Author Topic: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!  (Read 4317 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bluelamb03

  • Administrator
  • Big Time Cacher
  • *****
  • Posts: 1639
  • Good hunting everyone!
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2011, 12:25:05 »
Quote
The C/O is angry with me and cannot understand why his cache has been archived.

I hear you Inky, anytime you point out to someone that they've screwed the pooch, no matter how tactful you try to be, you're gonna get the 'I know what I'm doing! Mind your own business!' attitude from some people. I've gotten that myself in the past, I'll get it again in the future.

Check out my log for "Happy Birthday to Me!" http://coord.info/GC2F4EG

I was hoping to avoid any geocacher/police contact by getting the cache moved away from the classroom windows and exchanged a few emails with the cache-owner. Things were looking fine until a few mare finders chipped in with their opinion that it was fine! Well, so far so good I guess.... but if you have to be 'stealthy' then that's a bad location for a cache!

I'll continue to offer tactful advice to n00bs who haven't a clue about cache placement, but if it's as egregious a violation of the guidelines as 'Bridge Hanger' I'll hit 'Needs Archived' every time.

Blue -
Without shared stories we are strangers.
- Sheila Mendonça


elyob

  • Full Time Cacher
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2011, 23:31:54 »
I'm confused, how does such a cache (GC2V9M6) get approved in the first place?

cron

  • Guest
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #17 on: May 19, 2011, 06:52:11 »
I'm confused, how does such a cache (GC2V9M6) get approved in the first place?

Probably many reasons:

- reviewers are volunteers, so they do can do so much research before releasing a cache
- reviewers may not be aware of the details before the cache gets published (sometimes, description and attributes are modified after the fact)
- reviewers have to rely on users reading and respecting the guidelines in the first place
- etc

It's very easy to criticize after the fact.

model12

  • Administrator
  • Big Time Cacher
  • *****
  • Posts: 675
  • Rifling through your cache
    • SteveHanes.com
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #18 on: May 19, 2011, 07:56:04 »
I'm confused, how does such a cache (GC2V9M6) get approved in the first place?

Cron makes some good points, and although reviewers are human too, I think that cachechisme dropped the ball on this one.

Even a cursory look at google maps shows the cache plainly ON the RR tracks. The description (probably changed after the fact) mentions having to climb, and the cache name is BRIDGE hanger.

All that seems to be an obvious indicator that this placement did not meet guidelines due to the proximity of the RR tracks. The changed cachepage mentions that there was no log in the cache when placed, another violation that merits archiving of the cache.

Everything about this cache points to an noob cacher who has no knowledge of guidelines or etiquette, and one who should be noted as such for any future cache submissions.
 
Steve

“Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter, and those who matter don't mind.”
- Dr. Seuss



cron

  • Guest
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #19 on: May 19, 2011, 08:53:36 »
Even a cursory look at google maps shows the cache plainly ON the RR tracks.

Well, after the fact you know it's a live RR. Google Maps only shows a blurry straight line which looks like a RR. Who knows if it has not been transformed in a rail trail? If you're not local to the place, you'll need to do some research to prove it's indeed a live RR. Maybe everytime it looks like being close to a live bridge or RR, the reviewers should do a more thorough research? On the other hand, that's why there are guidelines in the first place and that reviewers have to rely on COs to read and abide by them. Otherwise, we'll need a much better reviewing system and much more reviewers.

hidnseek

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Cacher
  • *****
  • Posts: 419
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #20 on: May 19, 2011, 18:06:51 »
I will confirm reviewers are human and they make mistakes.  If they were not allowed to ever make a mistake CacheViewer would have been fired based on her first reviewer action...archiving a perfectly good cache.  That said, CacheViewer corrected that oops right away and I think players like her as a reviewer.  Sometimes reviewers oops and they do appreciate if you catch those oopses that you contact that reviewer and ask or point it out so they can correct them.  Also as players find the cache, they sometimes come across info in the process that the reviewer may not have known.  Again reviewers appreciate being made aware of such things and being allowed to deal with them.  I have also heard that players are human and oops on things too...wrong coordinates due to typo's being such a thing.

see you on the trails  8)


"I have to go. I'm conducting a seminar in multiple personality disorders, and it takes me forever to fill out the nametags."
— Niles Crane (David Hyde Pierce)

inkyfiller

  • Guest
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #21 on: May 20, 2011, 06:47:51 »
I'm confused, how does such a cache (GC2V9M6) get approved in the first place?

Cron makes some good points, and although reviewers are human too, I think that cachechisme dropped the ball on this one.

Even a cursory look at google maps shows the cache plainly ON the RR tracks. The description (probably changed after the fact) mentions having to climb, and the cache name is BRIDGE hanger.

All that seems to be an obvious indicator that this placement did not meet guidelines due to the proximity of the RR tracks. The changed cachepage mentions that there was no log in the cache when placed, another violation that merits archiving of the cache.

Everything about this cache points to an noob cacher who has no knowledge of guidelines or etiquette, and one who should be noted as such for any future cache submissions.
 

Juicepig

  • Guest
Re: A very disappointing cache.... and cachers!
« Reply #22 on: May 20, 2011, 09:52:38 »
I will confirm reviewers are human ...

MOST are...  ;)