Questionable caches being approved...

[+Squirrel Nut & Beersnob]

I'm not trying to start a flame war; I appreciate the fact that there are people volunteering to go over caches for approval; I know you're probably over worked and under-appreciated, and there's a flood of new caches constantly comming in.

 

BUT

 

On the 5th a cache in MI was approved, and listed amoung the original contents were 'a small assortment of fireworks'. I immeadately left a note that it should be archived, at least until the fireworks were removed (and apparently they have, or at least they're no longer listed in the original contents).

 

On the 6th, a virtual was approved, and from the 'clue' it appears to lead you to a restaraunt where you have to perform some feat of eating to get your name on a wall. I marked this one for archiving because it sounded a bit commercial. You don't need to perform this feat to claim the cache, but you do have to enter the establishment and inquire about it. From the general feeling I get reading the boards, IMHO this IS too commercial. Not to mention the coordinates show it's in the middle of the Atlantic.

 

Maybe it's just a freak occurance that these 2 were overlooked, but I wonder how often mistakes are made.

 

Are more volunteers needed to ensure proper time and care is made when the caches are approved? Or should the system rely on people who look these up and then post requests for it to be archived??

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish..

[+welch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Squirrel Nut:

Or should the system rely on people who look these up and then post requests for it to be archived??

---

i think the system already does

 

[+welch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Squirrel Nut:

Or should the system rely on people who look these up and then post requests for it to be archived??

---

i think the system already does