Jump to content

Virtual Subjectivity


Recommended Posts

The wet cat is correct. "Lameness" or "bad reviews" is not part of the cache guidelines. I am obligated to approve a cache fifty feet down the trail from the parking lot, if it meets the listing guidelines. Personally, I would label that as a lame cache unless it were hidden creatively, used a novel container, etc. If I found that cache under my player account, and gave it a critical log, that's one thing. But my definition of "lame" could be very different than someone else's. So, in my role as a volunteer for this website, my bad review and everyone else's bad reviews are irrelevant.

 

If the website added a guideline that said "no more caches within 50 feet of a road or parking lot," then I would be able to enforce that as an objective rule when evaluating new submissions. But even then, I couldn't go back and archive the "lame" cache from the above example, as it would be grandfathered. It met the listing criteria in effect at the time the cache was submitted.

 

Now, if the bad reviews on a cache were because of the container being wet, or filled with improvised explosive devices, and someone brought the cache to my attention, that would be different. This is because proper cache maintenance and appropriate cache contents are both discussed in the guidelines.

Thanks....that's pretty much the answer I expected, and it does make sense. :lol:

Link to comment
------------------------------

 

Virtual cache:

 

There are two kinds of virtual caches. The first kind is a particular spot that would be perfect for inclusion in a more traditional cache hunt but is currently in an area that restricts geocaching (e.g., NPS land). These virtuals can be considered "stake points" for future geocaches if restrictions were to be lifted. The second kind of virtual cache is to highlight something out of the ordinary even in a place where a normal geocache might fit. The purpose is to bring attention to some of the more subtle landmarks and sublime experiences or facts for your area. Often a number of these smaller points of interest can be strung together to tell a story about your locality. Because of the subjectivity involved, your submission for this type of cache must meet a number of requirements:

 

1) Is your submission unique? Is it peculiar to your specific location? (i.e., no animal carcasses or tennis shoes in the woods)

 

2) Can someone solve your validation information without actually going to the site? (if so, then you can not be approved)

 

3) Whether interested in the topic or not, will the seeker have gained a particular insight, knowledge, or appreciation from having completed your cache?

 

Remember that not every virtual is approved because the system can not currently maintain the difference between virtual hides and traditional hides. To preserve more area and system resources for the physical placement of caches, you may be asked to use your virtual as the beginning of an offset cache instead. The final decision is for the approver to determine and the dismissal of your virtual will require you to consider improving any one of the above criteria before it will be considered again.

 

-------------------

 

I think "Wow" may better be summarized as the ability to impress someone with their find even if they were not initially interested in the topic. Of course, the way it is phrased does not mean that *everyone* needs to come away with an appreciation for what they've been shown (just like park'n'cache traditionals don't instill some sort of appreciation for me to do them either)...but the subject or way in which the virtual is accomplished should give the seeker at the very minimum a trivia fact to quote to someone a day later.

 

I think that is a more pragmatic approach to defining a virtual than "wow". Finding a historical marker denoting the flanking point of General Hammersham in the Battle of Gettysburg....doesn't instill the person with anything. Finding every historical marker that follows the Union army's advance on the Confederacy over a 3 mile distance....instills at the minimum an appreciation for how far the soldiers had to go in the few days that the Battle took. And so on...

I think the way ju66l3r stated this makes virtual caches placement much clearer, and should be considered for inclusion in the guidelines. Even a new member should be able to read this and get a better understanding on what it takes to create a good virtual.

 

IMHO :lol:

Link to comment
I think the way ju66l3r stated this makes virtual caches placement much clearer, and should be considered for inclusion in the guidelines. Even a new member should be able to read this and get a better understanding on what it takes to create a good virtual.

 

IMHO :lol:

Of course, this still implies that the hider actually reads the guidelines. Judging by what I see posted here in the forums, 50% of the "problems" stem from the hider not reading them, even though they have to check off that they did when they submitted the cache. The other 50% seem to know the guidelines exist, they just don't seem to think they apply to their cache.

Link to comment
I think the way ju66l3r stated this makes virtual caches placement much clearer, and should be considered for inclusion in the guidelines. Even a new member should be able to read this and get a better understanding on what it takes to create a good virtual.

 

IMHO  :D

Of course, this still implies that the hider actually reads the guidelines. Judging by what I see posted here in the forums, 50% of the "problems" stem from the hider not reading them, even though they have to check off that they did when they submitted the cache. The other 50% seem to know the guidelines exist, they just don't seem to think they apply to their cache.

Thats very true Mopar...I guess its too much to expect a new cacher to spend the time doing the homework before wanting to play the game.

 

But, if for some odd off the wall reason they do (like I did) this would be a lot easier (maybe) for some to understand. :lol:

Link to comment

I just had a virtual get turned down and still don't know why. My approver referred me here so I am jumping in. Yeah, I got a reason for the denial after my approver took it to the approver club, but not one that made good sense in my opinion. I haven't been around that long and would like to own just one virt to get the icon, maybe that's not a good reason, so what :lol:

 

Personally, I don't think micro caches are any better qualified than virts to be caches. A container small enough for only a log book is not a "cache" by definition. Since there are no such limitations on micros, I don't see the justification for some of the arbitrary decisions made on what virts to approve and not. So please don't respond with the usual comments that virtuals are not "caches."

 

Lady Hydee says that gravestones are not "normally" qualified, then what is so special about GCJFKF that got approved nine days ago.

 

Great views or markers don't normally qualify either, so what about GCH8P5

 

I thought and worked hard trying to figure out a location that would qualify for a virtual, and came up with what I thought was an ideal candidate, the Chattanooga Choo-Choo.

 

I live nearby, and so I planned it out so that there were several questions, two of which could not be answered by internet search best I can tell. Due to security issues in a place of tourism a traditional cache is not possible. Being a tourism destination and the worldwide interest, I think it fits the WOW factor just fine. Please prove to me that the Chattanooga Choo-Choo doesn’t qualify and need a cache as badly as any other virtual that has been approved recently.

 

The reasons that it was turned down are that it was said to be commercial in nature and doesn't require a GPS.

 

I respectifully disagree. There is no admittance fee to the majority of the Choo-Choo property. Only an HO scale train museum has an admittance fee, and all the cache questions can be answered without paying a dime; even the parking is free. If the museum being on the same property makes it a commercial cache to be denied are the approvers going to stop approving urban caches and gas station micros? Please tell me what the definition of a commercial cache is.

 

I don't think the second reason is valid either. I provided specific coords for the cache where two of the qualifying questions could be answered. The GPS coords take a person exactly to the location without need of additional maps or resources.

 

I can look up most virtuals that have been approved since the restrictions have been in place and then click on the map link and know exactly where to go to find the answers. I can even find some caches without a GPS. If this "rule" were consistently applied than few if any virts would be getting approved, and some caches wouldn't either. Before I was told that was a reason for being turned down, I had never even heard that was a rule. Yeah it may seem logical, but where is the consistency? What defines the level of significance that a GPS plays in the hunt? I have looked at the recently approved virtuals in several states and not ever seen this as an issue until now. Are we making rules up as we go? Maybe, but why aren't they applied consistently?

Link to comment

Not to derail (pun intended) the discussion of how to improve the virtual guidelines, but here's my thoughts on your virtual.

 

The "no need for GPSr" is a bit of a red herring. WaldenRun does ALL of his caching without a GPSr...so, where does that leave him?

 

With that out of the way, from what you've stated, the only objection is the commercialism of the cache. I also disagree with this, if as you've also stated all parts of the cache can be accomplished without paying.

 

If you can visit the CCChoo without paying to reach your points of interest, then all I have to say is:

 

Pardon me boys...where's the Chatanooga Choo Choo cache?

 

I say all of this with the caveat of not having read exactly what they stated or what your cache asks for.

Link to comment
...I say all of this with the caveat of not having read exactly what they stated or what your cache asks for.

The reply I got says:

 

After discussing this cache with the other approvers. The cache has been archived because of the commercial nature and you don't need a GPS to find it.

 

The qualifying questions are:

 

1. What was the name of America’s first municipal railway system?

 

2. What was the date that the first passenger train was nicknamed the Chattanooga Choo-Choo?

 

3. For the third question you will need to make your way to the model railroad museum. Inside you can purchase tickets to go up to the museum. As you enter the museum on the first floor there are pictures of old trains. One picture is larger than the rest. The question you need to answer is what is the engine number of the train in the large picture?

 

4. To find the answer to the final question you will need to make your way down between the two rows of box cars that make up the restaurants and sleeping cars. The last car on the right (green in color) has a name, what is it?

Link to comment
I guess I shouldn't have worded it to mention the museum admission fee. The gallery that the question answer is found does not have an admission fee, only the museum upstairs.

You're cache seems fine. It's the listing rules that are broken. However they are this sites chosen rules, and so rather than fight I just go to my friendly neighborhood competing site and help build them up.

 

Non listable on GC.com doesn't equate to non viable.

 

As of today I've listed two caches on Navicache.com. I've also had exactly one finder. That's the down side. Will it stay like that forever? I doubt it. I still list here as my first choice but I don't fight the system beyond a limited point. The forums though are a great place to lobby for change.

Link to comment
I guess I shouldn't have worded it to mention the museum admission fee. The gallery that the question answer is found does not have an admission fee, only the museum upstairs.

Well, uh.....yeah! It sounds to me as though it's gonna cost me the price of a museum ticket to get in....probably poor wording there, for sure.....

Link to comment
Well, uh.....yeah! It sounds to me as though it's gonna cost me the price of a museum ticket to get in....probably poor wording there, for sure.....

Except that I made very clear in the note to the approvers that the cache can be completed without purchasing anything, including parking.

 

I'm going to try and reword it and see if they will give it another shot.

Link to comment
Well, uh.....yeah!  It sounds to me as though it's gonna cost me the price of a museum ticket to get in....probably poor wording there, for sure.....

Except that I made very clear in the note to the approvers that the cache can be completed without purchasing anything, including parking.

 

I'm going to try and reword it and see if they will give it another shot.

Apparently not clear enough, however.

Link to comment
Well, uh.....yeah!  It sounds to me as though it's gonna cost me the price of a museum ticket to get in....probably poor wording there, for sure.....

Except that I made very clear in the note to the approvers that the cache can be completed without purchasing anything, including parking.

 

I'm going to try and reword it and see if they will give it another shot.

Apparently not clear enough, however.

We'll find out if that is what was wrong if they decide to change their mind :lol:

Link to comment
Well, uh.....yeah!  It sounds to me as though it's gonna cost me the price of a museum ticket to get in....probably poor wording there, for sure.....

Except that I made very clear in the note to the approvers that the cache can be completed without purchasing anything, including parking.

 

I'm going to try and reword it and see if they will give it another shot.

Apparently not clear enough, however.

I understood that you had the option to buy a ticket to go somewhere else if you chose but not that you needed to buy one to complete the cache.

 

It could of been worded better but that describes 97% of everyones writing.

Link to comment
Please prove to me that the Chattanooga Choo-Choo doesn’t qualify and need a cache as badly as any other virtual that has been approved recently.

 

The reasons that it was turned down are that it was said to be commercial in nature and doesn't require a GPS.

While checking to see if the questions could be answered online, we checked the Chattanooga Choo Choo website. The moment you get there you're smacked in the face with blatant commercialism. One can only assume that visiting in person is the same.

 

Virtual caches are unique locations that the local tour bus in your city won't be stopping at.

If everybody is going to visit the place anyways, why should it be a virtual cache?

Link to comment
Please prove to me that the Chattanooga Choo-Choo doesn’t qualify and need a cache as badly as any other virtual that has been approved recently.

 

The reasons that it was turned down are that it was said to be commercial in nature and doesn't require a GPS.

While checking to see if the questions could be answered online, we checked the Chattanooga Choo Choo website. The moment you get there you're smacked in the face with blatant commercialism. One can only assume that visiting in person is the same.

 

Virtual caches are unique locations that the local tour bus in your city won't be stopping at.

If everybody is going to visit the place anyways, why should it be a virtual cache?

Ooooo....double smackdown......Methinks the approvers are winning again.......

Link to comment
Please prove to me that the Chattanooga Choo-Choo doesn’t qualify and need a cache as badly as any other virtual that has been approved recently.

 

The reasons that it was turned down are that it was said to be commercial in nature and doesn't require a GPS.

While checking to see if the questions could be answered online, we checked the Chattanooga Choo Choo website. The moment you get there you're smacked in the face with blatant commercialism. One can only assume that visiting in person is the same.

 

Virtual caches are unique locations that the local tour bus in your city won't be stopping at.

If everybody is going to visit the place anyways, why should it be a virtual cache?

1) Doesn't require a GPS. Nothing on this site truly requires a GPS. Just map skills. I don't recall any absolute standard that says "you have to have a GPS" or we would not have Letterbox hybrid caches. This is just silly.

 

2) Commercial. Isn't that limited to things like the Jeep Promotion (with permission), or fees to get into a site that is for profit? The cache owner isn't "Commercial" so far as I know. Boise Cascade is blatantly commercial but if they allowed caches on their lands it would not be commercial.

 

3) If everyone is going to visit anyway, and the Tour Bus... What the heck does that mean? Are we now supposed to provide the tour bus route to make sure that the site isn't visited too much? Or is it that we need to show that some number less than everyone "Goes there". I think it utterly funny to have to meet the "wow a tour bus doesn't go there guideline".

 

It's time to smell the coffee folks. You will fight this battle again and again as every newbie tries to list what they feel is a cool virtual. Now the problem could be those stupid newbies still fresh with enthusiasm who are trying to give back to this RASH, but I for one won't buy into that. That leaves another solution. Maybe it's to quit listing any virtual caches or give up on the subjective standard. Your only alternate is to walk this path again and again, ad nauseam.

Link to comment
...I say all of this with the caveat of not having read exactly what they stated or what your cache asks for.

The reply I got says:

 

After discussing this cache with the other approvers. The cache has been archived because of the commercial nature and you don't need a GPS to find it.

 

The qualifying questions are:

 

1. What was the name of America’s first municipal railway system?

 

2. What was the date that the first passenger train was nicknamed the Chattanooga Choo-Choo?

 

3. For the third question you will need to make your way to the model railroad museum. Inside you can purchase tickets to go up to the museum. As you enter the museum on the first floor there are pictures of old trains. One picture is larger than the rest. The question you need to answer is what is the engine number of the train in the large picture?

 

4. To find the answer to the final question you will need to make your way down between the two rows of box cars that make up the restaurants and sleeping cars. The last car on the right (green in color) has a name, what is it?

1. The "Choo-Choo" was operated by the Cincinnati Southern Railroad, America's first municipal railway system.

 

2. When passenger train service was inaugurated between Cincinnati and Chattanooga on March 5,1880, a newspaper reporter dubbed the train the "Chattanooga Choo-Choo."

 

Since part 3 and 4 require an admission fee and would be commercial I did not search them out.

 

Juggler, to find the Chattanooga Choo-Choo all you have to do is follow the signs. There are plenty of them in Chattanooga.

Link to comment

This topic had been getting some great dialog going before the discussion of the single denied cache derailed it. This topic is more about the big picture as it relates to virtual caches. It would be great if we could get back on track.

 

(TWO puns, do I get credit for that? :lol: )

Link to comment
While checking to see if the questions could be answered online, we checked the Chattanooga Choo Choo website. The moment you get there you're smacked in the face with blatant commercialism. One can only assume that visiting in person is the same.

 

Virtual caches are unique locations that the local tour bus in your city won't be stopping at.

If everybody is going to visit the place anyways, why should it be a virtual cache?

"Getting smacked in the face by commercials" and making a commercial cache are two gargantuanly different things and to deny a cache because it takes you close to a billboard or business is *really* absurd. I've come to expect far better from the approvers than that. (in fact, some caches I have done _require_ you to get information FROM a storefront/ad!)

 

Also, the "tour bus route" comment was hydee's way in the forum to try and explain the "Wow" factor. It's not in the guidelines, so to quote it as a reason that this cache was denied is illogical. I also find it a poor way of describing the "wow" factor, simply because a tour bus is going to stop at all of the biggest "wow" spots (that's how they make their money). If the *biggest* wow spots are not valid virtuals and the littlest wow spots are too uninteresting for being a virtual...that leaves very little "wow" room to play in.

 

Going back to one of the other actual guidelines, the virtual needs to have a historical, etc catch. If the Chatanooga Choo Choo (which everyone probably hums when they hear the phrase) and the train station that was responsible for almost every train heading to the South from the West isn't "wow"...I hesitate to revisit some of the other recently setup virtual caches.

 

Oh...and just in case you were worried that the CCChoo could meet the "coffee table book" rule that is also actually in the guidelines....

Link to comment

Coffee table books traditionally are not paperback books.

 

You have to be kidding me...

 

If you're not, there are about 5000 books on amazon.com that count as "coffee table books". Feel free to go look at all of the ones that say "Paperback"...

 

EDIT: CO's post wasn't there when I clicked the link to start this reply. Feel free to address my rewrite (or any new rewrite) of the guidelines.

Edited by ju66l3r
Link to comment
Coffee table books traditionally are not paperback books.

 

You have to be kidding me...

 

If you're not, there are about 5000 books on amazon.com that count as "coffee table books".  Feel free to go look at all of the ones that say "Paperback"...

Yes, coffee table books are traditionally hardcover books. As in so many things in life, they don't *have* to be hardcover books. I never said that there has never been a softcover coffeetable book. There are definately softcover coffee table books. But, several sources all agree on the definition:

 

http://www.freesearch.co.uk/dictionary/coffee-table

a large expensive book with a lot of pictures, which is meant to be looked at rather than read

 

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dicti...4/c0458400.html

NOUN: An oversize book of elaborate design that may be used for display, as on a coffee table.

 

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/coffee-table+book

Definition: [n] a elaborate oversize book suitable for displaying on a coffee table

 

Ironically enough, as you search on coffee table book you get this link:

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...603121?v=glance

 

If you scroll down you will see a link where you can make your own coffee table book:

 

http://www.sharedink.com/default.aspx?src=...grp=book_coffee

 

The description says, "It's easy and fun to create web books. with our ready-made book designs, invite friends and family to contribute, and turn your pages into a beautiful hardcover book in minutes."

 

I guess your definition of a coffee table book is any book that you can put on a coffee table. Is my checkbook a coffeetable book?

Link to comment
Yes, coffee table books are traditionally hardcover books...

Yadda, yadda, yadda... and who was gripping about off topic and getting derailed?

 

This "single cache" subject is on topic. If you haven't noticed the thread title is virtual subjectivity, and that is what it is addressing. If I had started a new thread I would have been flamed for starting it and told that there was already a thread discussing the subject. All the bitching about off topic is off topic.

Link to comment
Since part 3 and 4 require an admission fee and would be commercial I did not search them out.

 

Juggler, to find the Chattanooga Choo-Choo all you have to do is follow the signs.  There are plenty of them in Chattanooga.

Not quite so fast, you missed the juggler. You obviously didn't read the notes to approver where I clearly said "I don't believe that the the restriction on commercial caches applies because the cache can be completed without buying anything. Even the parking is free, a rarity in an urban setting!"

 

I admit that the cache description is poorly written and includes information about the commercial aspects available at the Choo-Choo. However I would like the opportunity to re-write the description to leave that out and make it crystal clear that there is no charge or admission of any kind necessary to complete the cache.

 

There is a picture gallery to enjoy that is free. There is a rose garden to enjoy that is free. There is the Chattanooga Choo-Choo that can be viewed and pictures taken with that is free. The parking is free. There is much information about trains that is free.

 

I am well aware that the first two questions can be answered by visiting the web site that I added in the listing. That is why I asked four questions. I will be happy to strip the first two questions and leave the final two which can not be found by internet search. I did a query on the answers and did not get a single hit.

Edited by AB4N
Link to comment
You obviously didn't read the notes to approver where I clearly said "I don't believe that the the restriction on commercial caches applies because the cache can be completed without buying anything. Even the parking is free, a rarity in an urban setting!"

This is actually going off about another guideline though, and maybe should get it's own thread.

 

What everyone seems to be missing here is the actual guidelines about commercial caches..

Commercial Caches / Caches that Solicit

 

Commercial caches attempt to use the Geocaching.com web site cache reporting tool directly or indirectly (intentionally or non-intentionally) to solicit customers through a Geocaching.com listing.  These are NOT permitted. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services.

 

As that guideline is written, this cache seems to fail on that. It's obvious that the the hider isn't intentionally trying to get people to buy tickets to the museum (although the description posted here DOES sound like you have to pay to me), but it still sounds like a plug for a commercial location. If the museum itself had tried to place the cache, there would probably be no argument. Slam dunk commercial. I've said it before, I don't care for that guideline. I'd much rather see caches with commercial intent be banned. I mean, I don't think a cache in Disney is meant to get people to purchase admission. Rather it's there for people who are already going anyway. No intent=fine in my book. However, I understand it's probably impossible to truly know a hider's intent, and there would be no way to regulate that. The rule is there, I play by it. This cache seems to fail that rule no matter what the virtual aspect is.

There was some really good discussion on the virtual guidelines in general happening here. Let's try to stay with that.

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment

Whoa! (Not "Wow" but "Whoa"!) Take a day off from reading the forums and you can get lost!! My last posting to this thread -- and I am the OP -- was May 27 at 2:22am, and there has been a ton of activity. (Some great, some good, most off-topic, but these are the forums!)

 

To answer many of the questions that have arisen here are some answers (in no particular order):

 

COAdmin -- The formula I used was %age Growth (All) = New Caches since 1/1/04 / (Total of All Caches - New Caches since 1/1/04)

 

briansnat -- Thanks for clarifying the definition of Growth!

 

Hydee -- Thanks for shedding some light on what may or may not be listable as a virtual cache. It looks like a few things have been added to the not-a-virtual list, and this helps. I still feel that a more structured guideline that doesn't contain phrases like "of interest to others" and "special geocaching property" is needed. Do I have any suggestions? Not really. It is why I asked the original question.

 

Mopar -- Your comment about 50% of cache submitters not reading the guidelines is interesting. I think it more likely that in the case of virtual-cache-submitters after having read the guidelines they still feel that their cache DOES meet the guidelines as it has that special geocaching quality and will be of interest to others. In the case of the only virtual cache I have ever submitted -- which was turned down -- I carefully read the guidelines as I knew that getting one listed was an uphill battle. (Water under the bridge...)

 

ju66l3r -- Great posting! I agree with Keystone Approver that this is something Hydee can work with; wish all postings on this topic were as helpful!!

 

Prime Suspect/mixedx -- Oops! I omitted West Virginia stats! Here they are...

WV.....312.....10......3.2%..........92..........0...........0.0%........41.8%

(Maybe not spaced the same but in the same order.)

 

AB4N -- reword and re-submit.

 

NFA -- Reviewers archiving lame virtual caches does not sound like a good idea to me. How about all the lame traditional caches? And some cachers LIKE lame caches as they are not into 8 mile hikes or searching hours for the pine cone cache in the middle of a pine tree forest or finding the micro hidden inside the eye of a needle. Who are we to judge the value of a cache?

 

Rengade Knight -- I think I agree with you that a possible solution to the virtual problem is to either shut them down or to completely open the floodgates.

 

As I mentioned in my response to RK virtual caches seem to exist on a slippery slope along two dimensions: 1. Wow <----> Lame, 2. Have them <----> Get rid of them. If TPTB decide to keep virtuals (which I would support) it might be time to get rid off all but the most obvious quidelines (e.g., animal carcasses).

 

I have enjoyed (most of) the discussion!

 

(Edited for typos.)

Edited by OzGuff
Link to comment
Yes, coffee table books are traditionally hardcover books...

Yadda, yadda, yadda... and who was gripping about off topic and getting derailed?

 

This "single cache" subject is on topic. If you haven't noticed the thread title is virtual subjectivity, and that is what it is addressing. If I had started a new thread I would have been flamed for starting it and told that there was already a thread discussing the subject. All the bitching about off topic is off topic.

Regarding commercialism, Mopar is exactly right. Thanks.

 

AB4N, the rest of us were talking about Virtual Subjectivity. The rest of us were talking about ways to re-write the virtual cache guidelines to make them clearer. You jumped in and asked people to look at your cache and tried to drum up support for its approval. Feel free to take that to it's own topic.

 

By the way, you are telling two moderators that "All the bitching about off topic is off topic." Two moderators are telling you that your posts are off topic. If you want to suggest ideas of ways to redo the guidelines then feel free to contribute. If you want to drum up support for your cache, then take it to a new topic.

Link to comment
The rest of us were talking about ways to re-write the virtual cache guidelines to make them clearer.

Commendable goal. Can anyone clarify for us:

- the trad-can't-be-placed-here criterion. How is nearby defined? I am mostly talking wilderness areas and NPs. Does the fact that you can place a trad within 25 miles drive, or 5 hour hike, mean that one must submit a multi instead of a virt? How far is too far to necessitate a multi conversion?

- the trad-can't-be-placed-here criterion #2. Is it sufficient? Or you still have to prove that your virt is neither a mountain nor a lake, etc. Again I am thinking wilderness and NPs, where most of the WOW destinations belong to generic categories of rock formations, waterfalls, trees etc. This locations are not unique in the same limited sense which dictates that the Tomb of the Unknown is not unique because there are millions of other grave markers. An example: is the oldest known bristlecone pine unique, or is it yet another specimen of vegetation?

- the must-use-GPS-to-find criterion. Does it mean that the WOW destination must have no trail signs etc.? Does it mean that the route there must be unpublished on the Internet? Does it mean that it must be unlabelled on topo maps? Does it mean that it must be so small that the seekers are unlikely to find it when they reach the general cache area using a map? ( I am afraid that by requiring the virtual location to be virtually unknown and virtually invisible, you virtually guarantee that this won't master a WOW treshold :P )

Link to comment
Can anyone clarify for us:

- the trad-can't-be-placed-here criterion. How is nearby defined? I am mostly talking wilderness areas and NPs. Does the fact that you can place a trad within 25 miles drive, or 5 hour hike, mean that one must submit a multi instead of a virt? How far is too far to necessitate a multi conversion?

- the trad-can't-be-placed-here criterion #2. Is it sufficient? Or you still have to prove that your virt is neither a mountain nor a lake, etc. Again I am thinking wilderness and NPs, where most of the WOW destinations belong to generic categories of rock formations, waterfalls, trees etc. This locations are not unique in the same limited sense which dictates that the Tomb of the Unknown is not unique because there are millions of other grave markers. An example: is the oldest known bristlecone pine unique, or is it yet another specimen of vegetation?

- the must-use-GPS-to-find criterion. Does it mean that the WOW destination must have no trail signs etc.? Does it mean that the route there must be unpublished on the Internet? Does it mean that it must be unlabelled on topo maps? Does it mean that it must be so small that the seekers are unlikely to find it when they reach the general cache area using a map? ( I am afraid that by requiring the virtual location to be virtually unknown and virtually invisible, you virtually guarantee that this won't master a WOW treshold :D )

well it looks like the admins all duck these questions, and nobody wanta to take responsibility and to say "YES if you fullfill these criteria, it's gotta be approved".

So I decided to take an extreme approach & hammer every nail & satisfy every whim & I just got this decrepit mine dump in the middle of nowhere approved as my 1st virtual cache. Feels better. But the very way it stands out from the older virtuals makes me think that the current virtual approval criteria are deeply flawed... as if we didn't know.

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...