Jump to content

New Locationless Cache

beejay&esskay

By beejay&esskay
in Website

Followers 1

Recommended Posts

beejay&esskay

+beejay&esskay

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I can't view the cache. I get an error saying it hasn't been approved yet. WTF, this thread only started minutes ago. Did the cache get yanked that quick :mad:

Yes, I think it did. It was certainly there (with no logs yet, since I think it showed up today) when I posted it.

Link to comment
beejay&esskay

+beejay&esskay

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So I wonder how the cache owner feels about you now??? :ph34r:

 

:o

I don't know. They are free to contact me to tell me.

 

I thought about not saying anything....but should we just let errors go?

 

I thought about contacting an approver directly...but it better to do this anonymously?

 

If new locationless are no longer allowed, does that mean if one slips by, it's OK?

 

(And I was also worried about cachers who would try to log it if it were just pulled later.)

Link to comment
res2100

+res2100

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just curious since we can't see the listed cache anymore, what the text of the cache was, and maybe it was changed after it was approved. I am curious how such a cache slipped by in the first place. If it was a locationless cache, which it sounds like it was, that would have been a pretty big slip up.

 

My opinion is that this should have been dealt with privately. I don't see any gain by bringing this up in the forums, unless of course you had already contacted the owner or approver.

 

Lets face it, there are other caches that have been approved over the last few months that I feel go against the guidelines too, but yet they are being approved in certain countries, but not here in North America. These caches in question are all excellent caches and add to the geocacing experience, and I don't want to see them go.

Edited by res2100
Link to comment
Gazza&Girls

+Gazza&Girls

Posted
Posted (edited)
Wasn't there a thread on garlic mustard before? Sometihng about it being a non-native weed worse than kudzu? The cache may have had something to do with that.

 

I may be wrong tho, I did a search (garlic mustard) and this is the only thread that came back.

Yes, there was. There may have been one before that.

Edited by Gazza&Girls
Link to comment
Stunod

+Stunod

Posted
Posted
Wasn't there a thread on garlic mustard before? Sometihng about it being a non-native weed worse than kudzu? The cache may have had something to do with that.

 

I may be wrong tho, I did a search (garlic mustard) and this is the only thread that came back.

Yes, there was.

And here it is!

Link to comment
Corp Of Discovery

+Corp Of Discovery

Posted
Posted
Wasn't there a thread on garlic mustard before? Sometihng about it being a non-native weed worse than kudzu? The cache may have had something to do with that.

 

I may be wrong tho, I did a search (garlic mustard) and this is the only thread that came back.

Yes, there was.

And here it is!

Thanks GG & Stunod. I must have done just too narrow a search. There were a few other ones also, with at least 2 having to do with CITO.

 

Having not seen the cache mentioned above this may be a good idea for a LC/CITO cache- pull out the plant as CITO and get to log it as a LC! Maybe a win/win for the caching community in general. Getting on the good side of some possibly otherwise not too friendly land managers and showing that there may be hope for LC's yet. Requirement would be volunteering on a garlic mustard removal project and posting a picture of you on the job (with GPS of course).

Link to comment
Team GPSaxophone

+Team GPSaxophone

Posted
Posted

So I wonder how the cache owner feels about you now???  ;)

 

:o

I don't know. They are free to contact me to tell me.

 

I thought about not saying anything....but should we just let errors go?

 

When it is none of your business, yes, let it go.

Why? Does that somehow improve geocaching by enforcing the rules subjectively? :ph34r:

Link to comment
hedberg

+hedberg

Posted
Posted

Here in Sweden can you find a big bunch of old caches that are miscategorized:

 

Caches that are "traditional" but the cache description states "The cache is not hidden at the coordinates, it is hidden in a tunnel system" or "50 meters away from the cache coordinates".

 

Traditional caches that are in fact two step multi caches.

 

Mystery caches that aren't really mystery, more like multi's or traditionals.

 

But it seems to be older caches, nowadays do they require you to have the correct category. But sometimes are it difficult: What about a multi cache that have off-set coordinates in the beginning and also include a webcam and solving a puzzle to find the different steps in the multi cache? Which one should you choose for that one? :P

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted
...If new locationless are no longer allowed, does that mean if one slips by, it's OK?...

Locationless are allowed. Existing ones continue to exist. Were they actually banned I guess that would be different. If an owner gets lucky and gets a LC approved what's the harm? (A VC allowing LC logs that has not actuall VC another story and should probably be corrected to the rule below)

 

I've seen alternate forms of logging allowed by owners and that's all part of the game. The only "Rule" is that if you have a traditinonal cache that also lets you log it as a locationless there should actually be a traditional to be found.

 

Whether you should archvie a cache that does this or whether or not it's in good taste is another debate for another thread.

Link to comment
Hemlock

+Hemlock

Posted
Posted
This reminds me. I saw a 'traditional' cache the other day in may area that required solving a cryptogram puzzle to solve it. Shouldn't that be a 'mystery' cache? If so, how does one go about getting it re-catagorized? (not my cache)

Email your friendly neighborhood reviewer and ask him or her to change it.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 1
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...