Jump to content

Should This Cache Be Allowed?


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

I would be interested to read the exact response you received, kayak.

Had to hunt down my old email for it but finally found it.

 

Here is the quote:

Thanks for the email. Based on the guidance we have been given for

approving virtuals, it doesn't seem like this one is unique enough for a

virtual cache. I've seen most of the displays and they are nice to look at.

But I've also seen similar displays in other areas, granted they weren't in

airports. I appreciate you checking before you put a lot of time into it

and I'm sorry that it won't fly.

 

I respect his opinion. I disagree, but I respect it.

 

I have read in the forums that if a cache was not allowed by an approver, and you still think it should be, to voice your opinion here. This approver has not approved other caches I tried to make. I mostly understood/agreed with his decisions. I am sorry but I don't agree with this one.

 

1. No physical caches on federal land. So why not a virt!?!?

2. I and many others think these are very unique "sculptures"

3. If you are on a layover here you will never see them.

 

If the approvers in their infinite wisdom still say no to this cache, I will be glad to post the picture of this cache (security risk or not). I think most people will get a chuckle out of it.

 

Kayakanimal

Link to comment

Um, how do you get a GPS coordinate inside a parking garage? :blink:

Sorry...that is going to be one of the "skills" for this cache. If I gave away what you needed to do here (if the cache ever got approved) it would give it away. This will not just be a "walk to these cords and see the whatever".

Um, so it won't be geocaching. If you don't need your GPS, then it's not geocaching. As Keystone says, you just follow the big signs to the parking lot. The waypoint web sites would not accept these submissions either. Since you won't give any idea of what is going on to make it a cache it would appear to be just another sculpture submission that you cannot even use a GPS to find.

 

Granted, I know there are offset caches and all, but walking up to coordinates and finding a virtual target or a tupperware box IS geocaching.

Link to comment
Airports are the most boring place you can spend a few hours at, and if you can kill some time by going looking for a piece of art - isn't that great????

WOW...someone gets my point. This is suppose to be fun. If you don't think this cache would be fun to you then DON'T DO IT!. Simple.

Link to comment

Um, how do you get a GPS coordinate inside a parking garage? :blink:

Sorry...that is going to be one of the "skills" for this cache. If I gave away what you needed to do here (if the cache ever got approved) it would give it away. This will not just be a "walk to these cords and see the whatever".

Um, so it won't be geocaching. If you don't need your GPS, then it's not geocaching. As Keystone says, you just follow the big signs to the parking lot. The waypoint web sites would not accept these submissions either. Since you won't give any idea of what is going on to make it a cache it would appear to be just another sculpture submission that you cannot even use a GPS to find.

 

Granted, I know there are offset caches and all, but walking up to coordinates and finding a virtual target or a tupperware box IS geocaching.

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Edited by kayakanimal
Link to comment
That was not the reason it was not allowed.

Yes. But you don't tell us WHY it wasn't allowed and since we can't see the cache page we have to guess.

 

Possible guesses may include but are not limited to:


  •  
     
     
  • too close to federal property
     
     
     
  • maintainance issues
     
     
     
  • low WOW! factor
     
     
     
  • could be used as a stage in a multi
     
     
     
  • grandfathered caches are not a reason to allow new caches with particular issues
     
     
     

1. It is ON federal property.

2. NO maintenance issues in a Virt.

3. I think (any many other people) these sculptures are cool.

4. If was a multi you would have to leave the airport (trying to stay away from that so travelers don't have that problem).

5. The reason I was told that this cache would not be allowed was because (this is NOT an exact quote) GC was going away from caches that do not have a log book.

I am familiar with the location (and I'm quite sure the approver is as well) and kayakanimal is correct in all his assertions. However, the statues in question, although cute, clearly lack the WOW factor required of a virtual, IMHO. I agree that it would make a nice diversion during a layover, but it just doesn't cut it as a virtual. Just my opinion.

which one of the 9 in that area are you talking about?

While I can't be sure which of the statues in the OIA parking garage you're talking about, I'm fairly familiar with the raccoons, bears, pigs, whatever, and just don't think those, or anything of that type rates a virtual. What I was trying to say was that, knowing the location to the degree I do, I don't think any of the points Bons brought up are an issue except the subjective one of the WOW factor. You asked and that's my opinion.

Link to comment
That was not the reason it was not allowed.

Yes. But you don't tell us WHY it wasn't allowed and since we can't see the cache page we have to guess.

 

Possible guesses may include but are not limited to:


  •  
     
     
     
  • too close to federal property
     
     
     
     
  • maintainance issues
     
     
     
     
  • low WOW! factor
     
     
     
     
  • could be used as a stage in a multi
     
     
     
     
  • grandfathered caches are not a reason to allow new caches with particular issues
     
     
     
     

1. It is ON federal property.

2. NO maintenance issues in a Virt.

3. I think (any many other people) these sculptures are cool.

4. If was a multi you would have to leave the airport (trying to stay away from that so travelers don't have that problem).

5. The reason I was told that this cache would not be allowed was because (this is NOT an exact quote) GC was going away from caches that do not have a log book.

I am familiar with the location (and I'm quite sure the approver is as well) and kayakanimal is correct in all his assertions. However, the statues in question, although cute, clearly lack the WOW factor required of a virtual, IMHO. I agree that it would make a nice diversion during a layover, but it just doesn't cut it as a virtual. Just my opinion.

which one of the 9 in that area are you talking about?

While I can't be sure which of the statues in the OIA parking garage you're talking about, I'm fairly familiar with the raccoons, bears, pigs, whatever, and just don't think those, or anything of that type rates a virtual. What I was trying to say was that, knowing the location to the degree I do, I don't think any of the points Bons brought up are an issue except the subjective one of the WOW factor. You asked and that's my opinion.

Yes I did. And thanks.

 

On another note...

I remember reading some where that one of these things won some kind of award...I will try to find it if I can.

Link to comment

Um, how do you get a GPS coordinate inside a parking garage? :blink:

Sorry...that is going to be one of the "skills" for this cache. If I gave away what you needed to do here (if the cache ever got approved) it would give it away. This will not just be a "walk to these cords and see the whatever".

Um, so it won't be geocaching. If you don't need your GPS, then it's not geocaching. As Keystone says, you just follow the big signs to the parking lot. The waypoint web sites would not accept these submissions either. Since you won't give any idea of what is going on to make it a cache it would appear to be just another sculpture submission that you cannot even use a GPS to find.

 

Granted, I know there are offset caches and all, but walking up to coordinates and finding a virtual target or a tupperware box IS geocaching.

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Sorry I did not explain myself. Your cache has been archived...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be unarchived.

Link to comment

I've almost posted this several times now, but as others have noted, you did ask for opinions, so...

 

From the sound of it, you're wanting people to go to a set of coords on the top floor of the garage, and then proceed to the corresponding point on susbequently lower floors to find the objects in question. (I've never actually been to the airport in question and don't know the "lay of the land", but this seems the most logical approach to the problem.)

 

What worries me about this is that to the security patrols, cameras, and "innocent bystanders" that would undoubtedly notice such activity, this would look awfully suspicious. With suspicion often comes misinterpretation, which can lead to overreaction, particularly where airports are concerned.

 

Despite having existed for several years, Geocaching is still neither well-known nor is it always well-accepted. An unfortunate incident between a geocacher and airport security would certainly do no good for the sport's already weak public image. Sending strangely-behaving, GPS-equipped people into a security-intense area just doesn't seem like that great of an idea to me.

 

The sculptures in question may or may not be very interesting (again, I've never actually been there), but if people are bored during a long stopover in Orlando, reading a book sounds like a good idea.

 

Just my $0.02 on the matter...

Link to comment

Um, how do you get a GPS coordinate inside a parking garage? :blink:

Sorry...that is going to be one of the "skills" for this cache. If I gave away what you needed to do here (if the cache ever got approved) it would give it away. This will not just be a "walk to these cords and see the whatever".

Um, so it won't be geocaching. If you don't need your GPS, then it's not geocaching. As Keystone says, you just follow the big signs to the parking lot. The waypoint web sites would not accept these submissions either. Since you won't give any idea of what is going on to make it a cache it would appear to be just another sculpture submission that you cannot even use a GPS to find.

 

Granted, I know there are offset caches and all, but walking up to coordinates and finding a virtual target or a tupperware box IS geocaching.

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Sorry I did not explain myself. Your cache has been archived...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be unarchived.

Was this suppose to be something funny? Sorry...I missed your dry humor.

Link to comment
I've almost posted this several times now, but as others have noted, you did ask for opinions, so...

 

From the sound of it, you're wanting people to go to a set of coords on the top floor of the garage, and then proceed to the corresponding point on susbequently lower floors to find the objects in question. (I've never actually been to the airport in question and don't know the "lay of the land", but this seems the most logical approach to the problem.)

 

What worries me about this is that to the security patrols, cameras, and "innocent bystanders" that would undoubtedly notice such activity, this would look awfully suspicious. With suspicion often comes misinterpretation, which can lead to overreaction, particularly where airports are concerned.

 

Despite having existed for several years, Geocaching is still neither well-known nor is it always well-accepted. An unfortunate incident between a geocacher and airport security would certainly do no good for the sport's already weak public image. Sending strangely-behaving, GPS-equipped people into a security-intense area just doesn't seem like that great of an idea to me.

 

The sculptures in question may or may not be very interesting (again, I've never actually been there), but if people are bored during a long stopover in Orlando, reading a book sounds like a good idea.

 

Just my $0.02 on the matter...

Thank you.

I do appreciate all opions. They do not have to agree with me.

It really doesn't matter that it is wrong. :blink:

Just kidding.

Thanks for your 2 cents worth.

Link to comment

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Sorry I did not explain myself. Your cache has been archived...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be unarchived.

Was this suppose to be something funny? Sorry...I missed your dry humor.

No humor there at all. That comment was completely serious. You will give no details so there is no way to fairly evaluate your cache. You posted a "note from the reviewer", but you will not post the description from your cache which that note is based on.

 

FYI... I can see archived and unapproved caches, but there is no archived virtual cache near the airport. In fact, the only denied virtual you have is one in your home area about 75 miles south of Orlando. From this account, that is the only unapproved and archived cache I see. It just makes me wonder if there was ever a "cache" at all. Maybe this is why you are being so evasive.

Link to comment

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Sorry I did not explain myself. Your cache has been archived...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be unarchived.

Was this suppose to be something funny? Sorry...I missed your dry humor.

No humor there at all. That comment was completely serious. You will give no details so there is no way to fairly evaluate your cache. You posted a "note from the reviewer", but you will not post the description from your cache which that note is based on.

 

FYI... I can see archived and unapproved caches, but there is no archived virtual cache near the airport. In fact, the only denied virtual you have is one in your home area about 75 miles south of Orlando. From this account, that is the only unapproved and archived cache I see. It just makes me wonder if there was ever a "cache" at all. Maybe this is why you are being so evasive.

You might be able to distract the puppymonster with a big doggy bone, but Mtn-man needs more than that to distract his attention.

 

Hey Mtn-man...look...a yellow jeep :blink:

Link to comment

Sorry I did not explain myself. You need a GPS to find...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be a virt.

 

There are other types of caches...multi...mystery and so on. Not ALL all are walk up to the cords.

Sorry I did not explain myself. Your cache has been archived...that is all of the details I will give....oh and it would be unarchived.

Was this suppose to be something funny? Sorry...I missed your dry humor.

No humor there at all. That comment was completely serious. You will give no details so there is no way to fairly evaluate your cache. You posted a "note from the reviewer", but you will not post the description from your cache which that note is based on.

 

FYI... I can see archived and unapproved caches, but there is no archived virtual cache near the airport. In fact, the only denied virtual you have is one in your home area about 75 miles south of Orlando. From this account, that is the only unapproved and archived cache I see. It just makes me wonder if there was ever a "cache" at all. Maybe this is why you are being so evasive.

Because of the "problems" with virts I directly emailed the local approver so I didn't waste his time if virts wouldn't be approved because the are virts. Are you telling me I should go ahead an post a request for the cache? Sorry, but I don't know who you are. Are you an approver? You have never spelled this out. If so, and you want to hear a detailed description I would be glad to email you.

Kayakanimal

Link to comment

Let's see.... is mtn-man a volunteer for Groundspeak?

 

- his forum signature line says "approver of all trades" and mentions the dreaded "admin brick"

 

- The main index page for the forums lists mtn-man in the moderator list for the following forums: Getting Started, Geocaching Topics, The Hunt/The Unusual, Organized Geocaching and South/Southeast.

 

Perhaps we should make mtn-man a virt. It appears that an encrypted hint may be needed in order to discover his true identity. :huh:

Link to comment
Let's see.... is mtn-man a volunteer for Groundspeak?

 

- his forum signature line says "approver of all trades" and mentions the dreaded "admin brick"

 

- The main index page for the forums lists mtn-man in the moderator list for the following forums: Getting Started, Geocaching Topics, The Hunt/The Unusual, Organized Geocaching and South/Southeast.

 

Perhaps we should make mtn-man a virt.  It appears that an encrypted hint may be needed in order to discover his true identity.  :huh:

if mtn-man can be a virt, can puppymonster be a micro? i do anticipate a problem with placement of the log book though. :P

Edited by uperdooper
Link to comment
Where traditionals are not allowed the normal anti virtual rules should be flat out waived.

 

Agree with you, RK.

I don't. The same rules must still be applied to as far as helping our cachers to be responsible, considerate members of society. No cache should be placed that would place our cachers in danger of setting off security alerts, trespassing on private property, trespassing in secured areas, etc. The standards for placement should still apply on virtuals.

Link to comment

OK...I give up.

You only have to kick me so many time and I learn.

All I wanted was to try to make this little part of the world better for caching.

 

I have not mentioned the approver I was speaking about before now. Tcrow has been very professional about this whole thing. I know he realizes mature adults can agree to disagree. Thanks Tcrow.

 

Thanks to all who have given feedback on this subject (for and against), but now I realize that there was not ever a chance of it getting approved.

 

Thanks again to all those who gave input.

 

Kayakanimal

I consider this matter closed.

Link to comment
Where traditionals are not allowed the normal anti virtual rules should be flat out waived.

 

Agree with you, RK.

I don't. The same rules must still be applied to as far as helping our cachers to be responsible, considerate members of society. No cache should be placed that would place our cachers in danger of setting off security alerts, trespassing on private property, trespassing in secured areas, etc. The standards for placement should still apply on virtuals.

I'm not sure you are understanding the point. Virtuals have rules that don't apply to traditional caches. They have to have a wow factor, they should be part of a multi, they sould be a traditinal cache if possible etc. They should be anything but a virtual if at all possible.

 

However where traditional caches are not allowed all the rules special to virtuals should be waived. In other words no wow factor and no anty virtual bias.

 

The NPS has rules on virtuals as well. They want to make sure they are not on top of a mine shaft or in an area where people should not go. That's fair and expected.

Link to comment

If all caches must be of the Standard Type 1A will geocaching die!

 

Innovative and creative caches must be allowed.

 

For example have I seen a multicache where you don't need a GPS at all, except finding the startpoint. But the loggers hasn't complained about it.

 

More things I have seen:

 

* multicaches where the the first steps have correct coordinates, but if you wanna find the final cache must you answer a couple of easy (but stupid) questions in all of the steps first. With stupid do I mean that the questions were very easy but it was very easy to choose the wrong question. There were questions about how many of each animal did Moses have on his boat: 0, 1 or 2. It is very easy to choose 2, but hey.. It wasn't Moses... So the correct answer is 0.

 

* multicaches where the final coordinate will lead you to the entry of a tunnelsystem where you will have to crawl among spiders to find the cache.

 

* caches where you must solve a crossword, crypto or similar to find the cache.

 

* caches hidden inside buildings, but you can't have it like a stand-alone cache since it doesn't require a GPS. But if you make it a multicache will it be allowed.

 

If all caches should be of the standard type 1A ("hidden under stone in a forest") will Geocaching not survive.

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...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...