Reviewing Our Bad Geo-Habits

 

Categories: Caches Geocaching.com GeoTheory IowaAdmin

 

Groundspeak reviewer IowaAdmin explains our three biggest hiccups when submitting new cache listings.

It’s Not About the Numbers was kind enough to ask me to write a guest blog on the topic of ‘the biggest/most common mistakes you see as a reviewer when players submit a new cache listing’. But since geocachers are Groundspeak’s customers, I prefer not to call them ‘mistakes’. How about referring to them as ‘issues’?

ISSUE NO 1

It’s pretty easy for me to say what the most common issue is that I see: placing a cache too close to an existing hide. This is sometimes called the proximity issue. As all seasoned geocachers know, Geocaching.com guidelines call for spacing of at least 528 feet (0.1 mile or 161 metres) between geocaches and between physical waypoints of different multi-caches.

If there’s one issue that red-flags a new geocache and causes a delay in publishing, it’s most likely to be the proximity issue, and it’s often the result of the cache owner neglecting to check the location of nearby geocaches before placing his or her new cache. In those cases, I try to work with the geocacher to let them find a new location so they don’t have to resubmit an entirely new cache page.

ISSUE NO 2

My second most common issue is when a multi-cache or puzzle cache doesn’t have the final co-ordinates listed as an additional waypoint. Sometimes geocachers will post the final co-ordinates in a reviewer note, but that doesn’t really help because I then have to enter those co-ordinates myself as an additional waypoint before I can determine if it’s too close to another geocache.

That’s why it’s important that cache owners use the “Add/Edit Waypoints” feature to enter the co-ordinates for all the waypoints that are physical caches, including the final location. This not only makes it easier for reviewers to review the new geocache, it also helps ensure that future geocaches don’t encroach on the caches we publish.

ISSUE NO 3

Third on my list of most common “issues” are listings which appear to have commercial overtones, which is a violation of Geocaching.com’s guidelines regarding commercial caches. Many times the cache owners are just big fans of the business or organisation and have no direct financial connection. They simply want other players to know about the great sandwiches, the delicious ice-cream, or the helpful service they receive inside the store.

However, such an endorsement of a business still crosses the line beyond what Groundspeak wants to publish on its website. In these situations, it’s usually easy to correct the issue. All it normally takes is the cache owner removing the name of the business from the geocache title and/or deleting the endorsement from the description.

In addition to those, I also see lots of others issues – ones readers of this blog are likely familiar with – such as: being too close to railroad tracks, on school property or near a government building without permission, and for Iowa, on land managed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources without permission.

One of the oddest issues that I encounter is seeing a newly submitted cache with the same co-ordinates and the same name as an existing geocache, but submitted by a different geocacher. The first time I saw it, I scratched my head as I tried to figure out what was going on.

Eventually, I was able to determine that the new listing was not actually a new geocache hide. It was meant to be a “Found it” log but the newbie geocacher was mistakenly using the “Submit a Cache” form to log his find. Believe it not, I’ve had this happen a number of times so when I see it again it’s easier to recognise the reason.

So there you have it. My list of the most common “issues” may be different than it is for other reviewers around the world. But all the volunteer reviewers will assure you that we don’t seek ways to deny new geocaches.

Our goal is to help cache owners get their caches published within the guidelines Groundspeak has established for its listing service – sometimes that requires a few details to be resolved before publication. My thanks to cache owners for their patience and co-operation as I work with them to keep this activity fun for everyone.”

*Ken Braband (GC handle: IowaAdmin) has been a reviewer for Geocaching.com since 2003. His blog is about geocaching and the review process – what it takes to get new caches listed on the world’s most popular geocaching website.

 
 



 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Leave a reply

 
Switch to desktop version