Jump to content

I Have A Gripe


Recommended Posts

OK I have a few things I need to address right away (in order of priority):

 

1. Keystone Approver - I am disheartened to hear that you wanted to take the rest of the evening off (presumably after reading my posts). This was not my intent. My intent was to communicate the level of frustration I am experiencing after having a cache archived with no warning. I hope all of you can understand having an item slip off the radar scope without your notice. This is the case with this cache. I have no defense for 5 months of inactivity, I am only asking for a chance to correct the situation before it gets archived. Instead of communicating my frustration, I apparantly transmitted it to you. I apologize to you and other approvers that I have never dealt with outside of this topic thread. I would ask that you consider the frustration you have, because I am in the same place just for a different reason. I find my self in a place where I need to go replace a cache not because I want to, but simply to maintain a point. I am sorely tempted to just take the hit to my credibility and let cache remain archived.

 

2. Warning meter - Yes it is lit for the geo-nazi statement. I apologize, I can only say it was a poor attempt at humor while experiencing a level of frustration. I do not wish to break the rules here, only challenge them when I don't think they make any sense.

 

3. Jeremy - The cache is still archived, contrary to a previous post from you encouraging me to email the approver. Now, I have extra hoops to jump through that you didn't mention in your previous post. As I mentioned above, I am wrestling with whether or not I should replace this cache. I concede that it will make me look bad if I don't, but this experience has sucked some of the life out of this hobby for me. Should I really take the time to replace the cache if it is only an attempt to prove that I do have a container ready to go? And even if I do, I still will need to figure out how to update the coordinates with a busted GPS.

 

4. Prime Approver - After reading your terse archive message along with your profile, the statement in your second email struck me as dripping with sarcasm. In other words, I have no faith that you meant what you said. If this snap judgement was incorrect then I owe you an apology. Again, based on your profile I am not sure that I was incorrect. If you choose to reply, I promise to take your next words at face value.

 

Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond. I disagree with some of you but I am happy to consider your point of view.

 

JakeandtheFatman

Edited by JakeandtheFatman
Link to comment
3. Jeremy - The cache is still archived, contrary to a previous post from you encouraging me to email the approver. Now, I have extra hoops to jump through that you didn't mention in your previous post.

 

Extra hoops? You mean by actually having to place a cache there before it is approved? Seems to me that's not an extra hoop to jump through, just part of the game. How did you expect them to unarchive something that wasn't even there? :lol:

Link to comment

Sorry we weren't clear. It seemed obvious that you would want your cache unarchived once the cache was returned to the spot and the coordinates were updated. The archived setting is something that can be turned off and on by any approver, so it isn't a big deal to bring it back once the cache is ready to go. And, logically, it makes no sense to unarchive a cache that isn't there.

 

Since you have that cache sitting on your kitchen table ready to go, go hide it and contact the approver when it is ready.

Link to comment

Jeremy Posted on Mar 31 2004, 08:17 AM

Since you have that cache sitting on your kitchen table ready to go, go hide it and contact the approver when it is ready.

 

Ok, I will do this on saturday(4/3/2004). Transportation issues prevent an earlier attempt. However, my other point still remains. The coordinates will need to be modified, and I have no working gps unfortunately. Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later. To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier. From my vantage point the cache page will need to be updated since the container will be placed in a different location. This should be within 50' to 100' of the original spot.

 

Since I have no GPS, my plan is to approximate it using satelite photos of the park. Then I will ask for an updated set of coords from the first cacher that finds it.

 

Thanks

JakeandtheFatman

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later. To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier.

I think that may be due to the fact that you said it'd be replaced in a few weeks and 5 months later it's still not there.

 

sd

Link to comment

It seems like a 2 page topic is overkill when all you had to do is email the approver and say: "hey Mr' Approver, good news I finally got around to replacing that cache. Can you please un-archive it for me?"

 

End of freakin story!

 

As for the admins treating people with respect. I have never been treated with anything but respect by the approvers.

Link to comment

I figure it's time for me to weigh in.

 

First, 5 months is far too long to be "temporarily unavailable."

 

Second, moving the cache 50' to 100' is likely to be a completely different hide warranting a new cache page.

 

Third, I despise having to email the owner a code in order to log a physical cache. The logbook is sufficient proof.

 

Fourth, the hidden date is a month after the first find and even after the first DNF. Heck, even after your last log!

 

Fifth, because it disappeared to fast, it could be that area is not good for a hide of your skill level. I know of hides where people walk within 3 feet of a full sized cache and they never know about. Some people can do it, others can't.

 

Sixth, no transportation and no GPS. How are you supposed to create a proper cache without accurate coords? How are you supposed to check on it if you can't even place it?

 

IMHO, the cache should stay archived. When your transportation and GPS issues are resolved, then you can place another cache in the area under a new waypoint.

Link to comment
Jeremy Posted on Mar 31 2004, 08:17 AM
Since you have that cache sitting on your kitchen table ready to go, go hide it and contact the approver when it is ready.

 

Ok, I will do this on saturday(4/3/2004). Transportation issues prevent an earlier attempt. However, my other point still remains. The coordinates will need to be modified, and I have no working gps unfortunately. Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later. To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier. From my vantage point the cache page will need to be updated since the container will be placed in a different location. This should be within 50' to 100' of the original spot.

 

Since I have no GPS, my plan is to approximate it using satelite photos of the park. Then I will ask for an updated set of coords from the first cacher that finds it.

 

Thanks

JakeandtheFatman

I wouldn't approve/un-archive that if I was an admin. The cache is NOT yet placed and when you do place it you saying the coords will NOT be accurate. It's been 5 months whats your rush at this point. Wait until you have your GPS back. Don't give the admin a reason not to approve it.

Link to comment
I have better things to do than recreate my cache site pages from scratch just because someone has an itchy trigger finger sitting on the archive button.

It take 10 - 15 minuted to create a cache page. You don't have time for that yet you have time to place and maintain a cache. Besides you don't have a car, where are you going? :lol:

Link to comment

Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later.

 

There's no cache there now.

 

 

To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier.

 

 

How trustworthy have you shown yourself to be up to now?

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later. To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier. From my vantage point the cache page will need to be updated since the container will be placed in a different location. This should be within 50' to 100' of the original spot.

 

Why unarchive a cache that isn't there? It would be like asking to post a cache page before a cache was placed. The policy is simply not to do it. It isn't about you, it is about having a policy and following that policy. I don't see why a special deviation from the rule would be warranted.

Link to comment
<snip>

The coordinates will need to be modified, and I have no working gps unfortunately. <snip> From my vantage point the cache page will need to be updated since the container will be placed in a different location. This should be within 50' to 100' of the original spot.

 

Since I have no GPS, my plan is to approximate it using satelite photos of the park. Then I will ask for an updated set of coords from the first cacher that finds it.

 

Thanks

JakeandtheFatman

I'll be totally honest...

 

Please do not replace the cache until you have a GPS or can borrow one.

 

Approximate coordinates will not do. Coordinates derived from mapping packages are not acceptable. Your lack of accurate coordinates could result in environmental damage as people have to search to find your cache. Not everyone gets good coordinates I know, but if you have a GPS at least your coordinates will be good 95% of the time. The whole basis of the game is to have a GPS to record the coordinates.

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later.

If it is unarchived now, someone might try and search for it. They won't find it because it's still on your kitchen table.

 

If it's unarchived after you place it, someone might try and search for it and actually find it.

 

Is it that difficult to understand?

 

:( CO

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later.

If it is unarchived now, someone might try and search for it. They won't find it because it's still on your kitchen table.

 

If it's unarchived after you place it, someone might try and search for it and actually find it.

 

Is it that difficult to understand?

 

:( CO

I'm going to attempt to understand his side of things. I think he wants it un-archived yet he will keep it disabled until he gets his cache placed. This way no one else can place a cache there. Does that about sum it up? I still don't agree with it under these circumstances but at least that sounds like a logical explanation.

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later.

If it is unarchived now, someone might try and search for it. They won't find it because it's still on your kitchen table.

 

If it's unarchived after you place it, someone might try and search for it and actually find it.

 

Is it that difficult to understand?

 

:( CO

I'm going to attempt to understand his side of things. I think he wants it un-archived yet he will keep it disabled until he gets his cache placed. This way no one else can place a cache there. Does that about sum it up? I still don't agree with it under these circumstances but at least that sounds like a logical explanation.

Yes, I thought of that too, but after 5 months? If someone else beats him to the spot, they have every right to place a cache there. You snooze you lose.

 

:D CO

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later.

If it is unarchived now, someone might try and search for it. They won't find it because it's still on your kitchen table.

 

If it's unarchived after you place it, someone might try and search for it and actually find it.

 

Is it that difficult to understand?

 

:( CO

I'm going to attempt to understand his side of things. I think he wants it un-archived yet he will keep it disabled until he gets his cache placed. This way no one else can place a cache there. Does that about sum it up? I still don't agree with it under these circumstances but at least that sounds like a logical explanation.

Yes, I thought of that too, but after 5 months? If someone else beats him to the spot, they have every right to place a cache there. You snooze you lose.

 

:D CO

That's absolutely right.

Link to comment
Also, I guess I don't understand the difference between unarchiving it now as opposed to later. To me this communicates a lack of trust, refering back to the point that was made earlier

 

The problem is not lack of trust, it's lack of cache. If the cache is unarchived then people will look for it. The fact that its sitting on your kitchen table isn't going to do them much good...unless you provide directions to your house and don't mind your doorbell ringing at all hours.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Soupnazi.jpg

 

NO CACHE FOR YOU!

 

Ok, don't warn me, I just had to say that. :(

 

Honestly though, the cache was MIA for 5 months. That prevents people from hiding ACTUAL caches nearby. I think you got a lucky break from the admins. The guidelines say a few weeks...you had your cache listing sit there for 5 months before action was taken.

 

And they were willing to unarchive it after you have another replacement cache hidden. I don't see how the gc.com staff are being rude or inconsiderate in any way about this situation.

Link to comment

It just occured to me, after spending ages reading this thread, that maybe this is an April Fool's prank: "Watch me get everybody all riled up!" Except that the responses from Jeremy and the Cache Approver, seem to indicate this is really happening.

 

Not to get into a long sob story, but the last few months have been overly eventful for me, but not in a good way.

Clearly, this is the most important thing you've said in this whole rant. Perhaps the only rational thing you've said. Think about it. Your angers and frustrations and discontent don't belong here. They don't have anything to do with GC.COM or Jeremy or approvers or rules or caches or geocaching, at all. Everyone here has been patient and kind and understanding, but it doesn't belong here.

 

No need for me to re-hash all of the rule-quoting and who is right or wrong or who should be e-mailing whom. All of that has been abundantly clear. Nothing here accounts for your anger. No one here has been direspectful.

 

This is not a flame, so please don't flame me. It is a sincere, direct and honest observation.

 

Go well.

Link to comment

Personally, I didn't focus for long on the sentence quoted above. However "eventful" the original poster's life has been lately, it didn't interfere with his finding geocaches on December 5, December 28, January 3, January 10, January 24, February 1, February 28 and March 6. And that is a good thing -- I encourage everyone who's stressed out about something to go find a cache or two -- it really helps.

 

But what I'm curious about is why this cache couldn't have been replaced on January 10 when the owner found this cache that is just 1.3 miles away from his disabled cache. And he was with a friend who apparently had a GPS. Had that been my cache, disabled for three months at that point, I would likely have swung by.

 

I also found it interesting that the cache owner attended two event caches during this time period. Events are wonderful opportunities to ask favors from, or offer assistance to, another geocacher. Had this cacher told me at an event that he was temporarily GPS-less, I would've loaned him my spare in a heartbeat. I also would've been happy to re-hide his cache for him, as I did for a geocacher in my area just three days ago.

Link to comment
Personally, I didn't focus for long on the sentence quoted above. However "eventful" the original poster's life has been lately, it didn't interfere with his finding geocaches on December 5, December 28, January 3, January 10, January 24, February 1, February 28 and March 6. And that is a good thing -- I encourage everyone who's stressed out about something to go find a cache or two -- it really helps.

 

But what I'm curious about is why this cache couldn't have been replaced on January 10 when the owner found this cache that is just 1.3 miles away from his disabled cache. And he was with a friend who apparently had a GPS. Had that been my cache, disabled for three months at that point, I would likely have swung by.

 

I also found it interesting that the cache owner attended two event caches during this time period. Events are wonderful opportunities to ask favors from, or offer assistance to, another geocacher. Had this cacher told me at an event that he was temporarily GPS-less, I would've loaned him my spare in a heartbeat. I also would've been happy to re-hide his cache for him, as I did for a geocacher in my area just three days ago.

Ah-ha!! The plot sickens....errr, thickens! :(

Link to comment

It seems that JakeandtheFatman's initial post was a knee-jerk reaction to a misunderstood situation.

 

Cases like this are going to come up repeatedly, because one camp believes that caches should be auto archived if ignored for x weeks, while another thinks it should be x months. I've seen caches around my area inactive for over a year. I look at the last time the cacher shows having logged onto the site, and base a decision to post an archive note on that and how long it's been in a disabled state. More often than not, my reasons are supported by the approver's, because I provide a reason to back up my archive note.

 

With regards to cache hides, I've only ever had one rejected, because it was a virtual. I remembered incorrectly the National Forest vs. National Park ban and wanted a virtual at the summit on Beartooth Highway. There were a few places I could have hidden a regular cache, but didn't think about it. I had someone to maintain it, so that was a non-issue. My local approver (ok, the local approver from CO) has been great. Any inquiries I've ever made regarding potential cache hides or types of caches, etc...has been replied to extremely quickly and with a reason to back everything. If there's one thing I've seen in practice, is that respect shown is respect given.

 

I take many of the complaints about the direction of the site with a grain of salt. When I'm out on the trail, those 'issues' don't bother me, as I'm out to enjoy the hunt, not to immerse myself in politics that have little to do with me directly.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...