage being the stated chords and the second being a projection from the first stage and 2.) whether should be a Multi-Cache or a Mystery Cache.

 

I get to resubmit.

 

 

[+arisoft]

57 minutes ago, Chipper3 said:

The cache has been accepted as a multi-cache based on the definitions in Section 2.2 in the Help section on Types of Caches.

 

You have to read the full section. Not only suitable parts supporting you opinion. If you continue to read, you will find that, "If the cache includes a projection and the projection may be calculated based on the posted coordinates without visiting the location",  the cache type must be a mystery cache - not a multi-cache.

 

[+TeamRabbitRun]

...and please, "coords", not "Chords" - it's short for "coordinates'.

 

That was Arisoft's joke back in the second message in the thread.

[+dprovan]

Sounds like the problem has been resolved, and even though I'm still not sure what the problem or the solution was, I'm going to guess that the reviewer thought someone could find the fairy light by just knowing it's "somewhere around here", then find the cache from there without a GPSr. GS draws a fine line here. It's hard to understand, and I'm not sure it's worth drawing, but it is a reasonable requirement, so I can't argue with it. Even though you posted coordinates, even though you gave them an offset to follow, you've nullified all that if you then say, "the cache is at the foot of the statue of Joe Shmoe" since, assume Joe Shmoe's statue is an obvious feature of the park you told them the cache was in, you've turned it into a follow the clues game instead of a follow the coordinates game. In your case, it sounds like you just needed to be more clear. That's the big lesson here: always, always, always, your first reaction to a rejection should be to talk it over with the reviewer until you fully understand the rejection...or the reviewer understands what wasn't originally clear that makes his objection invalid.

[+colleda]

7 hours ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

...and please, "coords", not "Chords" - it's short for "coordinates'.

 

That was Arisoft's joke back in the second message in the thread.

I thought it struck a note (or two).