Polish cache in Russia ?

[+Arne1]

Why is it possible to create a cache that is assigned to another country? For example, the caches GC9W7MD and GC9W6GC are all in Poland (i.e. initial coordinates and final coordinates), approximately 300 meters from the russian border. Yet they are listed as being in Russia.
Furthermore, these two have identical initial coordinates so they overlap on the map. Is there no rule to prevent these phenomena ?

 

 

[Keystone]

This is not a website bug or feature request, so I've moved the thread to the appropriate forum.

 

The OP assumes that the cache owner was not questioned about their country selection.  The Reviewer for Russia insisted on the country selection being changed to Poland, and the cache was published by a Reviewer for Poland.

[+baer2006]

6 hours ago, Keystone said:

The OP assumes that the cache owner was not questioned about their country selection.  The Reviewer for Russia insisted on the country selection being changed to Poland, and the cache was published by a Reviewer for Poland.

... but the listed country is still "Russia". I rhink this is what the OP is wondering. Maybe the Polish reviewer just didn't care?

 

The whole thing looks a bit like an "optimized" 😉 way to facilitate the addition of Russia to stats and maps for Polish cachers.

[+TheVoytekBear]

Not the first time, not the last. Those caches usually end up on the excluded list.

[+Isonzo Karst]

10 hours ago, Keystone said:

The Reviewer for Russia insisted on the country selection being changed to Poland, and the cache was published by a Reviewer for Poland.

 

If this were near me, I'd log an Needs Archived, and let the relevant reviewers handle it. 

[+baer2006]

3 hours ago, TheVoytekBear said:

Not the first time, not the last. Those caches usually end up on the excluded list.

This list doesn't seem to work as expected.

It includes the cache https://coord.info/GC5YQ8R . But if you click on the profile of a finder, who has not hidden their stats, you will always see "Solomon Islands" in the list of countries with finds, and very often the cache is "Find farthest south" and "Find farthest east". At least the "Find farthest ..." stats should exclude caches from a list, which says "Traveling caches and other special cases that should be ignored when awarding souvenirs or determining distance-related statistics."

[Keystone]

4 hours ago, baer2006 said:

... but the listed country is still "Russia". I rhink this is what the OP is wondering. Maybe the Polish reviewer just didn't care?

 

The whole thing looks a bit like an "optimized" 😉 way to facilitate the addition of Russia to stats and maps for Polish cachers.

 

You do understand that the country and regional selections are freely editable by the cache owner, both before and after publication?  If a change from Poland to Russia were made post-publication, a Reviewer would not be alerted to this.  Please re-read my prior post with this in mind, before speculating whether a Reviewer "just didn't care."

[+Isonzo Karst]

@baer2006  I expect the cache got added to list, found only a few times thereafter, (once?) and was archived. Finds there  before list inclusion will have stats and souvenirs attached.

 

 

31 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

This list doesn't seem to work as expected.

 

[+baer2006]

8 minutes ago, Isonzo Karst said:

@baer2006  I expect the cache got added to list, found only a few times thereafter, (once?) and was archived. Finds there  before list inclusion will have stats and souvenirs attached.

Thanks a lot, that explains it. I honestly thought, that the country and distance stats are a kind of "live" evaluation (or at least regularly updated), and that therefore retroactive inclusion of a cache to "The List" would make a difference. Thanks for clearing this up !

[+baer2006]

16 minutes ago, Keystone said:

You do understand that the country and regional selections are freely editable by the cache owner, both before and after publication? 

I admit I wasn't sure about this.

 

But it begs my next question: If the country were changed back to Poland, would previous finders, whose "Russia" country stat comes only from this cache, lose Russia from their country list? I would have guessed so, just like you can "lose" a D/T grid entry, if a cache has its D/T changed. OTOH, the fact that inclusion into the "Exclusion List" doesn't make a change could mean that country stats are "fixed" as soon as log a find in a country.

[+Isonzo Karst]

1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

If the country were changed back to Poland,

 

  Souvenir if any  would stay. It's awarded with find

 

 Country I'm less sure of I suspect it too would remain.

 

. I have two German state souvenirs, and China souvenir (cache finds from that list). My stats do not show those countries.  This may be a function of years... ie, those finds were 2003 and 2004. They predate the stats module on this site. by the time the countries list was created, those finds were being excluded. 

 

 

[+TeamRabbitRun]

4 hours ago, baer2006 said:

<...>

 

But it begs my next question: If the country were changed back to Poland, would previous finders, whose "Russia" country stat comes only from this cache, lose Russia from their country list? I would have guessed so, just like you can "lose" a D/T grid entry, if a cache has its D/T changed. OTOH, the fact that inclusion into the "Exclusion List" doesn't make a change could mean that country stats are "fixed" as soon as log a find in a country.

 

Don't see how. The 'Country' data item is free-text, and editable after publication as Keystone said.

 

You'd be asking GS' programs to compare free-text entries against some approved list of locations. 

 

For example, "USA", "U.S.A.", "US", "United States", "The States", "America", etc., EVERY mis- and mangled spelling and every other way of smartalecly referring to that place would ALL have to evaluate the same.

 

Lot to ask.

[+HHL]

30 minutes ago, TeamRabbitRun said:

Don't see how. The 'Country' data item is free-text

That's wrong. Country and region names could only be set by given data from a dropdown list.

Edited September 19, 2022 by HHL

[+TeamRabbitRun]

23 minutes ago, HHL said:

That's wrong. Country and region names could only be set by given data from a dropdown list.

 

Right you are.

[+barefootjeff]

On 9/19/2022 at 2:16 AM, Arne1 said:

For example, the caches GC9W7MD and GC9W6GC are all in Poland (i.e. initial coordinates and final coordinates), approximately 300 meters from the russian border. Yet they are listed as being in Russia.

 

One of those caches is a Wherigo and the other a multi, so it's possible the physical cache could be on the opposite side of the border to the listed coordinates (although I see now that you've said the final coordinates are also in Poland). In general, though, what's the etiquette in a situation like that? Should the country/state setting reflect the posted coordinates or the actual cache?

Edited September 19, 2022 by barefootjeff

[Keystone]

For caches with multiple stages, the correct country/state selection is based on the posted coordinates at the top of the cache page.

[+barefootjeff]

9 minutes ago, Keystone said:

For caches with multiple stages, the correct country/state selection is based on the posted coordinates at the top of the cache page.

 

Thanks!

[+CAVinoGal]

25 minutes ago, Keystone said:

For caches with multiple stages, the correct country/state selection is based on the posted coordinates at the top of the cache page.

 

I can verify this,  as I recently found a multi with the posted coordinates in California, and the final in Nevada, at the stateline in South Lake Tahoe, CA/Stateline, NV.  The find was listed as a California find, not Nevada, although the container and log were in Nevada.

 

GC3AFN7

[+JL_HSTRE]

39 minutes ago, Keystone said:

For caches with multiple stages, the correct country/state selection is based on the posted coordinates at the top of the cache page.

 

Even if the posted coordinates are essentially meaningless i.e. puzzle Mystery or some Wherigos?

[Keystone]

1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

Even if the posted coordinates are essentially meaningless i.e. puzzle Mystery or some Wherigos?

 

Yes, or else I would have called out any exceptions.

 

Mystery Caches and "Play Anywhere" or "Reverse" Wherigo Caches must have posted coordinates within two miles of the actual cache location.  All other Wherigo caches must have posted coordinates that match the Wherigo "Start At" coordinates.  So, those limitations have meaning when it comes to country and region selections.  The limitations would not be relevant in edge cases like a cache with posted coordinates near a border, such as the examples brought up in the OP.  But, as has been noted, both the posted coordinates and the cache location coordinates for those two examples are located in Poland, not Russia.

[+Arne1]

10 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

One of those caches is a Wherigo and the other a multi, so it's possible the physical cache could be on the opposite side of the border to the listed coordinates (although I see now that you've said the final coordinates are also in Poland). In general, though, what's the etiquette in a situation like that? Should the country/state setting reflect the posted coordinates or the actual cache?

Final from both is near of posted coordinates, on Polish territory, 300 m from border. I thing, it should be changed by HQ !

 

[+Isonzo Karst]

2 hours ago, Arne1 said:

. I thing, it should be changed by HQ !

 

If you want HQ to be aware, you need to contact them.

https://www.geocaching.com/help/

at the bottom of that page, see Contact us:

From the pulldown,  I'd use 16. Geocacher disagreement   as that will likely end up with the correct staff group.    Also, you disagree with the cache owner's choice to change the placed field from Poland, where it was published, to Russia where it is NOT. ;-)

 

[+baer2006]

22 hours ago, baer2006 said:

But it begs my next question: If the country were changed back to Poland, would previous finders, whose "Russia" country stat comes only from this cache, lose Russia from their country list? I would have guessed so, just like you can "lose" a D/T grid entry, if a cache has its D/T changed.

I have thought about this, and I now expect that when the two caches are changed to "Poland", finders might lose "Russia" on their country list.

 

It's a fact that stats-driven cachers would do almost anything to skew their stats in the desired direction. One example I learned recently is the circumvention of the "The data of an Attended log is identical to the event date" rule to make the "Find as much different cache types on a single day" easier. To do this, they manipulate the input fields of the logging form on the website, because the date rule is only implemented on the client side, and not enforced on the server side. Anyway, that said, if a country would stay "green" on the map once you have it, even when the relevant cache is moved, then there would be an easy exploit:

- Have a cache published, using a second account

- After publication, change its country to, say, "North Korea"

- Log a find

- Change it back to the real country

=> Bingo, NK in your country stats.

I've never seen this, nor heard of such a "trick" on FB etc. Therefore I assume it wouldn't work.

[+mustakorppi]

I lost countries and other related stats when caches I previously had found were added to the exclusion list. I got the stats back when said caches were removed from the list. Finders’ D/T, size, and hide date etc. stats change if the cache owner changes D/T, size, or hide date of a cache, so I would expect country to behave the same way.

 

I don’t know what the exact criteria for the exclusion list are, but caches like GC3AFN7 that don’t break any past or current rules are not on the list. With the exception of the two caches by the user TeamRockVisited, where I have no idea why they’re on the list.

 

[hsiale]

On 9/19/2022 at 11:33 PM, barefootjeff said:

it's possible the physical cache could be on the opposite side of the border to the listed coordinates

The sign on the photo in the listing is saying that if you cross the border there, you are breaking Polish law and can spend up to 3 years in prison. You are likely also breaking Russian law by doing this, and I expect the penalty from their side to be bigger (and they have a lot more serious prisons to send you to). This was a serious border even before the war in Ukraine, now going between Poland and Russia is even harder.

[+TeamRabbitRun]

3 hours ago, hsiale said:

The sign on the photo in the listing is saying that if you cross the border there, you are breaking Polish law and can spend up to 3 years in prison. You are likely also breaking Russian law by doing this, and I expect the penalty from their side to be bigger (and they have a lot more serious prisons to send you to). This was a serious border even before the war in Ukraine, now going between Poland and Russia is even harder.

 

Sounds like a reason to archive.

 

GS will archive if a property owner says "Boo".

GS will archive if it's next to train tracks.

GS will archive if it's next to a school.

 

Might they archive if it's likely to spark a geopolitical incident and land a cacher in the klink or get him or her shot by a Russian sentry?

 

[+Max and 99]

Archived

 

[+ChriBli]

There was never any need for crossing the border and getting arrested or shot, the caches were archived because the CO had changed the country to Russia which was in no way true. I don't know what possessed them to do that, but I see they are both in Poland now which I guess means no one got their Russia badge for logging these caches.

[+Arne1]

In my opinion, this cache is intentional from the beginning to misidentify the state so that a few geocachers can get another state cheaply. This is also reflected in the location of the final and the accompanying text and photos that it is across the border - but it is not a border but a fence bordering a 300 meter wide no-entry zone.

It is not the only such cache in that area:
GC84K2E is similar, - but there it is not such a big provocation, the virtual starting coordinates are in Russia.
GC853BD is a multicache where the origin was in the Aland Islands (now archived).

 

 

[+terratin]

On 9/20/2022 at 12:40 PM, baer2006 said:

I have thought about this, and I now expect that when the two caches are changed to "Poland", finders might lose "Russia" on their country list.

 

 

 

But would that be a problem? Those people never found a cache in Russia. Hey, I cheated, I know I cheated and I still keep my reward. Cool. But that discussion is moot anyway as the cache is archived and changed back to Poland.

[+baer2006]

1 hour ago, terratin said:

 

But would that be a problem? Those people never found a cache in Russia. Hey, I cheated, I know I cheated and I still keep my reward. Cool. But that discussion is moot anyway as the cache is archived and changed back to Poland.

It's not a problem at all for me . Personally, I don't like this kind of "stats tweaking" (a.k.a. cheating). Also, I did a quick check, and of the finders who don't hide their profile stats, at least one has Russia no longer on their country list. Of course, the souvenir for Russia remains, but this is a known limitation of the system.

[+Oxford Stone]

I own an international (Paris - London) multi GC5G49W that irked Parisians who wanted to have found every cache in Paris. I got some really aggressive messages telling me my cache was illegal because the final was so far away (I know...) and there was shall we say a team logging effort near the beginning that let those completists tidy their map. Now, post-COVID, people are back to solving it as intended.

[+mustakorppi]

On 9/22/2022 at 12:19 AM, Arne1 said:

In my opinion, this cache is intentional from the beginning to misidentify the state so that a few geocachers can get another state cheaply. This is also reflected in the location of the final and the accompanying text and photos that it is across the border - but it is not a border but a fence bordering a 300 meter wide no-entry zone.

It is not the only such cache in that area:
GC84K2E is similar, - but there it is not such a big provocation, the virtual starting coordinates are in Russia.
GC853BD is a multicache where the origin was in the Aland Islands (now archived).

 

 

GC853BD was a perfectly normal long distance multi, just like GC5G49W Oxford Stone mentioned above. GC853BD 's starting point went missing and the CO did nothing so it's fair that it got archived and locked. But why is it excluded from stats? Similarly, GC84K2E is just a mystery cache whose waypoint and final are on different sides of a border, so you can get a souvenir from an area without physically going there. How is that any different from GC3AFN7?

 

GC84K2E is not a field mystery so it's not relevant that the border near it is illegal to cross. Crossing the Russian border in general, pre-covid, was not hard. I.e. people living near border would get long-term visas and visit Russia just to refuel their car and buy cheap cigarettes.