Virtual Question

December 19, 2004

I recently submitted a virtual cache for consideration. After a few back and forths with my local reviewer I requested that a higher-up look at it. It was still declined. So here I am, hat in hand, asking the geocaching community what they think.

Here is the cache page:

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

A truly unique monument though the idea behind the statue is even more unique

In 1991 while visiting a rock yard in Carrera, Italy, Francis Jansen found herself drawn to a large piece of marble. She saw the image of a Native American man lying on the ground and felt compelled to release from the rock the image contained within. Nine months later she completed "Transformation Through Forgiveness." The monument symbolizes and acknowledges the significant cultural impact that our Native American heritage has brought us. The plaque attached to the monument's base reads:

This is a tribute to the Native American peoples and stands symbolically for the healing of all wounds, be they physical, emotional, mental, spiritual or environmental.

"Transformation Through Forgiveness" is a call to all Humankind for reconciliation of man's inhumanity to man, & stands in acknowledgment in celebration of the universal understanding, “One whole nation, One whole world.”

May the eagle soar to ever greater heights and envelope human kind into the profoundness of our higher destiny.

Click here for more information on this tribute in stone: Monument to Forgiveness.

To log this cache e-mail me the name of the person who said, "When forgiveness is offered and received, we are reunited in love." A photo of you, the statue and your GPS unit will also suffice as proof you were there. Do not include the answer to the question in your online log.

My first note:

To the best of my knowledge this cache is hidden in accordance with all current geocaching.com guidelines. A Google search did NOT elicit the correct answer. I believe that the statue along with the idea behind the statue has the "Wow" required.

First Reviewer Response:

At this time, your cache submission does not answer the key questions posed in the guidelines : (visit link). Therefore it has been placed on hold pending clarification.
Generally virtual caches are placed in locations where a traditional cache would not be allowed or would be inappropriate, since the virtual prevents a later physical cache being placed within a .1-mile radius of that spot.

Physical caches are the basis of the activity. Virtual caches were created due to the inaccessibility of caching in areas that discourage it. Please keep in mind physical caches are the prime goal when submitting your cache report.

Often a micro cache can be readily placed at or near the same spot submitted as a virtual cache.

That would not only bring people to your special spot but gives them a physical cache to find as well. Here are some excellent ideas for micro caches that could be hidden virtually anywhere: (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link) (visit link)

In places where a physical cache would be inappropriate other sources for numbers for the coordinates to an offset physical cache outside the park can be used to bring people to your special spot and forward them on to a physical cache.

Here's a simple example of an offset cache: (visit link) .

Please don't hesitate to respond with an explanation if it's been misjudged or after you've amended it to meet the guidelines. If you have any questions, go to your cache page and post a reviewer note.

I did ask many other reviewers about the your cache submission, so it's not like I take this lightly. All said, can a physical cache be placed there, or can an offset cache be created using information obtained while visiting this site. One reviewer noted that near where they live there are 40 or so highly similar sculptures meaning the item was fairly commonplace.

Hope you can understand the high standards for virtual cache submissions given that most locations lend themselves to offset caches - which you are most adept at creating.

My response:

PART ONE (Read this first)
I have already responded to your questions about this cache but thought I would post them here too.

I understand that physical caches are top priority at GC.com, and that in order to be listed as a virtual cache certain guidelines have to be followed. I read all pertinent guidelines before submitting this cache and have re-read them again. I suppose my main argument supporting this as a virtual is the "WOW" factor. The statue itself is cool but it is the idea BEHIND the statue that is way cool. I know that it might seem a little transcendental and cool in a 70s sort of way, and I suppose my next request is that we all hold hands and sign songs... This monument is somewhat similar to the Holocaust Museum but on a smaller scale. I am not Native American but have lived close to Cherokee for years and haev many friends you are members of the tribe. There is no doubt that they feel the impact of a couple of hundred years of repression and sufffering. (And I am not seeking reparations!)

As a cultural landmark I think the idea behind the statue has merit, and if it makes a few geocachers think about the Native American situation -- great! The reason I didn't make it a traditional cache was due to the fact that in a year or so the statue will be moving to another locale.

This is NOT a moving/traveling cache, and it is NOT a locationless cache. (With only one example extant only one cacher could log it as a locationless cache.) Here are the guidelines that apply to all cahe submissions:

Can I maintain this virtual cache? Yes. I will keep in contact with the folks in Cherokee to stay informed about the possibility of the statue being relocated.

Will this virtual cache be there for an extended period of time? Yes. The current plan is for the statue to remain in Cherokee through 2005.

Is the cache closer than 528 feet to another cache? No. The closest cache is currently 0.3 miles away.

Is this a vacation cache? No.

Are the cache contents safe? Not applicable.

Is this a commercial cache? No. (Though it does highlight the work of a sculptor who sells her pieces, I am not working as her agent.)

On to the virtual cache specific guidelines:

Is the object permanent or semi-permanent? Yes. It will be in its current location through 2005. When it is moved I should be able to get advance notice so that I can warn folks on the cache page about its imminent move. When the statue is relocated I will get a local cacher at the new location to get coordinaets so I can update the cache page and reactivate it.

Does the object have "WOW"? Yes. I believe it does, both the statue itself and the idea behind the statue. I understand that another reviewer has 40 similar objects close by but I assume that they are statues and not statues with the intent to heal rifts between two groups of people. (This is obviously the most arguable point -- what is "WOW" to me may be boring and mundane to another. I feel that many who visit this location and read the signs posted in the general area will feel something -- it may be "WOW" for some, it may not for others, but they will feel something.)

Is there a question (the answer of which is only attainable by visiting the object) a cacher can answer to prove they were there? Yes. I have Googled both the quote and the person to whom the quote is attributed and can find nothing linking the two.

Would a photo be acceptable? Yes. I have changed the web page to add the acceptance of photos with GPS units.

Will I maintain the virtual cache? Yes. I will keep in contact with the folks in Cherokee. If the statue is moved I will do what is necessary to update the cache page. I will maintain quality control on finds and delete bogus finds as necessary.

I understand the higher standard that virtual caches have to meet. If this cache still fails to meet the standards, so be it. (Of course I am still amazed about virtual caches near Minnie Pearl's gravesite...)

Sorry to have taken up so much of your time! Please remember that it is not so much the statue that has "WOW" but the idea behind the statue.

Thanks!

My next response:

This isn't connected to the two previuos reviewer notes; more just sort of added comments.

I looked at the NC virtual caches listed so far in 2004. I realize that you were not the reviewer for the entire year AND I realize that guidelines (though not necessarily posted on GC.com) for virtuals may have changed AND I realize that previously listed caches do not create precedent. However, it seems to me that only two of them HAD to be virtuals as they were located on National Seashore (NPS) land. Some had historical significance (e.g., NC gold rush, NC military, local legend), some had cultural significance (e.g., Thomas Wolfe's angel, a cool sculpture), and some had true "WOW" from almost any angle (e.g., whirligigs, Loafer's Glory building, Christmas lights). [Though I think the Christmas lights might be stretching it some...] The NC Pottery virtual seems a little out of place but was listed.

Of the non-NPS virtuals listed above all of them could exist as offset caches or parts of multi-caches. But for some reason were listed as virtuals. The guidelines seem to exist as just that -- guidelines.

I feel that making someone leave the Transformation statue to find a micro some distance away diminishes the experience of visiting the statue. I would like it to be just that -- a visit to a cool statue with a cool underlying ideal. No more, no less.

Cheers!

Second Reviewer Response:

After several looks at this cache submission and having it reviewed by other cache reviwers I find no way that this can be listed on geocaching.com under the current guidelines. You are welcome to take this matter to Groundspeak, Inc. (contact@geocaching.com) or to the forums. Perhaps there someone can come up with a suggestion that will work for you. I am sorry but this cache is archived.
Please refer to this excerpt from the guidelines:

--

If your cache has been archived:

First please read the archival log for an explanation. It is a common practice for the approvers to temporarily disable or even archive a submission while they obtain additional details required for its approval. This doesn’t necessarily mean that it won’t be listed. In order to ensure a prompt response when responding to an archival note please click on the Approver’s profile from the cache page and e-mail the approver through Geocaching.com. Replies directly to cache notifications can be delayed considerably.

If you believe that your cache may be questionable, you are encouraged to add a note to the cache page. For example, you could add an explanation in the “notes to reviewer” section such as: "The train tracks running through this park are inactive and have been converted to a rails-to-trails path." The reviewer will read the note and take the information into consideration when approving the cache. Rest assured that notes to reviewers will be removed before the caches are posted. Most caches that are temporarily put on hold or archived are done so due to a lack of information. Having all the relevant information up front during the review process will help ensure a speedy approval.

If your cache has been archived and you wish to appeal the decision, first contact the approver and explain why you feel your cache meets the guidelines. Exceptions may sometimes be made, depending on the nature of a cache. If you have a novel type of cache that “pushes the envelope” to some degree, then it is best to contact your local approver and/or Geocaching.com before placing and reporting it on the Geocaching.com web site. The guidelines should address most situations, but Groundspeak administrators and approvers are always interested in new ideas. If, after exchanging emails with the approver, you still feel your cache has been misjudged, feel free to post a message in the General Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks. If the majority believes that it should be posted, then Groundspeak administrators and approvers may review the listing and your cache may be unarchived.

---

Should you change your mind on making this an offset cache, and completely dropping the notion of a traveling cache in any form, please send me an email to

My next response:

Before I give this one up as a lost cause I would at least like an answer to my last few Reviewer Notes.
Your original "Not Gonna Make It" post had the words "...your cache submission does not answer the key questions posed in the guidelines..." and included a link to those questions. If you read my next three Reviewer Notes I answered all of those questions.

You have not responded to my answers other then to say that a few reviewers looked at it and that was that. I have begun to expect a better response than "No, go away." (And I sure would hate for this to go the way of the great state of Texas...)

Your initial response uses the word "generally" which seems to infer that the guidelines are flexible, and the section about a cache being archived contains the words "Exceptions may sometimes be made". Both seem to lean towards possibilities.

With regard to this being a traveling cache, it is not. It is a cache with set coordinates for a specific object. But the object in question has the potential, some time in the future, to be re-located. Cache guidelines mention "semi-permanent" which this object seems to be. When the object moves I will deactivate the cache until I can get the new coordinates at which time the cache will be reactivated for cachers in a different geographic locale to enjoy.

Again, I understand that virtuals have a higher standard. All I want is the reason (or reasons) that this can't be listed. At the moment all I can figure is that it is a virtual. If that is the reason, fine. But just tell me that.

Huggy -- Just so you know, I plan t

o appeal this after receiving your response. (Assuming it continues to be negative.) I am not doing this to be spiteful I just want someone to tell me why not. Even in the guidelines you quote it says, "Please keep in mind physical caches are the prime goal when submitting your cache report." Not the only goal.

I then e-mailed TPsTB:

After going a couple of rounds with [my local opprover] I would like someone higher up to give me a more succinct explanation of why this virtual cache can't be listed. I understand that virtuals are not the primary goal. I understand that they are held to a higher listing standard. I understand that I will likely not be successful.

However, all I am asking is a better explanation than "No." I would also like folks to understand that the virtual cache object is not really the statue. The statue is the physical manifestation of the philosophical idea. You may have to visit the sight I have provided a link to.

Thanks! I am a happy geocacher who appreciates the work by done by all. I am just a little frustrated at not getting a decent answer/explanation for why this cache doesn't make the cut. "Wow" is pretty subjective. I am sure that I could find something similar in a coffee table book.

Cheers!

Their first response was:

Hello Graeme
I have reviewed your cache and the exchange of information between the local reviewer and you. He has stated clearly the stance on Virtual caches. It is possible to place an offset cache or a multi stage cache with this statue. It may not be what you want but it is the way to get the cache approved.

This is a copy of the original and as such has no unique value. I have been told that you can also see a copy of this statute in the Atlanta Airport.

You stated: "The statue itself is cool but it is the idea BEHIND the statue that is way cool" and "The statue is the physical manifestation of the philosophical idea." A virtual cache is a physical object not a concept or idea. Since it is not unique and a physical could be placed in conjunction with this cache I have to agree with the reviewers decision.

Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.

I then responded to TPsTB:

Upon further reflection:

1. The statue in question is NOT a traveling statue. Yes, it is a replica of the original, but the fact that it is traveling the US visiting Native American locations on its philosophical mission IS unique.

2. There is only one replica of this statue. There is NO replica at the Hartsfield-Atlanta Airport.

3. Though a sweeping generalization -- most if not all virtual caches could be turned into offset caches or included as part of a multi-cache.

4. According to the guidelines, "...new virtual cache proposals are only approved if they meet the all of conditions listed in the guidelines below." In one my reviewer notes I addressed all of the guidelines. I have yet to be given an answer consistent with currently published GC.com guidelines that shows how my cache is not acceptable.

5. Michael stated, "It is possible to place an offset cache or a multi stage cache with this statue." I agree. However, the published guidelines do not say that this type HAS to be used as on offset or multi. In fact, they say, "Physical caches have priority, so please consider adding a micro or making the location a step in an offset or multi-stage cache..." (The italics are mine.) “Priority” seems to suggest that virtuals still have a place but not as prominent. “Consider” seems to suggest that the hider has some say in whether a virtual or a traditional makes more sense at that location. If the published language on GC.com allows for the possibility…

I understand the stance that GC.com seems to have with regard to virtuals. I would just like a response that is consistent with the published guidelines. So far I have not received anything other than “It is my ball and I am going home so that you can’t play with it anymore.”

Thanks for reading this far.

Their response:

Hello Graeme
My response to your email was very consistent with the guidelines. I am sorry it is not the answer you want but it is the answer you requested.

If you still feel your cache has been misjudged, feel free to post a message in the General Forums to see what the geocaching community thinks. If the majority believes that it should be posted, then Groundspeak administrators and approvers may review the listing and your cache may be unarchived.

Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.

If you have read so far, thanks. Please check the link out to the statue in question and let me know -- thumbs up or thumbs down. I can take it...

22k · December 19, 2004

One of these days I'm gonna have to buy me a mouse trap.

3.9k · December 19, 2004

I have to agree with the reviewer. You can use this as an offset cache. Very cool statue by the way!

El Diablo

6.5k · December 19, 2004

I'm with you Ozguff. The feelings that seeing this statue in person and thinking of what it represents would be cheapened by doing some math using info from the plaque and signing a piece of paper in a bison tube or 35mm film can hidden in the shrubs 50 feet away. This one definitly has the asked for WOW factor.

I think TPTB need to either clean up the ambiguous language of the guidelines for getting virts approved or apply them as they stand. It seems that you have satisfied the requirements for them as they are currently written.

Please email me the coords; I want to see this the next time I'm out your way. The heck with the smiley. <_<

December 19, 2004

N 35° 28.965 W 083° 19.033

OK, so the score is 1 For, 1 Against (but with a thumbs up for "WOW") and 1 WTF.

6.4k · December 19, 2004

OK, I need to ask about this line:

. The statue in question is NOT a traveling statue. Yes, it is a replica of the original, but the fact that it is traveling the US visiting Native American locations on its philosophical mission IS unique.

In the 1st sentence you say it's NOT a traveling statue. In the very next line you say it's traveling the US visiting Native American locations.

So, is it a fixed, permanent statue, or isn't it? If I go out there next summer will I find the statue at those coords?

3.8k · December 19, 2004

Sorry,

I'm gonna have to agree with the Approver on this one. It's a nice statue, but not something that I would go "wow" at. If it was in my hometown, I would cruise over to look, once, and then go on about my business.

However, I do agree that they should have given you a reason, and not just "no".

2.1k · December 19, 2004

I'll add an "I'm not sure" to the list <_< . On the one hand I can see the reviewers position. There are lots of neat things around that people might want to see. That doesn't mean there should be a geocache at each one of them. Things could VERY easily get out of line. I personally can't think of a single situation that *couldn't* be part of an offset, or some kind of muti. Virtuals are a lot easier to 'place' than a standard cache, so some might be tempted to make them more and more to push up their numbers. The question is, how do you draw the line. There will always be someone who says, "My cache is at least as cool as that one that was approved, so why wasn't mine".

Of course this make one wonder why virtuals haven't gone the way of the traveling caches. I guess that there may be some very unique situations in which one *might* be approved, but my guess is that pretty much everything is turned down.

Yours does sound pretty cool though, so I think it may be border line.

I'm curious as to when the last virtual was actually approved. Around here, it was GCGH93 (July 25, 2003), and before that, it was GCA5CB (November 8, 2002). Sounds to me like the reason yours wasn't approved is the 'higher standard' thing.

December 19, 2004

Assuming you quoted all the correspondence between you and the approvers and so forth, and if the quotes are accurate, then it appears to me you have met all the current guidelines for placing a virtual. I do not see where you got any responses showing where specifically you did not meet the guidelines. I also don't think that making this an offset cache would be appropriate, so my vote would be for approval.

24.7k · December 19, 2004

Any virtual can be turned into a lame offset cache, or part of a lame multi cache, or yet another micro. Because you can always do that (yes even the NPS can have an offest/multi based on some plaque or feature) I wonder at times why they still have virtuals.

Another comment is that virtuals do not 'block' a traditional cache but for the choice this site makes in how they look at caches. A different choice and all of the sudden virtuals could co-exist with a regular cache.

Rant aside, your cache seem well thought out, provides some background information to help you enjoy the experience and you took the extra time to cross check google for the answer. What you submitted is fine; better than most actually.

9.4k · December 19, 2004

Virtual Question, Any Thoughts?

Yeah, go place a container at the location, then it will be approved

7.2k · December 19, 2004

A few comments.

I was asked about the cache as were several others. There was a misunderstanding regarding the Atlanta airport part. There are about 30 or 40 statues in the walkway between the main terminal and the first concourse. They deal with black heritage and some deal with the stuggles of families dealing with slavery and such. The emotions surrounding the issues would be similar, but the illustration I was trying to bring up is that in sculptures and monuments there is *always* some reason for them being there. That is the reason why they are displayed. Statues are everywhere and therefore are a common item. If you approve this one then you have to list the next one that deals with some healing of issues near and dear to the hearts of some group of people. That is pretty much every statue and monument out there.

This brings me to the issue of uniqueness. Is this the one end-all be-all statue regarding Native American heritage? Your target is not even the original sculpture itself. It is located in Santa Barbara, CA. Your target is mearly a bronze replica of the original. I find this rather interesting as well:

S P O N S O R S H I P

Sponsorship is being invited by corporations, foundations, and individuals to assist in "THE JOURNEY"

These cities, sacred sites, large corporations and foundations, with participation, will have their names added to the inscription on the turtle base. Please inquire.

The monument’s journey has taken it from Wallawa Lake to Southern Oregon State University in Ashland, to “End of the Trail Of Tears” Sponsored by NE State University, Tahlaquah, OK and to North Cherokee Tribe, Cherokee, NC

They are attempting to make this somewhat of a commercial venture to keep it going. Here is another interesting quote from the page you linked:

As the bronze monument journeys, the name of each place it stands will be engraved on the turtle’s back. When the turtle back is completely engraved, this monument will be permanently placed on a site where detriment and great suffering has occurred. Another bronze monument of “Transformation Through Forgiveness” will then be created to continue the journey’s vision... as long as it takes... until the healing is done.

They even say this will not be a one of a kind piece. The are going to keep creating copies of the original sculpture out in CA. On the web page itself it says this is not a unique item and will be reproduced again in the future.

Sorry, but I think it fails based on the points listed above.

December 19, 2004

It is items like this statue that make me hope that virtuals are never done away with.

The purpose of this cache should be experiencing the statue and reflecting on the purpose of the statue. I feel that coming to this statue to then have to hunt down a soggy log in a film can would detract form the experience.

Virtuals allow for a different type of experience and cachers approach them in a different frame of mind. When I approach a virtual I am on the hunt for knowledge and I get the chance to read the plaques and inscriptions at my leisure. While hunting a virtual I am much more relaxed. Many times I get to sit on a bench next to the statue/fountain/monument and read the information, talk about the experience with those around me and watch other's reactions to the virtual.

If the statue is part of a multi it is not the final destination/goal of the hunt and many people will rush off to find the next stage without fully experiencing the statue. I know, I have done this. There is an internal drive(voice) that makes me want to rush to get the cache completed. I never know how long that final stage will take to finish and I cut myself short at the statue to make sure I have enough time to find the cache. As soon as I have the answer to send the hider I am done and I know exactly how much time I have to do whatever I want to do next.

Also, if a Micro is involved the cacher has to be stealthy and inconspicuous in a public area, which is not enjoyable to me. I prefer to visit virtuals in high traffic areas than to try to find a hidden micro. One of my most enjoyable days of caching was in Washington, DC wondering from one virtual to the next.

My vote is to make this statue a virtual because sometimes there are things that are more important to experience than finding a vessel with a slip of paper to sign.

GEO.JOE

December 19, 2004

I'm sorry, but I'm with the reviewers on this one. I'm just not getting that "wow" feeling--although it's a cool sculpture, and certainly thought provoking, I don't think it's that different from various other sculptures that I've seen of Native Americans. I know the artist did this without any formal training or preliminary drawings, which is quite an accomplishment--but, because I have a background in the academic study of fine art, I just can't get past the technical shortcomings of her work (or the misspelling of "carrara" marble). <_<

Edited December 19, 2004 by Team Doggiewoggie

3.1k · December 19, 2004

I like it and see the wow factor but I guess wow is subjective.

I'd like to see it approved.

December 19, 2004

This brings me to the issue of uniqueness. Is this the one end-all be-all statue regarding Native American heritage? Your target is not even the original sculpture itself. It is located in Santa Barbara, CA. Your target is mearly a bronze replica of the original.

I do not think its being a replica makes it less unique and to some it just may be the one end-all be-all statue regarding Native American heritage. Statues (like other works of art) all inspire or touch people in different ways. What may not 'WOW' an approver just may WOW someone else. This particular piece may have added WOW factor to some due to what it represents (Native Americans). As for it being only a replica of the original located in CA that may be, but perhaps there are some in the region of this proposed virtual that would love to see the original, but will never make that trip to California.

I find this rather interesting as well:

S P O N S O R S H I P

Sponsorship is being invited by corporations, foundations, and individuals to assist in "THE JOURNEY"

These cities, sacred sites, large corporations and foundations, with participation, will have their names added to the inscription on the turtle base. Please inquire.

The monument’s journey has taken it from Wallawa Lake to Southern Oregon State University in Ashland, to “End of the Trail Of Tears” Sponsored by NE State University, Tahlaquah, OK and to North Cherokee Tribe, Cherokee, NC

They are attempting to make this somewhat of a commercial venture to keep it going.

I hardly think this is an attempt to make this a commercial venture. Their is a very well known monument in DC. It is a wall to honor those that gave their lives for our country during the Viet Nam War. Recently a replica of this wall (now touring the country) was set up here in my area. We went to see it and the related displays. At each end there were large cans to drop donations to help keep the wall moving. I do not think there intent was to commercialize on our fallen sons and daughters.

They even say this will not be a one of a kind piece. The are going to keep creating copies of the original sculpture out in CA. On the web page itself it says this is not a unique item and will be reproduced again in the future.

To me the questions should be... is it unique to the area that the the virtual cache is looking to be approved? Would it possibly be of unique interest to the people of 'that' particular area. I say yes on both and agree with RK and GEO.JOE ... the submission was well thought out, provided good background on what you were seeking and gave you something to admire and reflect upon.

I will give it another thumbs up vote.

Edited December 19, 2004 by PC Medic

December 19, 2004

OK, I need to ask about this line:
. The statue in question is NOT a traveling statue. Yes, it is a replica of the original, but the fact that it is traveling the US visiting Native American locations on its philosophical mission IS unique.

In the 1st sentence you say it's NOT a traveling statue. In the very next line you say it's traveling the US visiting Native American locations.

So, is it a fixed, permanent statue, or isn't it? If I go out there next summer will I find the statue at those coords?

I think the word "NOT" should not be there. Sorry! The statue IS traveling but pretty darn slowly. The folks at the statue's current location (Cherokee, NC) have told me it should be there through 2005. My plan was to deactivate the cache while it is being moved and then ask a local cacher at the next location to get the coordinates and reactivate it. (Assuming it still meets all then-current GC.com guidelines.)

If Mopar's question relates to the "traveling" nature of the cache, the guidelines mention "semi-permanent or permanent" so this statue qualifies.

December 19, 2004

I'm sorry, but I'm with the reviewers on this one. I'm just not getting that "wow" feeling--although it's a cool sculpture, and certainly thought provoking, I don't think it's that different from various other sculptures that I've seen of Native Americans. I know the artist did this without any formal training or preliminary drawings, which is quite an accomplishment--but, because I have a background in the academic study of fine art, I just can't get past the technical shortcomings of her work (or the misspelling of "carrara" marble).

And "thought provoking" is what I was going for! I may not know Rodin from Rodan but the sculpture IS cool. Maybe I should have loaded shots of the information displays near the statue.

And FWIW, "Carrera" and "Carrara" are both legitimate spellings for that type of marble and the region it is found.

December 19, 2004

This brings me to the issue of uniqueness. Is this the one end-all be-all statue regarding Native American heritage? Your target is not even the original sculpture itself. It is located in Santa Barbara, CA. Your target is mearly a bronze replica of the original.

I do not think its being a replica makes it less unique and to some it just may be the one end-all be-all statue regarding Native American heritage.

ok I know I probably should not even go here, but how can something be a replica and unique??? That word in and of itself means one of a kind, no other like it. Replica means a duplicate..

As for the statue itself and Geocaching not approving it, I think it would be bad form if it was approved. Why you might wonder? Well, read on.... :

http://nativenet.uthscsa.edu/archive/nl/9601/0070.html

http://www.dickshovel.com/JansenPicts.html

http://www.dickshovel.com/WKLAltr.a.html

"...the Lakota people do not wish to have the Francis Jansen sculpture as part of this Bill. The people were not consulted about this sculpture and no one connected with the Wounded Knee community or actual landowners authorized such a sculpture. Should the Park Service insist on locating the sculpture on Wounded Knee lands, the Lakota Nation now and forever disavows any obligation to maintain, protect, and/or preserve such sculpture." Wounded Knee Landowners Association...

Now it is someone interesting that the Landowners will not even allow it to be there and we are going to pick fights because it cannot be a cache?

I wonder if the cache submitter works for the sculpture and is trying to get more people interested in it so that it can be placed where she wanted.. And you must have shot Kennedy!

December 19, 2004

Wow! Looks like ShadowAce has a lot of spare time on his/her hands.

The statue -- a replica of the original -- is unique because it is traveling around the US visiting various Native American locations. The original is currently in Santa Barbara, CA as previously mentioned.

I do not work for nor have I ever met the sculptor/sculptress. I happened to drive by the statue at the current location while doing cache maintenance and thought the staue was cool and the idea -- as presented by display boards at the site -- was even cooler. SA -- Thanks for questioning my integrity without first asking me directly. [sarcasm mode on]With the number of finds and hides I have under my belt I have nothing better to do than place a questionable (to some) pseudo-commercial virtual cache.[/sarcasm mode off]

Just because some of the folks connected with Wounded Knee weren't interested in the original doesn't mean that the entire statue and any copies should be destroyed. (And as we all know there are at least two sides to all stories.) Since the traveling replica has already stopped at a number of Native American sites it appears that not all Native Americans feel the same way about the statue and what it might represent.

One of the points made in the nativenet article referenced by SA is that if a piece of statuary is provided for some future Native American Monument that it should come from the hands of a Native American. Fair enough. But the purpose of this traveling statue is to help heal any rift between Native Americans and those that oppressed/repressed them for centuries. It seems that the fact that this statue comes from the hands of someone who traces their roots to those that oppressed/repressed may make the gesture more meaningful.

But I like the fact that folks are expressing their opinions. It seems that so far the vote is split with a possible bias towards thumbs up. <_<

2.4k · December 19, 2004

I gotta go with the reviewers on this one. It's not unique, it's likely not even going to be the only COPY of the original. If you want to draw cachers to it, hide a cache there. Preferably something waterproof, not a film can.

6.4k · December 19, 2004

I purposely waited to form an opinion, and do some research myself first.

I also came across the same info that Shadow Ace did. I didn't think that info had any direct bearing on it's viability to be a cache. But then again, there was a recent thread about people getting out of shape and offended about a cacher mentioning "family values" in a logbook entry, imagine how offensive THIS is to many Native Americans?

I do think there are enough things that don't meet the guidelines or are on the line enough to go with the thumbs down.

It's not a permanent object. It is a traveling cache (although at such a slow rate, I don't thing thats a problem in itself, but it's still not something generally allowed here).
There appears to be plenty of ways to hide a micro nearby or make it an offset cache. I disagree that combining a physical cache cheapens the virtual aspect. If anything, if the virtual stage is well thought out, it can enhance it. As you proposed in the first post, all you really need to log this as a find is a picture next to the statue. Jump out out of car. Run up. Snatch a pic. Run back to car. By using the info on various plaques in the area creatively, you would encourage force people to spend time at the location, and read all the info and history involved, before they could log a find. If it were local to me, I'd use the info to a native American themed cache nearby. I would probably include some of the info SA mentioned above in the cache itself, so cache finders would get both sides of the story. I think that would enhance the experience way beyond just snapping a photo.
It's not original. It's just a copy of something. I would be much more inclined to consider the original statue a possible virtual then one of several little copies traveling the country.

2.1k · December 19, 2004

On further reflection, I think I'm going to have to change my maybe vote to thumbs down, for the following reasons.

1. I think mtn-man is right, ANY statue is placed for a reason. One can always make an empassioned plea as to why this statue is significant over another, but in the end what is it that makes this one particulary special as opposed to any other statue?

2. Yes this is an iinteresting spot, but what makes it a cache? There are lots and lots of interesting spots on the planet, but what makes it "cache worthy". I don't think this is a problem with your spot per-se, I think this has to do with virtuals in general, which is why I don't think many have been approved in a while.

3. I disagree with the placement of the cache 'cheapening' the experience. I think what you get out of it is entirely up to you. I know at many virtuals I've been to, once I've gotten the requirements for logging it, I generally leave. I've never sat in quiet contemplation of a site, but thats just me. I fail to see the difference between "A Lame Micro" and answering a silly question.

I would however like to know if there is anything special about recent virtuals that have been approved that this one doesn't meet. It certainly complies with "The language of location" ideal, but that doesn't mean its a cache <rumour mongering> perhaps this is one of Groundspeak's future projects </rumour mongering>. I can tell you right now why the most recent virtual around here was approved, it is essentially a Benchmark, but seeing as how its up here in Canada, we don't have Benchmark Hunting, and hence the closest cache type is a virtual.

So, reviewers, what was the most recent virtual you approved? Any particular reason? or were you just feeling generous that day <_< .

December 19, 2004

I think the word "NOT" should not be there. Sorry! The statue IS traveling but pretty darn slowly.

I usually like to agree with the person submitting the virtual, but since you said it is moving, it shouldn't be approved. It's no different than a traveling cache and is therefor not allowed. All of your other points are well thought out and very convincing for your side of the argument!

3.8k · December 19, 2004

...I guess wow is subjective.

Wow is indeed subjective.

I think the wow in the guidelines is subjectively determined through the eyes of very young people. I think this is because, as mentioned above, Groundspeak wants virtuals to truely wow everyone that experiences them.

It's easy for adults to be wowed by concepts and ideas. And because of our diversity and interests, it's easy to agrue about the wow factor. Children are a great way to guage wow. Children are not caught up in the complexities of life.

I think the virtual in question is a very interesting idea, and if it were approved and I was in a position to find it, I certainly would. I'm not too sure a 9 or 10 year old would enjoy it as much as I. So I have to agree that it does not fit into the current guidelines for virtual caches.

I kind of like the idea of a panel of kids determining the wow factor. It brings a little of the kid out in all of us. <_<

1.8k · December 19, 2004

I kind of like the idea of a panel of kids determining the wow factor.

Ooh, ooh, ooh pick me ... pick me ... I'll do it, pick me ...

Edited December 19, 2004 by clearpath

2.1k · December 19, 2004

Well, most people know my thoughts on this subject, assumely. To each their own. Some may say wow. Others may not. Just like any other cache. Physical or not. Placing a log of some sort there, would not add any more "wow" to it. Having a log is an easy way out, in my opinion. How many times do people go directly to the cache, sign the log and move on. Just like in other recent threads about people not trading, many people are going to go directly go to the log, sign and move on to the next 1/1 cache for another number. The owner at least attempted to make it where that you were there, read what the sculpture was about and show proof with photo. No different than any webcam caches placed all around. By supplying proof of your presence to the owner, then it's the same thign as what a physcial container and log would do, even the suggested micro. Some may not even sign the log, which is ok to some owners. Some owners may say at least describe to me what was there or nearby, to prove that they were there which is the same thing as a virtual. Once again, to each their own. some may like it, some may not. First come, first serve, right?

9.2k · December 19, 2004

Any virtual can be turned into a lame offset cache, or part of a lame multi cache, or yet another micro.

Or the person could put some time and thought into it, and actually enhance the cache experience.

2.1k · December 19, 2004

Any virtual can be turned into a lame offset cache, or part of a lame multi cache, or yet another micro.

Or the person could put some time and thought into it, and actually enhance the cache experience.

To one an offset could be lame. To you, one should put an "X" amount of time into it. Both being subjective. Neither is better than the other.

I remember people also saying that caches, espcecially unmaintained ones, shouldn't be removed or archived if they are still there and functioning. it's all subjective. Because someone else may want to place a cache there that will maintain it and make it a better cache than what is already there.

What about a virtual and a physical one in the same place! As we've discussed over and over before about virts being completely seperate from actual physical containers with logs. Virts can be something else and not counted into the totals, or at least into a different total. Yes, like the benchmarks....

I think that will be the only way to bring the twon on different sides of the fence on this subject, in agreement.

Or better yet, require that every cache be physical. No ifs, ands or buts. Allow each current virtual owner a set amount of time to turn their virt in a physical cache. If they don't, then they get archived and open up the doors for others to make it happen, if it can be done. Then hey, if it can't, then make it an offset cache. Include a list of coordinates in the cache for the person to go and virtually check out. Make it a requirement of the offset cache with the proof and the owner can approve the "finds" or not. Even for those on NPS lands.

Edited December 19, 2004 by woodsters

3.9k · December 19, 2004

Well, most people know my thoughts on this subject, assumely.

I didn't know your thoughts before I read your post, and I after reading it I still don't know if you're for or against virtuals. <_<

I'd vote no, this virtual doesn't seem to meet the requirements. The first line in the original post said it was a monument and I immediately thought, "here's another person that thinks their monument is somehow more worthy than the hundreds of other monuments that have been turned down for virtuals."

There are monuments, statues, carvings, etc. all over the world and each of them has a story behind them. None of them are unique because of that.

2.1k · December 19, 2004

I didn't know your thoughts before I read your post, and I after reading it I still don't know if you're for or against virtuals.

hehe....good...that shows no real stance then, huh. I stated that from previous postings back when I was more active in the forums.

I am grateful for any caches placed. I do not go after all of them. Personally I don't care too much for puzzle caches or multi's. Will I do them? Maybe, then maybe not. Depends on the mood and what is available at the time and/or where ever I may be. I typically enjoy a physical cahe myself, especially a micro. I would rather search for a micro that was cleaverly hidden, than to find a piece of broken tupperware, with dirty stuff in it. I really don't care about the swag in it. If my kids are with me then it's different. But I will plan my finds accordingly. Everyone has their own agneda. No ones is any better. Either try to work with them (virts) or get rid of them altogether. If someone wants to list cool places to see or learn something, they can do it on another site somewhere or list their own like a couple of us did on my old website.

2.1k · December 19, 2004

There are monuments, statues, carvings, etc. all over the world and each of them has a story behind them. None of them are unique because of that.

Forgot to note on this as well...this is subjective as well. Caches are the same. The places they put them in make them not unique as well. Especially when one is hidden 528 ft a away in the same forest or on the same mountain. Caches really haven't gotten to "I wanted to bring you to this cool place" anymore. It has gotten to here's another cache, see if you can find it. I have not truly said "wow" at any cache I've been too. Of course if I never saw a hollowed out tree, rock wall, etc, then I might. Have i enjoyed the caches? Yes, each and every one. It was about finding them and not where they were. I've also learned myself around places too. Last year in Massachusetts, I knew the back roads around where we were at like the back of my hand. We would be going somewhere and i would take a shortcut. My wife would ask how I knew about it. All thanks to finding geocaches, both the lame and the fun.

to each their own!

2.1k · December 19, 2004

It has gotten to here's another cache, see if you can find it.

I think in part this is very true, especially once you've done a good number in an area. When I first started though, I found geocaching was getting me to all kinds of places I'd never been to within my own city (more the thanks for the general location, rather than the specific)

Now though, it gives me a good reason to go back there (so again thanks for getting me off my butt and out there). But I do think 'the hunt' is a very big part of the game. A big part of the fun lies in finding something that other people don't know about. Even if its an easy hide, there is still the fact that you're looking at things in a way that other people don't. That to me is a big part of the game. Virtuals don't (normally) work like this. You're going to a well known spot, to look at something that many people have seen, to answer questions any one can answer. Its not to say that a virtual *can't* incorporate this aspect, its just a lot harder.

2.1k · December 19, 2004

That is ture Ibycus, but on defense of the virt lovers, a virt gets you out as well. Plus many physical caches take you to places that other people have been to, are at and etc. Then add the fact that the "solution" of making it a micro, doesn't add anything....well except a little piece of paper with a broken off pencil that is difficult to write with and on.....lol

December 19, 2004

I miss virtuals!

1.4k · December 19, 2004

I will give it another thumbs up vote.

Looks like you should list it over on Mikie's site. He'll list anything <_<

2.1k · December 19, 2004

Then add the fact that the "solution" of making it a micro, doesn't add anything....

I think it adds to the exclusivity of the experience. You came here, you saw the thing just like everyone else, but you were such a smarty you got to go and find this little bonus as well that only a select group of people know about.

I do think virtuals can have a certain exclusivity factor to them as well, its just a lot harder. A few months ago, while out, I was going through a wooded area (pretty well grown over). Anyways I happend to come across a 1920s or 1930s truck, mostly intact (nothing under the hood though) in the middle of the woods. This thing had obviously been there since it was new and wasn't going anywhere any time soon. I spent a good twenty minutes just looking over the thing and trying to figure out how the heck it got there.

I know it must have some story behind (especially as to why it wasn't moved when it was intact), and it just makes you wonder. Just seeing that makes me go wow anyways. And since there are no real paths to it, not many people have actually seen in. Now if this had been in a no-caches allowed area, I probably would have tried to place a virtual there, luckily it was in an OK place, AND I had a cache ready to go with me, so I stashed it away and marked the coordinates.

December 19, 2004

I've never been the biggest fan of virtuals. All of my finds were for different reasons: close by (quick smiley), support of another cacher, boredom, possibly interesting, etc.

One of the coolest caches I ever did was at an old township on the coast which was active in the late 1700's. I spent an hour or so looking around, reading the trail signs & just enjoying this place. Had it been part of a multi I (and most) would probably have missed out on a lot just scurrying on to the final cache.

That being said I still think it's a rare thing to come upon a virtual like this. The "wow" factor may be there for some & not there for others. Same can be said for any cache.

This particular cache doesn't sound all that enticing to me but some may go all out to search it so yeah, list it. The logs will show if it was the right decision or not.

Given the choice I'd take it over a parking lot micro. (Not that there's anything wrong with that) <_<

9.4k · December 19, 2004

It is items like this statue that make me hope that virtuals are never done away with.

The purpose of this cache should be experiencing the statue and reflecting on the purpose of the statue. I feel that coming to this statue to then have to hunt down a soggy log in a film can would detract form the experience.

<snip>

Odd, when I visited the Grand Canyon, I took pictures, some video, etc, but no one knew I visited until I signed the logbook at the visitor center. It didn't detract from visiting the Grand Canyon in any way.

Since this game is geocaching, I can't see how placing a cache (with a logbook inside, of course) would detract from the experience.

24.7k · December 19, 2004

Any virtual can be turned into a lame offset cache, or part of a lame multi cache, or yet another micro.

Or the person could put some time and thought into it, and actually enhance the cache experience.

Adding pointless steps to a virtual cache only dilutes the intended cache experience. They do not help it along.

Digging in the shrubs at The Wall won't make it a better experience.

24.7k · December 19, 2004

...Since this game is geocaching, I can't see how placing a cache (with a logbook inside, of course) would detract from the experience.[/color]

Grasshopper you have much to learn about geocaching. If virtuals suck then why did they come up wiht Earth Caches?

There are a lot of ways to get off your lazy butt and get out into the world. Which reminds me I'm avoiding working on my rig... Is there a dead car locationless I can log when I bring this thing back to life?

2.1k · December 20, 2004

Again, many variances as in what people like, what they think should be for "caches" and where they should be placed. I, for one, don't really care either way. Just make it simpler and fair all the way around.

December 20, 2004

I think that the virtual as described is questionable according to the guidelines especially with the emphasis lately on offsets or multis as a way to show us an interesting site, statue or other object. However, if it were approved and I was in the area, I'd go for it. It sounds as interesting to me as many physical caches I've found and also as interesting as many other virtuals.

What bothers me is the inconsistency in approving virtuals. OzGuff's research shows the variance in North Carolina. I just don't understand why the policies of approval can't be written down. Except for the extremely subjective wow factor, I think OzGuff adhered to every guideline. If virtuals are out, say so. If they are only allowed on land that forbids physical caches, say so. It will cause a whole new controversy ala locationless, but at least the guidelines will be clear and understandable.

December 20, 2004

I'm curious as to when the last virtual was actually approved. Around here, it was GCGH93 (July 25, 2003), and before that, it was GCA5CB (November 8, 2002). Sounds to me like the reason yours wasn't approved is the 'higher standard' thing.

We've had several approved over the past couple of months.

GCM7P8 12/6/2004

GCM6MQ 12/2/2004

7.2k · December 20, 2004

Well, if anything, the original is the only one I would consider. You could easily put the locations of the traveling copies on that page. If you approve the copy, then I guess you would have to approve the original too. I don't think the original qualifies personally for my reasons regarding statues above -- not unique by definition. (I do like the idea of posting the location of a moving version of an original item on the cache page if a cache like that was approved in the past. Maybe the guy who has The Wall virtual cache will amend his cache page. <_< )

woodster!!! Hope you are OK man. Here is something for you to think about. You say you don't like multi-caches or puzzles much. You do like micros though. Lots of virtuals are being rolled into multi-caches. Lots of those have micros at the end of them after seeing a statue or monument. Oh happy day! Two of your favorite cache types in one!

<_< <_<

Of course, I do think there are good virtual caches out there.

I just don't think a copy of a statue quite gets there.

1.3k · December 20, 2004

Sorry I must chime in. I have had virtuals denied before due to the WOW rule, but I also had one denied that was within the Smokies because the reviewer thought I could hide a physical cache there. Well that's far from ok. Anyway, I fought the good fight with a reply or two then just gave in. I suppose what I'm trying to say is that what one person thinks is really neat and cool may not be so to another. I can understand being more strict with what virtuals can be because can you imagine how many statues are out there and how many virtuals would then exist? The reviewers would never get around to approving physical caches.

I appreciate your sharing a neat appearing statue and like one other person, if I get back to Cherokee before it moves on, I would like to see it in person.

Anyway, good luck with your appeal etc. If it ultimately gets denied, please consider trying to hide a micro or something near the area, so people will at least visit the statue.

Happy Holidays!! <_<

2.1k · December 20, 2004

woodster!!! Hope you are OK man. Here is something for you to think about. You say you don't like multi-caches or puzzles much. You do like micros though. Lots of virtuals are being rolled into multi-caches. Lots of those have micros at the end of them after seeing a statue or monument. Oh happy day! Two of your favorite cache types in one!

<_<

Of course, I do think there are good virtual caches out there.

I just don't think a copy of a statue quite gets there.

Mtn-man....doing ok...working my arse off....will be back to normal soon. No i don't mean causing havoc here....or do I! <_<

I still don't like the multis, puzzles or virts for all that much. I have done some and will probably will still do some. I much prefer the "straight shot" caches. And i prefer them to be of micros for the most part. i don't think I would like the ones you mentioned with a micro at the end.But I do think that either the virts should be allowed (into their own space) or not allowed at all. That would save a lot of heartache and confusion. That way, for those who want to place something physical where another said it's a virt place, then they can. Make it fun for everyone all the way around.

December 20, 2004

{snip} I have had virtuals denied before due to the WOW rule, but I also had one denied that was within the Smokies because the reviewer thought I could hide a physical cache there. {/snip}

Blind Acorn, if you have a chance would you mind emailing me the basic info/location about your attempted Smokies virt? I'm a rabid visitor to the park and would love to know what place you had in mind.

Regarding the OP, I think OzGuff's proposed virt sounds reasonable and I'd vote in favor of it. I hope to visit the location sometime to experience it, even if there isn't a magical film cannister with a sheet of paper stashed somewhere <_<

3.8k · December 20, 2004

No i don't mean causing havoc here....or do I!

Hi woodsters! Good to have you back. :lol: <_<

I like virtuals. <_< <_<

1.1k · December 20, 2004

Thumbs up for me, but then again, I like a virtual cache over a micro most any day.

Virtual Question

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment