Event cache denied in Washington by a Canadian reviewer?

[+MrGigabyte]

I am curious as to how a Canadian reviewer can deny my event that is in a different country.

My cache is ie Washington State, USA.   The reviewer is is in canada sitting some BC (British Columbia, Canada) local event stacking rule.

Just so we are clear, the Event is in the USA. I live in Canada, 5 minutes from the event location in the US.

 

Hello MrGigabyte,

Unfortunately, your event is too close to another event that was just published. Due to the BC Event Stacking guidelines, your event cannot be published at this time or place.

I am temporarily disabling your cache so you can decide how to proceed with it. Before you resubmit your cache for review, please make sure to answer any questions I asked, or add any other comments you might have. The more detail you provide, the quicker your caches get reviewed. When you’re ready for me to review the cache again please click the Submit for Review button. Otherwise, I won't see it again.

Thank you for your cooperation.

---

Skookum Bear
Community Volunteer Reviewer
BC Regional Geocaching Policies: https://wiki.Groundspeak.com/display/GEO/British+Columbia
Geocaching Help Center: https://www.geocaching.com/help/

 

[+MrGigabyte]

[+MrGigabyte]

 

Edited June 7, 2023 by MrGigabyte

[+MrGigabyte]

[+MrGigabyte]

The cache was submitted on June 5 in the USA. Denied on June 6 by a reviewer in Canada, but the location was changed to British Columbia by the reviewer. He/She changed the location that I had entered in the submission from the USA to Canada.

 

  

Edited June 7, 2023 by MrGigabyte

[+Mausebiber]

If two events are to close to each other one of the two will not be published, regardless where this happens on our beautiful planet.

Just move your event half a mile away and everything is good, as you stated, the bay will be dry for a mile.

 

[+MrGigabyte]

Why did the reviewer change my submission to Canada from the USA?   He/she edited my submission, changing countries, then siting a local BC (Canada) guideline for the denial. Since when to do reviewers arbitrarily change submission countries? 

 

[+Mausebiber]

This has nothing to do with BC guidelines.  Here are the guidelines from GS:

https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines#event

see event stacking. 

 

All your pictures above are showing "Washington" as event location, I don't see, that the reviewer has changed anything.

 

Regardless, all this will not help you in any way.  The only solution I see is, to work with the reviewer to solve the problem.

[+Max and 99]

[Keystone]

Your event cache's posted coordinates are in Canada, according to the mapping tools used by Community Volunteer Reviewers.  The Reviewer toolset throws an alert for selecting Washington as the event location.  (The same is true for your existing Virtual Cache 135 feet away from the event's coordinates.)

 

The other event, which has a lower GC Code and has already been published, runs from 11:45 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. on July 4th.  Your later-submitted event runs from 12:00 noon to 1:00 p.m. on July 4th.  The overlapping events are separated in distance by .7 miles.

 

Regardless of the event's correct geographic classification in either British Columbia or Washington, the close proximity of the events in both time and place constitutes "event stacking" under any interpretation of that listing guideline.  Had your event been reviewed by a volunteer covering Washington, you would have received the same answer. 

 

 

[+MrGigabyte]

3 hours ago, Keystone said:

Your event cache's posted coordinates are in Canada, according to the mapping tools used by Community Volunteer Reviewers.  The Reviewer toolset throws an alert for selecting Washington as the event location.  (The same is true for your existing Virtual Cache 135 feet away from the event's coordinates.)

 

The other event, which has a lower GC Code and has already been published, runs from 11:45 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. on July 4th.  Your later-submitted event runs from 12:00 noon to 1:00 p.m. on July 4th.  The overlapping events are separated in distance by .7 miles.

 

Regardless of the event's correct geographic classification in either British Columbia or Washington, the close proximity of the events in both time and place constitutes "event stacking" under any interpretation of that listing guideline.  Had your event been reviewed by a volunteer covering Washington, you would have received the same answer. 

 

 

Thank you for your detailed explanation.  Your mapping tools need to be updated though.  The location is in the USA. The border is NOT at the 49 degrees north. It is  49 00.130 due to a surveying error by the International Boundary commission 150 years ago.   That is about 800 feet south. There are a series of huge monuments that span this bay demarcating the international boundary.. I have to pass through US iImmigration and Customs to reach N49º.

[Keystone]

9 minutes ago, MrGigabyte said:

Your mapping tools need to be updated though.

 

This is good feedback for Google.

[+Hügh]

10 hours ago, MrGigabyte said:

Since when to do reviewers arbitrarily change submission countries? 

 

Allegedly a Reviewer changed the cache type of one of my friends' caches (Multi to Mystery) immediately before publication, so... they can do whatever they want to your listing.

 

2 hours ago, MrGigabyte said:

49 00.130

 

Not exactly: it varies with longitude. Fisheries and Oceans Canada claims the Point Roberts Monument at 00.125, which puts your event at 00.126 well within Canada. It gets as far north as 00.130 only near the centre of Boundary Bay before dipping back down to 00.125 at Peace Arch.

Edited June 7, 2023 by Hügh

[+Viajero Perdido]

Google agrees with OpenStreetMap here.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=N+49°+00.126'%2C+W+123°+01.250'#map=19/49.00196/-123.02089

 

Hover mouse over coords to see marker.

 

Interestingly, you're juuust outside the Boundary Bay Wildlife Management Area, which presents an interesting loophole, if you're into hunting / fishing / pollywogging.

 

Edited June 7, 2023 by Viajero Perdido

[+SwineFlew]

On 6/7/2023 at 8:53 AM, Keystone said:

 

This is good feedback for Google.

Good excuse to pass the blame to someone else when you know there's a problem but won't work with it.