Jump to content

Too Many Rules! I'm Switching To Navicache.com


cacherats
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Geocaching.com has too many rules for cache placement. Several times after creating a new cache, I've had trouble getting it listed on the site, and never for any good reason. The lastest cache wasn't approved because at 261 feet, they told me, it was too close to another cache that I didn't even know about! As a result, I listed the cache on Navicache.com instead, and it was immediately accepted.

 

They have pages and pages of rules, most of which are completely unneccessary. My conclusion: the management of this site is taking itself far too seriously and has forgotten that geocaching is a recreational activity that is meant to be fun, not an exercise in beaurocracy!

 

I have decided not to use this site anymore. Navicache.com has most of the same cache listings, including some that are not found on this site, and it is a much friendlier organization. Join me in rejecting the self-important beaurocracy that geocaching.com has become!

 

Nathan Chronister

Link to comment
...They have pages and pages of rules, most of which are completely unneccessary....

I agree that GC.com has a buch of rules that don't need to exist at all. However are there any other than the distance rule that you think fit this catagory?

 

In posting a note such as this you should provide useful information that GC.com can use if they so choose. It also gives a chance for other geocachers to discuss the issue with more focus than in general terms. Both benifit GC.com and geocaching as a whole.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

My impression is that this site has rules for a reason. For example, the proximity rule came about in part because people would at times find the wrong cache when two were very close together. Other rules are in response to landowner concerns etc. To avoid listing problems, it is best to read the guidelines first. With proximity, all you need to do is look up other caches that are close to where you are placing your cache and check the distance with your GPS before placing. If it is something hard to tell, like close to the final stage of a multi, simply moving the cache some should not be very difficult.

 

As for too many rules, at times I worry about other listing sites not having enough. For example, Nebraska and other states require permits on some state lands. I would hope that other sites would not list caches placed without a permit because that causes headaches for the locals who are working with land managers, who get annoyed to see caches listed that are against their policies. I fear that some of those likely get listed though, which I feel is bad for caching in general.

 

Anyway, obviously you are free to disagree with the rules and choose which listing services to use, just as the sites are free to set their rules.

Link to comment

as for the distance rule, I am placing a multi right now and i placed the first one like 230 feet away from a existing cache. I didnt think of it at the time, once i did remember it i thought i was further away. but i decided to see if a exception could be made cause a big reason for the distance rule is to limit crowiding, but in my area there isnt a crowding problem. it was shot down. i can easily find another spot, the rules are there for a reason. although i think in a area that doesnt have a lot of caches the distance rule could be flexed a bit but in my opinion all the other rules are good.

 

see you shouldnt have a problem listing a cache as long as its not buried, is a ammo box with wierd wires coming out of it on the white house lawn, or on private property.

 

my $.02

 

aj

Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

We live in a free forum, Navicache can appear. :lol:

To be honest the rules are in place for a reason, fair enough if you don't like them, go to the other sites.

Although I think most people here would agree that the other sites pale in comparision to GC.com...

Link to comment

I remember once that N-word occurred in one of my posts. When I submitted it, I received a message that my post contained a banned word and therefore it has to be reviewed by a moderator before it appears in the thread. I found it really ridiculous.

Link to comment

The other site was filtered in the past because of the group of folks that constantly spammed our forums trying to advertise the other site. Since it has calmed down the ban has been lifted.

 

If it gets out of hand again, we will reinstall the ban or whatever you call it.

Link to comment
I remember once that N-word occurred in one of my posts. When I submitted it, I received a message that my post contained a banned word and therefore it has to be reviewed by a moderator before it appears in the thread. I found it really ridiculous.

As far as I know, the site hasn't censored that word for quite some time.

 

Edit: Jeremy beat me to it and explained it better. :lol:

Edited by carleenp
Link to comment
The other site was filtered in the past because of the group of folks that constantly spammed our forums trying to advertise the other site. Since it has calmed down the ban has been lifted.

 

If it gets out of hand again, we will reinstall the ban or whatever you call it.

Thanks for clarifying.

Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

That's funny, I haven't seen such thing happen since you joined the site. Care to point us to all the examples?

While you're looking, I'll point to the 19 pages of threads that contain the word "navicache".

 

[edit] man, I get up for a minute in the middle of posting and by the time I come back and hit send the whole world beat me to it!

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

That's funny, I haven't seen such thing happen since you joined the site. Care to point us to all the examples?

I should point you to the posts that were censored out? Very funny.

Link to comment

I have decided not to use this site anymore. Navicache.com has most of the same cache listings, including some that are not found on this site, and it is a much friendlier organization.  Join me in rejecting the self-important beaurocracy that geocaching.com has become!

 

Nathan Chronister

Well, at the risk of sounding unfriendly, don't let the door hit ya in the .........

 

And if you aren't going to use the site anymore, DON'T use it. Ask TPTB to ban your account. Archive all your caches first. In your case it shouldn't take long.

 

Stick to finding the caches listed on sites you LIKE.

 

One little note. This site handles more new caches and cache logs in one day then all the other listing sites combined handle in a year. When the day comes they are as big as this one (hey, maybe you'll help that!), they will have to have just as many rules.

 

Most of the rules here are for the preservation of the game. Sorry it's too hard for you you walk 500ft from one cache to the next. Good luck!

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

That's funny, I haven't seen such thing happen since you joined the site. Care to point us to all the examples?

I should point you to the posts that were censored out? Very funny.

And I pointed out close to 500 different threads where it was NOT censored. Perhaps it wasn't the word that was censored in your case but the context you used it in?

Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

That's funny, I haven't seen such thing happen since you joined the site. Care to point us to all the examples?

I should point you to the posts that were censored out? Very funny.

I guess I should point out that you were NOT censored. I just did a quick search and found this thread:

Yes, thanks. I also know one or two but I thought you people might have better tips.The censorship thing surprises me, however.

OK, let's try if this would be censored: www.navicache.com :lol:

Link to comment

Look, Mopar, Jeremy just confirmed that there WAS a ban for that word. Consequently, certainly a number of posts containing that word were deleted. So stop being cocky, OK? I don't know what you want to achieve here but your efforts are pointless.

Link to comment
And if you aren't going to use the site anymore, DON'T use it. Ask TPTB to ban your account. Archive all your caches first. In your case it shouldn't take long.

And why should he? He can be a member of both sites and use both. He can use this site for traditional caches and navicache for virtuals or whatever.

Link to comment
Look, Mopar, Jeremy just confirmed that there WAS a ban for that word. Consequently, certainly a number of posts containing that word were deleted. So stop being cocky, OK? I don't know what you want to achieve here but your efforts are pointless.

The word was not banned. That was your word. For a period of time (for reasons Jeremy explained) the word triggered your post to be reviwed by a mod before posting. If it wasn't a problem the post was put through. You say you were censored for using the word "navicache". I pointed out that you were not. Your post went through. What is YOUR problem?

Link to comment
And if you aren't going to use the site anymore, DON'T use it. Ask TPTB to ban your account. Archive all your caches first. In your case it shouldn't take long.

And why should he? He can be a member of both sites and use both. He can use this site for traditional caches and navicache for virtuals or whatever.

Because he said "I have decided not to use this site anymore.", not "I have decided to use navicache to list caches in banned parks and stuff".

Sure, he CAN be a member of both sites, no problem with that. Lots of people are.

However, since he's not going to use this site anymore according to him, his cache hides should be archived here and his account deactivated. This way they aren't blocking another cacher from hiding a cache there, just like he's complaining about now.

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment
Navicache.com has most of the same cache listings, including some that are not found on this site

 

Not true for me at least. When I did a search they came up with 159 caches, only 12 of those Caches are with in 20 miles of me, The rest are 27.2 miles out to 498.7 miles.

I like that I can go less than 5 miles and find 20 or more caches where as driving 100 miles+ for recreational activities is a little far for me.

As for the rest of your post I think you should stop feeling so picked on and just have fun with this game that has rules, just like any other game.

 

So You have fun with Navicache.com and I'll stay here where the management has so much fun picking on us and all that.:lol:;)

Edited by BAF
Link to comment
My impression is that this site has rules for a reason. For example, the proximity rule came about in part because people would at times find the wrong cache when two were very close together. Other rules are in response to landowner concerns etc. To avoid listing problems, it is best to read the guidelines first. With proximity, all you need to do is look up other caches that are close to where you are placing your cache and check the distance with your GPS before placing. If it is something hard to tell, like close to the final stage of a multi, simply moving the cache some should not be very difficult.

 

As for too many rules, at times I worry about other listing sites not having enough. For example, Nebraska and other states require permits on some state lands. I would hope that other sites would not list caches placed without a permit because that causes headaches for the locals who are working with land managers, who get annoyed to see caches listed that are against their policies. I fear that some of those likely get listed though, which I feel is bad for caching in general.

 

Anyway, obviously you are free to disagree with the rules and choose which listing services to use, just as the sites are free to set their rules.

cacherats said -

The lastest cache wasn't approved because at 261 feet, they told me, it was too close to another cache that I didn't even know about!

 

That indicates that TPTB knew where the other cache was. We have 2 caches around here that are only a few hundred feet apart because the senior cache is a mystery cache with the listed coordinates about 5 miles away. The junior cache placer didn't know the other cache was there and evidently neither did the reviewer. This leads me to believe that the reviewers don't have a magic list of the locations of final multi's or mysteries. They depend on the published coordinates just like us peons do.

 

If that is the case then your point is well taken. Cacherats placement would not have disapproved unless there were published coordinates showing the other cache being close. I have little sympathy for someone who doesn't do their research. You may not like the rules and you can argue to change them but as long as the rules are there you have to follow them. Them's the rules.

 

P.S. Notice how I gracefully steered the posting back toward the topic without insulting anyone before the thread got pushed to Off Topic? What does censoring have to do with Geocaching? :lol:

Link to comment

I'm all for freedom of choice and I actually would love it if there was a nonprofit organization setting up the rules and having a great listing site that would be the central listing site for geocaching, instead of a commercial site. Hopefully geocachers will organize themselves so that one day this will become reality.

Link to comment

Yeah, I've found that in the areas that I haved searched, Navicache has only a tiny fraction of the number of caches that this stie has. And while rules just for the sake of rules are obviously a bad thing, most if not all of the rules here have been instituted for legitimate reasons.

 

I can even understand the opinion that certain rules could be "flexed", as you put it, in certain circumstances, but that ends up being a slippery slope. In any case, you might make a better argument for flexxing the distance rule if you were trying for 500 ft instead of the required 528', but 261'? That's not even close to the requirement.

 

In any case, I hope you enjoy caching "over there" at navicache. My concern, along with alot of others', is that the lack of any rules on sites like that can do irreperable<sp?> damage to the sport, thereby hurting both us and them. That's why, even though it may be a bit more work, my caches will only be listed here. That at least guarentees some sort of standards.

Link to comment
The other site was filtered in the past because of the group of folks that constantly spammed our forums trying to advertise the other site. Since it has calmed down the ban has been lifted.

 

If it gets out of hand again, we will reinstall the ban or whatever you call it.

Yupp! Duane and crew, are not around! :lol: There is a "Geogod". ;) I just checked the "other" site, and did a search on them, they are "only unregistered guests" on that site.

Hopefully, anyone who post the "Navicache" name will use it in a positive way, and not bash this site with it. Some rules, are worth having. :lol: Good job Jeremy , keep it a family site, and I'll be around a lot longer ;) . SF1

Link to comment
The lastest cache wasn't approved because at 261 feet, they told me, it was too close to another cache that I didn't even know about!

 

...

 

 

Nathan Chronister

You seem to be upset because you didn't research your placement.

 

All you have to do is run a search for nearest caches to the co-ords of your newest palcement. Should take less than two minutes.

 

If you were ignorant of the existing cache would you be more accepting of GC's decision if your new one were 100 feet away? 10 feet away?

 

 

Give the rest of the players a break, man. There are millions of square miles available to hide caches and you want to start a boycott based on tenth of a mile?

Link to comment
The junior cache placer didn't know the other cache was there and evidently neither did the reviewer. This leads me to believe that the reviewers don't have a magic list of the locations of final multi's or mysteries.

 

That's why the TPTB now require all multis submitted, include every stage be listed in " their notes", when they review a new cache! One more reason for a rule :lol: being in place.

 

It would be confusing, starting at cache GC1234 and finishing at cache GC3456, because you picked up a part of another cache. Which one would you be logging a find on.

SF1

Link to comment
Geocaching.com has too many rules for cache placement. Several times after creating a new cache, I've had trouble getting it listed on the site, and never for any good reason. The lastest cache wasn't approved because at 261 feet, they told me, it was too close to another cache that I didn't even know about! As a result, I listed the cache on Navicache.com instead, and it was immediately accepted.

 

They have pages and pages of rules, most of which are completely unneccessary. My conclusion: the management of this site is taking itself far too seriously and has forgotten that geocaching is a recreational activity that is meant to be fun, not an exercise in beaurocracy!

 

I have decided not to use this site anymore. Navicache.com has most of the same cache listings, including some that are not found on this site, and it is a much friendlier organization. Join me in rejecting the self-important beaurocracy that geocaching.com has become!

 

Nathan Chronister

Please remember to use the official Geocicde form created by our Very own RK.

 

I [state your moniker here] no longer wish to participate in geocaching.

 

After [check the traumatic life altering event below]

 

[ ] My cache was denied.

[ ] I was flamed in the forums.

[ ] I got an email.

[ ] Saw a light path near a cache.

[ ] I found a lame cache.

[ ] Realized fair trades means me.

[ ] My ‘big uns’ signature item was ruled not family friendly.

 

I have come to the conclusion that. [check your conclusion below]

 

[ ] The admins suck

[ ] Geocaching.com sucks

[ ] The forum regulars suck

[ ] All threads that start with Woo Hoo suck.

[ ] Jeremy sucks.

[ ] Everybody but me sucks.

 

Because of this [check your reason for resentment below]

 

[ ] Blatant disrespect for my sensitive nature.

[ ] Utter lack of bowing and groveling at my feet.

[ ] Lack of acknowledgment that my new idea is better.

[ ] Display of online attention directed at me.

 

I can no longer participate in geocaching and/or these forums. As far as my caches go you can [select final cache disposition]

 

[ ] Archive them and make them into cache litter.

[ ] Adopt them to people who care.

[ ] Divide them up like the bickering slobs that you are.

[ ] Let me list them on another site.

[ ] Stuff them where the sun don’t shine.

 

As a final note just let me say that. [choose your parting shot from those provided below]

 

[ ] This has been the worst experience of my life.

[ ] It’s been really fun and I’m not sure why I’m going but it’s something I must to do be true to myself.

[ ] That will teach you, you rat bastards.

[ ] I’m not going to tell you the story why I left even thought I made this big long suicide note for the forums.

[ ] You can kiss my a__.

 

Signed [insert your moniker here]

Link to comment

You forgot to file an official notice

[state your moniker here] no longer wish to participate in geocaching.

 

After [check the traumatic life altering event  below]

 

[  ] My cache was denied.

[  ] I was flamed in the forums.

[  ] I got an email.

[  ] Saw a light path near a cache.

[  ] I found a lame cache.

[  ] Realized fair trades means me.

[  ] My ‘big uns’ signature item was ruled not family friendly.

 

I have come to the conclusion that.  [check your conclusion below]

 

[  ] The admins suck

[  ] Geocaching.com sucks

[  ] The forum regulars suck

[  ] All threads that start with Woo Hoo suck.

[  ] Jeremy sucks.

[  ] Everybody but me sucks.

 

Because of this [check your reason for resentment below]

 

[  ] Blatant disrespect for my sensitive nature.

[  ] Utter lack of bowing and groveling at my feet.

[  ] Lack of acknowledgment that my new idea is better.

[  ] Display of online attention directed at me.

 

I can no longer participate in geocaching and/or these forums.  As far as my caches go you can [select final cache disposition]

 

[  ] Archive them and make them into cache litter.

[  ] Adopt them to people who care.

[  ] Divide them up like the bickering slobs that you are.

[  ] Let me list them on another site.

[  ] Stuff them where the sun don’t shine.

 

As a final note just let me say that. [choose your parting shot from those provided below]

 

[  ] This has been the worst experience of my life.

[  ] It’s been really fun and I’m not sure why I’m going but it’s something I must to do be true to myself.

[  ] That will teach you, you rat bastards.

[  ] I’m not going to tell you the story why I left even thought I made this big long suicide note for the forums.

[  ] You can kiss my a__.

 

Signed [insert your moniker here]

I quit notice thread

Link to comment
Please remember to use the official Geocicde form created by our very own RK.

Maybe I've missed it, but I've always had the secret desire to be the first to use this form.

 

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

 

[ ] All threads that start with Woo Hoo suck.

 

I wonder how many people know this reference.

Link to comment
Navicache.com has most of the same cache listings, including some that are not found on this site...

If you say so...

 

I just did a search from my zip code on both sites. Within 100 miles of me:

 

Geocaching.com lists 669 caches (wow, I thought it was only 500 or so)

Navicache.com lists 2

 

Gee, I wonder which site I should use? :lol:

 

Rules are necessary for any activity. If I don't like the rules, I can ask that they be changed. I've even done that several times around here because I want to participate rather than just be a spectator. If you don't vote, then you shouldn't complain about who's running the country. Same thing here, if you haven't made constructive suggestions, then don't complain about overbearing rules.

Link to comment

If you do decide to list your caches with navicache.com, please make their name prominent on your cache, so as not to be confused with the larger organization, geocaching.com. The rules that geocaching.com require, as stringent as they may seem to you right now, protect us all from a lot of grief. Navicache, with its far fewer number of caches, does not have the name recognition of geocaching.com, for good or bad, but a poorly placed or inappropriate cache will most likely generate bad publicity for geocaching in general. Being the bigger organization, geocaching.com will get the bulk of the bad publicity, unless navicache.com resolves the issue with the complaining party. They will only be able to do that if they are prominently listed on the cache as the sole list manager of the cache. Thanks for this consideration, because I'm sure there are enough complaints running through the main offices of the Powers; they needn't have to front efforts to deal with a competing site's less stringent requirements. Good luck.

Edited by Metaphor
Link to comment
Look, Mopar, Jeremy just confirmed that there WAS a ban for that word. Consequently, certainly a number of posts containing that word were deleted. So stop being cocky, OK? I don't know what you want to achieve here but your efforts are pointless.

Man, and to think the forums were so boring the last couple of days. Why do yo question someone else's motives? What are yours? What do you want to achieve? Do you just want to hear yourself yell? Do you think this is better than closing the door behind you? Be gracious, please, you're getting all emotional. :lol:

Link to comment

Aaah, and what would Labor Day weekend be like without at least one heart felt geocide, hehehe. I still do not understand what drives people to the point of cashing out and then telling everyone about it. This is, after all, A GAME not a race to save the world. Lighten-up, play by the rules or find another hobby, life is way to short to agonize over a game ...

Link to comment

wow - every one want to beat on this guy - well I guess I am going to join the party.

 

with only 3 caches hidden and only 17 caches found - and only one posting on the forums - what is your problem - get out there and find some caches instead of bitching about what you can't get done. Hey - you signed on here and read the rules or ignored them - like the guy said - if you don't like my apples - go next door and eat their apples -

 

geeeesshh!

Link to comment
I surprised to see the name of another listing site to appear here. Posts like this have usually been censored out immediately.

That's funny, I haven't seen such thing happen since you joined the site. Care to point us to all the examples?

While you're looking, I'll point to the 19 pages of threads that contain the word "navicache".

 

[edit] man, I get up for a minute in the middle of posting and by the time I come back and hit send the whole world beat me to it!

I havnt gone back and tried to find where as77 joined or when the ban on spelling out Navicache was lifted. Not taking sides here, but as77 stated a fact that there was a censorship/ban in effect a little while back. He evidently hasnt come across the N word until now. So he missed seeing it a few times, big deal. He didnt say anything derogatory or inflammatory towards anyone! Not sure why Mopar came back so heavy on him in the first place. :lol:

 

The rules are here for a reason. Some we may find rediculous but believe me, the Geocaching folks are doing what they think will help the hobby/sport prosper. Does anyone really think they are intentionally trying to run people off and ruin a good business by making them mad? Heck NO!

Link to comment

I have to agree that the original poster was being kinda ridiculous for getting mad about not being able to post a cache less than 500 feet away, but Mopar, you really are an a**!

 

gc.com does have some stupid rules, and i find alot of the moderators to be just plain jerks. but i like the sport and i like the site in general..

 

in closing i think this topic needs to be locked/closed.

Link to comment
...The rules are here for a reason. Some we may find rediculous but believe me, the Geocaching folks are doing what they think will help the hobby/sport prosper. Does anyone really think they are intentionally trying to run people off and ruin a good business by making them mad? Heck NO!

Most of the rules are good for the RASH. Some of the rules are there for the benifit of this site. A few more could be pruned and probably hurt neither the site nor the RASH.

 

It would be nice to know where the rules came from. No Digging is purportedly from the NPS ban. But other than forum lore where do you learn that? Why 528'? Why not 497, 322, or 1024? That number came from somewhere. Is the sole reason because it's the point where your GPS flips from decimal miles to feet? Is it because that was about the accuracy under SA so we can still find caches with no confusion if SA is turned back on?

 

In my line of work I deal with one heck of a lot of stupid rules. Every time I challenge them and dig I find the reason the rule is there. Knowing that makes me more effective in my job.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...