New Cache Approvals

January 21, 2005

Does anybody else get put through the wringer trying to get a new cache approved or is it just me? You’d think that being a paying member would count for something.

Is there an appelate system if you disagree with a reviewer's assessment of the situation from afar?

Thanks

1.5k · January 21, 2005

Absolutely. They're cachers just like us and seem to be pretty open about talking about the cache you're trying to hide. Not sure who the approver is in Virginia but you can find out from the bottom corner of your cache pages. Drop an e-mail and talk to them.

January 21, 2005

I don't mean to imply that my reviewer has done anything wrong and we have had some positive discussions but does it have to be so freaking hard? Somethines I just want to archive all my caches and participate without contributing to everyone else's enjoyment. (A passing and childish thought I know.)

4.1k · January 21, 2005

You’d think that being a paying member would count for something.

Hi Tantor,

Being a Premium Member or even a Charter Member has no influence on whether a cache meets the approval guidelines.

Just open a friendly discussion and I'm sure your issues can be resolved.

1.7k · January 21, 2005

Although I signed up a long time ago, I have not been real active until recently. Are there any other factors working, such as proximity. I adopted a neglected cache close to my office, and found that the saturation in that area was pretty heavy. I am sure no other caches will be allowed there. Have there been any other issues of ownership. Was there an explanation of reasoning? Before anyone could comment those things should be explored.

21.9k · January 21, 2005

I see from your pending cache submission that you've hidden a cache that's just 400 feet away from your nearby multicache. You've asked for an exception to the cache saturation guideline. That takes some work, like studying the maps to make sure there's a natural barrier like a river or cliff between the two caches. It looked like the Virginia reviewer was happy to do that work. In his note, he asked you for the coordinates of the other stages of your nearby multicaches. This will better enable him to make an intelligent decision about the location of your new cache relative to the existing multicache stages, when judging it under the cache saturation guideline.

The guidelines have a purpose. When your cache submission meets all of them you can expect to see your cache listed promptly. When the cache doesn't meet one or more of the guidelines, then the reviewer will attempt to work with the cache hider to find a solution, if at all possible. It looks like that's exactly what's being done here, and I would have handled the situation the same way.

In reply to your question, if at any time you feel that you and your cache submission are not being treated appropriately under the Guidelines as applied by the volunteer reviewer, then you can "appeal" by writing to Groundspeak with complete details, using the special e-mail address provided for that purpose: approvers at geocaching dot com.

I hope that this explanation is helpful, and that you'll see your cache listed once you provide the requested information.

January 21, 2005

I have no issues, all is well. I'm just childishly venting. My reviewer is doing a good job and I think my newest will be approved shortly. I 'm just a litle frustrated because I went the extra mile for nothing. Bad on me.

Edited January 21, 2005 by Tantor

8.1k · January 21, 2005

Usually if there is a problem (and I am not referring to this or any other specific case), it is due to an oversight by the cache placer... such as cache saturation, bad placement etc. When I place a cache I research the area first with regards to policies etc to try and minimize the potential problems.

Edit: Or I hear you can just throw one over your shoulder and anoint it by tapping on it twice with a stick

Edited January 21, 2005 by avroair

38.2k · January 21, 2005

Does anybody else get put through the wringer trying to get a new cache approved or is it just me?

If your cache clearly conforms to the published guidelines approval is a piece of cake. If you push the envelope, enter grey areas or your cache violates the guidelines you're going to have trouble.

1.7k · January 23, 2005

briansnat--How long should one wait for approver response before inquiry. Perhaps the approvers might comment as to most frequently encountered approval problems. Saturation ? Bad coordinates? Improper placement ?

New cacher screw up--I believe the cache I am seeking to have approved may fall into that category, as in what kind of special case can't push the right button. I would suggest that the approver probably doesn't even look at some cacher's placement. Based upon past performance. Though no one in that category immediately comes to mind.

38.2k · January 23, 2005

briansnat--How long should one wait for approver response before inquiry. Perhaps the approvers might comment as to most frequently encountered approval problems. Saturation ? Bad coordinates? Improper placement ?
New cacher screw up--I believe the cache I am seeking to have approved may fall into that category, as in what kind of special case can't push the right button. I would suggest that the approver probably doesn't even look at some cacher's placement. Based upon past performance. Though no one in that category immediately comes to mind.

If they rejected your cache or have concerns, check your page. The approver may have left a note on it.

The only reason that they will not approve the cache is if it violates the guidelines. Saturation could be a problem. Check and see if there is .1 mile between your placement and another...or a stage of a multi.

Bad coordinates will probably not be caught by an approver (unless they are real bad and put the cache in the wrong state, or in the middle of the Atlantic)

The approvers eventually look at all caches in their approval queue. If they think there are issues with a cache, they will often move it to the back of their list and work on the easy ones.

If it's gone beyond two weeks, I'd send an e-mail to NJ Admin or Pofe (who has been approving caches in NJ lately) and see what's up.

Don't forget to provide a link to your cache page so they know what you are talking about.

1.7k · January 23, 2005

I will wait awhile longer. thanks for the input. No saturation, nearest cache is about 2 miles away, which for Wayne is unimaginable. No log entry, no rejection, I think what happened was that I hit the wrong button and then had to go back and enable the link. Hey--it happens.

21.9k · January 23, 2005

I think what happened was that I hit the wrong button and then had to go back and enable the link. Hey--it happens.

That is *precisely* what happened. When you created your cache page on January 9th, you must have checked the box saying that it was not active. You did not make the cache active until the evening of January 20th. The volunteer reviewers cannot see a cache waiting in the queue unless it is active. Yours has now been visible in the queue for less than 72 hours. Add to that the fact that it's a multicache, which takes longer to review, and I'd humbly suggest that it's not quite time to complain yet. Thanks for your patience.

January 23, 2005

Here's a good question , could you use an part of a multi (that you own) in conjuction with another multi ? Like making a big X having one start in one spot and another in another then ending them in different spots with the middle being the common part .

3.8k · January 24, 2005

I will wait awhile longer. thanks for the input. No saturation, nearest cache is about 2 miles away, which for Wayne is unimaginable. No log entry, no rejection, I think what happened was that I hit the wrong button and then had to go back and enable the link. Hey--it happens.

Sometimes it's pretty quick (few minutes, day or so) sometimes it's a bit longer. Just remember they are volunteers and are doing their best. They'd rather get them out of the queue than sit on them, so be patient.... it'll get approved before you know it.

1.7k · January 24, 2005

[it'll get approved before you know it.]

My queries really have nothing to do with approval times, they were more designed to the mechanics of approval. In fact , I did determine that I had done something in error, that needed to be undone, in order to get it into line. This is a first placement and as such I wasn't exactly sure of procedure, nothwithstanding the placement guidelines. So I asked ? Time means nothing in geocaching. It is not like there are going to be hundreds lining up to chase down a cache in a swamp in January with a foot of snow on the ground. That and I hope I don't have to go retrieve it.

Edited January 24, 2005 by Packanack

1.1k · January 25, 2005

[it'll get approved before you know it.]

My queries really have nothing to do with approval times, they were more designed to the mechanics of approval. In fact , I did determine that I had done something in error, that needed to be undone, in order to get it into line. This is a first placement and as such I wasn't exactly sure of procedure, nothwithstanding the placement guidelines. So I asked ? Time means nothing in geocaching. It is not like there are going to be hundreds lining up to chase down a cache in a swamp in January with a foot of snow on the ground. That and I hope I don't have to go retrieve it.

was approved! It

1.1k · January 25, 2005

What's the greenlight icon mean? I've never seen it before...

4.1k · January 25, 2005

It means that someone clicked to enable the cache.

It's new.

Edited January 25, 2005 by MissJenn

1.1k · January 25, 2005

It means that someone clicked to enable the cache.
It's new.

Cool, thanks Jenn. Is there a list of all these icons somewhere that I'm missing, so we (mostly me!) can refer to them rather than posting stupid little questions like this?

4.1k · January 26, 2005

I don't know if there is a list, odragon. (Does anyone know?)

I saw a red version of that icon when a cache I was watching was archived. I inferred the rest.

1.1k · January 26, 2005

I don't know if there is a list, odragon. (Does anyone know?)
I saw a red version of that icon when a cache I was watching was archived. I inferred the rest.

Thanks again Jenn, I will go ask in the Geocaching.com website forum... I meant to mention that the other icon page needs to be updated as they don't have earthcache's mentioned there yet...

I'll have to look for a red version since I've never seen it...

Well, I posted something about this...

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=89567

Edited January 26, 2005 by odragon

38.2k · January 26, 2005

It means that someone clicked to enable the cache.
It's new.

Cool, thanks Jenn. Is there a list of all these icons somewhere that I'm missing, so we (mostly me!) can refer to them rather than posting stupid little questions like this?

Many icons on this website have an explanation if you move the mouse pointer over the icon.

1.1k · January 26, 2005

Many icons on this website have an explanation if you move the mouse pointer over the icon.

Hmmm, none of the ones I tried show that (at least in the logs I checked) and I used both Firefox and IE to make sure it wasn't browser specific.

9.1k · January 26, 2005

Cache Type icons and Cache Size icons both have hover/mouseover text explanations. In addition, if you click on the Cache Type icon on a cache page, it will take you to the page where all (well, almost all) of the Cache Types are defined.

Log Type icons do not have hover/mouseover text. But, if you click on the link to view the log on a separate page, you'll get a textual explanation next to the icon, like "Keystone Approver archived Vacation Cache #423." Not that I'd know anything about that, mind you.

1.1k · January 26, 2005

Cache Type icons and Cache Size icons both have hover/mouseover text explanations. In addition, if you click on the Cache Type icon on a cache page, it will take you to the page where all (well, almost all) of the Cache Types are defined.

Log Type icons do not have hover/mouseover text. But, if you click on the link to view the log on a separate page, you'll get a textual explanation next to the icon, like "Keystone Approver archived Vacation Cache #423." Not that I'd know anything about that, mind you.

So I'm using this Page as an example...

On firefox, hovering over the cache type does not show any text however, the cache attributes do. However, on the list view of caches around my zipcode, you are correct, the cache type and size do have hover over information.

Additionally, you are correct in that if you click on the "view the log on a separate page" all the little icons including notes, smileys, do have hover overs. It's sort of interesting it works in some places but not others.

And as you probably noted, I did post a message saying the caching types page was a little outdated. Seems like it and the search info will be ignored.

Once more, your (and most others) information was greatly appreciated.

Edited January 26, 2005 by odragon

January 29, 2005

Ive been having some toruble getting a cache approved lately. I put some background info on the Medal of Honor in my description and the approver said it seems like i have a heavy agenda promoting the medal of honor, so they wouldn't approve it yet. Its been only 4 days, but i mean, thats still a long time, eh?

38.2k · January 29, 2005

Ive been having some toruble getting a cache approved lately. I put some background info on the Medal of Honor in my description and the approver said it seems like i have a heavy agenda promoting the medal of honor, so they wouldn't approve it yet. Its been only 4 days, but i mean, thats still a long time, eh?

That sounds pretty weird. Did the cache have a tie-in to the MOH, or was the info just added for educational purposes. If it was the latter, I guess I could see their point.

February 4, 2005

I put some background info on the Medal of Honor in my description and the approver said it seems like i have a heavy agenda promoting the medal of honor, so they wouldn't approve it yet.

Funny, this nearby cache:

God's glorious view

seems to have been approved without delay.

I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which has a heavier agenda.

~Zhanna

February 4, 2005

The only reason that they will not approve the cache is if it violates the guidelines.

The only reason? I would agree the failure to meet the guidelines is the primary reason behind most rejections, but it is hardly the only reason.

The approvers eventually look at all caches in their approval queue. If they think there are issues with a cache, they will often move it to the back of their list and work on the easy ones.

Last-come first-served? We see a lot of that in society these days. It's "The New American Way." <_<

8.1k · February 4, 2005

Also some tracts from our church.

Solicitations are also off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, or social agendas may not be listed. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.

Some exceptions can be made. In these rare situations, permission can be given by the Geocaching.com web site. However, permission should be asked first before posting. If you are in doubt, ask first.

Maybe they got permission? <_<

21.9k · February 4, 2005

Hello,

Regarding Voncachstein's cache, it may be helpful to note the following:

1. When the reviewer indicated that time was needed to mull over whether the cache posed an issue under the "cache with an agenda" guideline, the owner responded by saying "take all the time you need." Later, without e-mailing the reviewer, he posted to this forum thread.

2. The cache was submitted on a weekday and listed before the weekend without modification. The reviewer concluded that the cache met the guidelines.

3. This is a multicache. Multicaches take longer to review and during busy times they are often passed over in favor of easier review projects.

Regarding the other cache mentioned, it is OK for a religious theme to be a small part of a cache so long as promoting a religion is not a primary purpose of the cache. The religious tracts are listed at the end of a laundry list of other more traditional trade items. Such caches and their contents have a long history of being listed here, and it would have been inconsistent not to have listed this one. Had the same cache been placed in the woods behind a church, with a cache page that talked about the church service schedule, the answer would have been different.

February 5, 2005

... Had the same cache been placed in the woods behind a church, with a cache page that talked about the church service schedule, the answer would have been different.

Yes, but the cache itself could have been a "golden calf" or some other "graven image." The thing that matters the most for a successful cache approval is that the true nature of the cache is not disclosed on the cache page. <_<

February 5, 2005

I note that Voncachstein's cache was approved. I'm still puzzled however why a cache that commemorates a Medal of Honor winner can be considered as a "heavy agenda promoting the medal of honor." The MOH is awarded by Congress for conspicious acts of gallantry on the field of battle. Many of the recepients receive their medal posthumously. As you may note from the citation set forth in the cache, there is no reference to the receipient's race, creed or color. It is awarded for bravery. You don't get the medal by belonging to some political, civic or religious organization. I would hope that a geocacher's efforts to honor the sacrifice and valor of a member of his community would be encouraged by Groundspeak, not suspected as promoting some type of agenda. How does one promote the MOH anyhow?

February 5, 2005

Just thought I'd add my two cents regarding the speed of approvals.

I entered a cache in today at about 2pm, and now, four hours later, I've found that it has been approved and repeatedly viewed. I give three gold stars to the NJ Admin, and nobody can convince me they don't deserve it.

8.1k · February 6, 2005

WoW! I placed a cache today and it was approved before I finished typing up the cache page: Project X: Little Green Men cache

February 6, 2005

Pofe rocked on approving mine too! TRL Dead Men Tell No Tales is ready for some takers!

8.1k · February 6, 2005

Pofe rocked on approving mine too! TRL Dead Men Tell No Tales is ready for some takers!

Cool! Hey, we were only 1.8 miles from eachother

February 6, 2005

Pofe rocked on approving mine too! TRL Dead Men Tell No Tales is ready for some takers!

Cool! Hey, we were only 1.8 miles from eachother

I noticed that too. Although having done that 1.8 miles on foot before, I can tell you it's a LONG 1.8 miles. This area has great potential for a Spring group hike.

10.1k · February 6, 2005

HEY!! Not nice teasing the dolphin, putting all these new caches on his Ten-Mile List. Especially with snow on the ground!

February 6, 2005

HEY!! Not nice teasing the dolphin, putting all these new caches on his Ten-Mile List. Especially with snow on the ground!

If you act fast, you can follow their footprints today for an easy find... which is why I'm waiting until it rains before I post another one...

February 6, 2005

WoW! I placed a cache today and it was approved before I finished typing up the cache page: Project X: Little Green Men cache

We're onto you Mr. Pofe.

Hiding your new cache with Mr. NJ Admin (briansnat) surely has it's rewards. Don't it?! :blink:

8.1k · February 6, 2005

Hiding your new cache with Mr. NJ Admin (briansnat) surely has it's rewards. Don't it?!

You have to wonder! Yet reliable sources told me Brian was 'ice fishing' on the reservoir.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will sit on ice all day drinking beer...

38.2k · February 6, 2005

he will sit on ice all day drinking beer.

It wasn't beer :anitongue:

.

A cache I hid today was approved within minutes after I submitted it by Mr Pofe. Great job admins!

Edited February 6, 2005 by briansnat

10.1k · February 7, 2005

HEY!! Not nice teasing the dolphin, putting all these new caches on his Ten-Mile List. Especially with snow on the ground!

If you act fast, you can follow their footprints today for an easy find... which is why I'm waiting until it rains before I post another one...

LOL! Exactly what we did! First to Find for Project X: LGM to Andy Bear! We beat out Skully & Muldur etAutumn by ten minutes. Okay, so we were still looking when they showed up. Always nice to meet them on the hunt. Last time we met, Nikki beat us to the cache. :anitongue:

New Cache Approvals

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

Join the conversation