This topic contains 22 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
when a cache is denied because of proximity issues the submitting cache owner (and the world) is notified about the nearby cache. in the reviewers log it states the nearby posted cache owners name and the name of the cache that he owns. in doing this everyone now knows the approximate whereabouts of the already posted cache. in this case, one of my puzzle cache whereabouts has now been given to everyone and can now be found without solving the puzzle. the rules should be changed and that information should not be posted for everyone to see. i was very proud of the fact that i created and owned this puzzle having not seen 1 like it before. now that this cache has been compromised i am deeply saddened. with the information posted by the reviewers this cache basically changes from an almost 1 of a kind puzzle to your basic run of the mill traditional if you are 1 of the lucky ones to read their post. end of rant.
I second that motion!
I can certainly empathize as well. I’ve been there. On occasion, a proximity alert will spoil a location or it will lead someone who is seeking to place one nearby to scour for mine till they come up with it.
About all you can do in this case is offer the cacher trying to get a new one published to help find a different spit and kindly ask that they keep the location of your quite. If that doesn’t work you have to modify yours such that a proximity warning will not pop up, also something I’ve had to do many times.
I used to get very worked up over everything relating to caches that were intentionally or unintentionally bush-whacked, short-cut, group-toured and the like. I went through a cathartic period at the beginning of the year where I had to choose between accepting this as part of the sport or loosing days from my life because of the stress it caused me.
Now I just laugh or reciprocate in my own sarcastic way, like publishing tributee caches for those who somehow think I am out to do anything but add value and enjoyment to the sport.
This week alone, I had a couple false “found it logs” from newbies who didn’t know better, I had a very difficult tributee cache go MIA because another cacher didn’t have the courtesy to make sure a final of mine was hidden again or pull it until it could be remedied, I had an adopted cache get archived even though I offered to adopt it back to fix it twice… the list goes on.
I have just accepted this as part of the territory now, even though going to found caches that are never hidden as well as they should be drives me nuts!!!!… and all I can do is roll my eyes and fix it.
Stick with it Peach, you are one of the significant ones out there who brings more to this game than many get out of it.
I agree with all the comments. I’ve never seen a proximity issue email, so I’m guessing it only gets sent to the new cache placer. One thing I’ve tried to do is ask some of those “in the know” if there is anything in a large area that appears open. I don’t ask specific questions, but just general area questions and the one source I use regularly for this is really good.
I’ve also talked with some newbies & also non-puzzlers who just want coordinates so they can place something swearing they won’t use coordinates to go “find” them. Yeh right. I tell them they can give me the general area and I’ll give them any general insight, but I’m certainly not giving away coordinate lists. I figure they can solve the puzzles just like I’ve done.
Peach – Your puzzles are awesome and my list of solved / unfound is growing for your area with many of yours on the list. Definately a bit different that what I’m used to but also stretches the imagination.
You get the name of the cache that you are too close to, but not the actual coordinates so I don’t see that it is that much of an issue. At least that is the case in the half dozen or so times that I tried to place a cache too close to a waypoint for a puzzle.
I saw that note and I was p*ssed and I don’t even own the cache. THat was a very well crafted puzzle. Shame it got destroyed in such a fashion.
Tradational caches I don’t see as much of an issue with. But this system not only ruins a puzzle but could ruin a nicely set up multi as well.
in most cases an instance like this does not effect much, but in this case, even without the coordinates being posted, it gives my entire puzzle away.
also,
in my book, if the posted coordinates don’t take you directly to the cache (or a set of coordinates which then take you to the final as in a multi) it should be listed as a puzzle. i d/l a pq for traditionals/multis and off i go. now i get to the coordinates only to realize that i have to do some field (or home) research to find the final. without having the cache page with me, this becomes a dnf real fast. puzzles in my mind.
also,
i have a bunch of caches in the bad lands (door county). recently a cacher has been placing multi caches (field solves so they are actually puzzles, see above) at the same exact spots that i have some of my maritime caches. now my cache icons on the map page get covered up and are unseen by others. whats the sense of taking the time to place a cache, any cache, and then have other cachers place multis (puzzles) directly on top and obscuring them from all to see? i have tried to contact reviewers multiple times with no response from any of them. i don’t know who else to contact. i know that all of these issues are legal in the eyes of geo.com but it is my hope that somebody proposes changes to these rules.
end of rant (maybe) hahaInteresting point about the icon stacking on the map…
i probably should have started a new topic with the second part of my rant. sorry.
@peach107 wrote:
when a cache is denied because of proximity issues the submitting cache owner (and the world) is notified about the nearby cache.
Interesting. I’ve never seen this sent to the “world”, but am wondering if it accidentally got sent to the new notification list? Or some other list. I’m kind of curious, because as a programmer this would seem to be a huge flaw in the system. Notifying the submitter that there are proximity issues seems reasonable, but I assume that only goes to one account.
@codejunkie wrote:
@peach107 wrote:
when a cache is denied because of proximity issues the submitting cache owner (and the world) is notified about the nearby cache.
Interesting. I’ve never seen this sent to the “world”, but am wondering if it accidentally got sent to the new notification list? Or some other list. I’m kind of curious, because as a programmer this would seem to be a huge flaw in the system. Notifying the submitter that there are proximity issues seems reasonable, but I assume that only goes to one account.
I’ve never seen a notification for other peoples rejected caches, either. That’s weird. Not much of a consolation for you at this point, peach, but let’s hope it was just a one time thing.
The reviewers are human and prone to human error…
But with that said, I have seen more than one occasion where the wrong cache (i.e., the existing cache) got disabled because of “proximity issues” when a new cache was trying to be published.
It also appears–and Peach can clarify because I didn’t see it–that the issue had to do with a reviewer note being posted, perhaps to the existing cache? Whatever the note was gave the cache away and anyone who had watchlisted it would see, as would the rest of the world. And I’m not sure if the CO can delete a reviewer note.
Of course, even if there is no error, telling the submitting CO of the new cache that “your cache is to close to cache GC12345” can give it away to that new CO which, depending on that CO, could mean “everyone else” and cause your cache to get bushwhacked or go AWOL, as s|s seems to have found out.
The first issue is solvable, but I’m not sure how to address the third while still giving the other CO meaningful information they can work with.
Lastly, regarding coordinate stacking, I have seen this done intentionally by cachers who like to leave their marc on a particular area or who are trying to make some superiority statement or for whatever reason they get their personal jollies out of doing so.
On the Left Side of the Road...Peach, could you archive your puzzle and then move it to a different location? I know that creates a hassle for you but would solve the problem.
As for the other issue with multi’s/puzzles, I had created what I thought was a multi but is really a field-solve puzzle several years ago…when I asked the reviewer to change its classification, I was told that it was correctly classified and would not be changed. Now I know better.Oconto...the birthplace of western civilization:)
@seldom|seen wrote:
I second that motion!
I can certainly empathize as well. I’ve been there. On occasion, a proximity alert will spoil a location or it will lead someone who is seeking to place one nearby to scour for mine till they come up with it.
About all you can do in this case is offer the cacher trying to get a new one published to help find a different spit and kindly ask that they keep the location of your quite. If that doesn’t work you have to modify yours such that a proximity warning will not pop up, also something I’ve had to do many times.
I used to get very worked up over everything relating to caches that were intentionally or unintentionally bush-whacked, short-cut, group-toured and the like. I went through a cathartic period at the beginning of the year where I had to choose between accepting this as part of the sport or loosing days from my life because of the stress it caused me.
Now I just laugh or reciprocate in my own sarcastic way, like publishing tributee caches for those who somehow think I am out to do anything but add value and enjoyment to the sport.
This week alone, I had a couple false “found it logs” from newbies who didn’t know better, I had a very difficult tributee cache go MIA because another cacher didn’t have the courtesy to make sure a final of mine was hidden again or pull it until it could be remedied, I had an adopted cache get archived even though I offered to adopt it back to fix it twice… the list goes on.
I have just accepted this as part of the territory now, even though going to found caches that are never hidden as well as they should be drives me nuts!!!!… and all I can do is roll my eyes and fix it.
Stick with it Peach, you are one of the significant ones out there who brings more to this game than many get out of it.
I believe that I am the cacher that s|s is referring to as not having the “courtesy” to re-hide or pull his final container that had been compromised… Let’s begin with the facts shall we??? I was approx 45 miles away from home placing a few WSQs when I discovered a silver ammo can out in the open near a public latrine… Knowing that it was a commemorative container, I had the “courtesy” to check the log for ownership info… Not knowing if it was disabled or archived I left it as is… Upon returning home I checked the cache page and saw that it was still active… Knowing that s|s was probably unaware of the condition of his cache, I had the “courtesy” to immediately PM him with the details… I also asked what his intentions were so that I knew whether or not to submit my obviously conflicting cache… I also noticed that it seemed that there were co-placers involved and had the “courtesy” to suggest that he contact the nearest one, who by the way lives considerably closer to the cache than I, to help remedy the situation… In his reply he resopnded that he wished to keep it active and that his co-placer?/friend?, was of no help, he also asked if I could be of assistance… I had the “courtesy” to inform him that it may be a month or so before I could get out that way again, but that I would see what I could do… I placed the cache on my watchlist so that I could be kept aware of its status… I was able to return to the area approx. two weeks later to place a couple more caches and while there I had the “courtesy” to attempt to re-hide his container… By this time it had gone missing though I wrongfully presumed that he or someone else had re-hidden it in its correct location as it was still listed as active… I retrieved my previously placed container and went on my merry way… Several days later I received a PM from s|s where he informed me that I could submit my now retrieved cache and asked me to relocate his container in a specified radius of where I found it… Please note that I have had the “courtesy” to not reveal what cache this is or where any of this occurred, I’m not that spiteful… I had the “courtesy” to PM him informing him what had transpired several days prior, he subsequently disabled the cache…
Now s|s if you truly have accepted missing caches as “part of the territory” and are out to “add value and enjoyment to the sport” maybe you wouldn’t be such a cynical S.O.B. of strangers who have tried to assist you… Or has being the “Puzzle King” for so long robbed you of the simple “courtesy” of saying “Thanx for trying”…
The Pirate Monkies
p.s.
It might behoove you to have the “courtesy” to review the Cache Placement Guidelines, especially the Cache Maintenance section…Wow Pirate Monkeys are on a roll. They dislike our reviewers and they dislike S|S. HMMM? I guess if I found a silver ammo can “in the open” I certainly wouldn’t have left it there. I would have rehid it someplace and then given the CO specific coords and a description so they could find it. It seemed something was obviously wrong, but yet the monkeys do nothing without direction.
And stating you’re placing caches a distance from home that you can’t maintain timely (i.e. you didn’t make it back to the area for 2 weeks), but yet call the kettle black? I’m all for having a good time, but calling people out publicly in these forums isn’t how you win friends and influence people.
Oh BTW – I don’t believe the rules allow you to delete a log just because you don’t like the manner it was written or feel you’re being attacked. If that was the case a lot of CO’s would be deleting a whole bunch of “TFTC” logs.
I never stated that I disliked anybody… That was inferred by others…
I simply stated that after attempting to assist a CO with a compromised cache I was labeled as discourteous by said CO…
I are not smart enuf two bee much of a “?” cacher, but we all know the effort that s|s puts into puzzle caches and I wasn’t about to do anything without informing him first… Also, two weeks is well within the guidelines for a cache maintenance timeframe… I have three archived caches due to maintenance issues, two by reviewers, rightly so, and one by myself after realizing that I couldn’t maintain it in a timely fashion…
As for TeamDJ, I respect everything that he has done to increase the value of geocaching, but I as well as many others, feel that logging intentional spoilers and publicly denouncing honest cache placements, (isn’t that the same as “calling people out publicly”???) is detrimental to our hobby…
Maybe some of us have let this whole caching thing go to our heads???
After all, isn’t caching supposed to be fun?????
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.