Admin Problems

May 25, 2005

hi all fellow geocachers!!!

i have not had this happen to me but.....

my friend had just joined our sport of geocaching ( 5/23/05) and well the greeting he got was not the best more of a rude comment by a admin when he tryed to place a new cache with my help due to he has no gps of his own ( its being shiped to him)

the coment want

''this is a joke right and if it is its not funny you can't put a cache there its in the center of a house on my map! sorry but i am Archiving this cache"

now where we put the cache was not in the center of a house

my friend just got his cache appoved after he set up a new listing for it

and the same admin appoved it this time

how odd is that?

i hope no one else has this problem with admin

24.7k · May 25, 2005

If I understood that you guys placed a cache. Your friend listed it and it was denied due to either a bad map or blown coordinates. Then he listed it again using the same coordinates and got it approved?

That would be odd since approvers typically check a map to double check the location is kosher. The appropriate thing for the approver to do on the first instance would be to verfiy the coordinates and not ask about a joke. But 3rd hand information (by the time it gets to the forums) is hard to guage.

May 25, 2005

its not cool when the admins think you jokeing about placeing a cache

when your not and he even said he lookeed at a satalite map of the spot which has a lot of trees in it and its so hard to make out the house on the map (i tryed finding my house and i found a dot with trees you can't get that close in on to any spot)

how do you know its not next to the road? it was too hard to tell on that kind of map

2.1k · May 25, 2005

If you have an issue with your local admin please email the details to approvers (at) geocaching (dot) com and your inquiry will be addressed.

Regards,

Nate

Groundspeak Inc

9.1k · May 25, 2005

Very puzzling. I looked at the ten caches listed in the OP's home state since the date specified (5/23) when his buddy joined the website. Couldn't find any caches that matched what was described here.

Oh well, OpinioNate is right. Such matters are best handled through the complaint process. Without all the facts it is difficult to discuss them in the forums.

20.7k · May 25, 2005

Perhaps he could forward the offending email to the 'approvers' address?

May 26, 2005

well he called me just after he got the email and said he erased it

o and to answer "The Leprechauns" question : my friend joined the website on the 23rd and placed his cache that day with the help of a sat map and my gps (that he still has from a camping trip) you will not be able to find his cache from my home state on the date (5/23) due to he lives about 70.6 miles from me in vancouver Washington

well i am in seaside oregon

o and his cache can be found at THE 205 cache

May 26, 2005

Your Friend "The_Fishy" deleted the email?

Your friend has no finds and already has placed a cache? You only have four finds and three hides since dec 03. You have another forum asking to be an admin complaining about the admin in your area not taking care of caches that needs to be archived. Here is a couple of questions for you:

Have you ever taken your friend to find a cache?

* If yes, is there any reason why neither of you have posted that you found a cache?

* If no, maybe you could spend more actually playing the game and less complaining to those who do...

How do you know if your admin is doing well or not with only four finds? (from the other forum)

I'm not trying to offend you, but it seems to me that you are going out of your way to make trouble. I'm new to the game but if I were an admin, I don't think I would approve a cache placed by a 'cacher' with no finds. How would your friend even know what constitutes a good hide, a good container, or a fun cache? You could say your friend knows the answers to these questions because you assisted in the hide, but again with only four finds, I'm not sure you were the right person for that job.

21.9k · May 26, 2005

Thanks, Charles, for the link. I've taken a look at the cache.

Your original post seriously misquotes what was actually said by the volunteer reviewer to your friend. Also, there were not two cache submissions -- one which was denied and one which was listed. As happens every day, the volunteer worked through the problem, and the cache was listed. Contrary to your "quote," the cache was *never* archived.

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

Contrary to the assertions in the early posts to this thread, a very clear aerial view of this cache location is available. See Google Maps or Terraserver, which puts a red dot on the cache coordinates.

After further study the reviewer wrote back as follows:

I reviewed the location of this cache on the map and there appears to be a problem. Please double-check your posted coordinates. Based on the high resolution aerial images, these coordinates point to what appears to be the middle of a house. From your description, this is not correct. Are you sure you have the datum and coordinates format set right on your GPS? There's also a chance that the aerial maps are in error.

For now I have disabled the cache to remove it from the reviewer queue. Once you have confirmed the coordinates, please click on the "click to enable link" at the top of this page to put the cache back onto the queue.

You may also email me directly via the link to my profile on the log. Please be sure to include the cache name and GCxxxx number, or better yet, the URL of the cache page.

And finally, after the coordinates were moved 76 feet and no longer appeared on top of a house, the cache was listed and the reviewer provided this note:

Thank you for adjusting the coordinates.

The reviewer did a good job of spotting the problem and working with the cache owner to fix it. With new geocachers, we very frequently see cache submissions that mistakenly use the owner's home coordinates instead of the coordinates for the cache they hid.

2k · May 26, 2005

Thanks, Charles, for the link. I've taken a look at the cache.

Your original post seriously misquotes what was actually said by the volunteer reviewer to your friend. Also, there were not two cache submissions -- one which was denied and one which was listed. As happens every day, the volunteer worked through the problem, and the cache was listed. Contrary to your "quote," the cache was *never* archived.

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

Contrary to the assertions in the early posts to this thread, a very clear aerial view of this cache location is available. See Google Maps or Terraserver, which puts a red dot on the cache coordinates.

After further study the reviewer wrote back as follows:

I reviewed the location of this cache on the map and there appears to be a problem. Please double-check your posted coordinates. Based on the high resolution aerial images, these coordinates point to what appears to be the middle of a house. From your description, this is not correct. Are you sure you have the datum and coordinates format set right on your GPS? There's also a chance that the aerial maps are in error.

For now I have disabled the cache to remove it from the reviewer queue. Once you have confirmed the coordinates, please click on the "click to enable link" at the top of this page to put the cache back onto the queue.

You may also email me directly via the link to my profile on the log. Please be sure to include the cache name and GCxxxx number, or better yet, the URL of the cache page.

And finally, after the coordinates were moved 76 feet and no longer appeared on top of a house, the cache was listed and the reviewer provided this note:

Thank you for adjusting the coordinates.

The reviewer did a good job of spotting the problem and working with the cache owner to fix it. With new geocachers, we very frequently see cache submissions that mistakenly use the owner's home coordinates instead of the coordinates for the cache they hid.

Seems to be a BIG difference when you see the actual quote and not that blatant misquote.

From reading what keystone wrote it doesn't sound to me like the admin was being harsh.

9.4k · May 26, 2005

Seems to be a BIG difference when you see the actual quote and not that blatant misquote.

From reading what keystone wrote it doesn't sound to me like the admin was being harsh.

Isn't it odd how the complaints stop once the truth comes out? :unsure:

2.7k · May 26, 2005

*sigh* Every. Time.

May 26, 2005

Wow! Reading what really happened seems to have put OP into silent mode...

The approver in my area did a great job of giving me the information I needed to correct my hide - I didn't do the best job of reading that info :unsure:

Anyway, I learned from it and corrected my cache, which was then listed on the site. You admins are doing a great job in my opinion - thanks for the hard work.

2.1k · May 26, 2005

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations... :anibad:

The reviewers second comment should have been his first. The first never should have seen the light of day.

Isn't it odd how the complaints start when the user isn't spoken to professionally.

2k · May 26, 2005

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations...

The reviewers second comment should have been his first. The first never should have seen the light of day.

Isn't it odd how the complaints start when the user isn't spoken to professionally.

You have a point. I think that is the defference when you read something as to hearing it in person. That could be read two different ways.

Is this a real submission? It could have been read to the OP though as

IS THIS A REAL SUBMISSION?!?!?!?!

May 26, 2005

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations...

The reviewers second comment should have been his first. The first never should have seen the light of day.

Isn't it odd how the complaints start when the user isn't spoken to professionally.

Or maybe looking at the cache submitter having only signed on with gc.com that same day with no finds led the admin to think - "this has to be a joke, right?"

2.1k · May 26, 2005

Or maybe looking at the cache submitter having only signed on with gc.com that same day with no finds led the admin to think - "this has to be a joke, right?"

Regardless as to what they thought, they shouldn't send it. Pass it around the reviewer forum for a laugh, joke about it with Jeremy, do whatever you like behind closed doors, but treat each customer account with professional courtesy as was done in the second response to the cache. Exact same argument against the cache...completely different connotation to the text.

Of course, I post this here...it really needs to be sent to approvers at Groundspeak or it sounds as it may fall on deaf ears. But that is not my fight.

Edited May 26, 2005 by ju66l3r

May 26, 2005

Thanks, Charles, for the link. I've taken a look at the cache.

Your original post seriously misquotes what was actually said by the volunteer reviewer to your friend. Also, there were not two cache submissions -- one which was denied and one which was listed. As happens every day, the volunteer worked through the problem, and the cache was listed. Contrary to your "quote," the cache was *never* archived.

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

Contrary to the assertions in the early posts to this thread, a very clear aerial view of this cache location is available. See Google Maps or Terraserver, which puts a red dot on the cache coordinates.

After further study the reviewer wrote back as follows:

I reviewed the location of this cache on the map and there appears to be a problem. Please double-check your posted coordinates. Based on the high resolution aerial images, these coordinates point to what appears to be the middle of a house. From your description, this is not correct. Are you sure you have the datum and coordinates format set right on your GPS? There's also a chance that the aerial maps are in error.

For now I have disabled the cache to remove it from the reviewer queue. Once you have confirmed the coordinates, please click on the "click to enable link" at the top of this page to put the cache back onto the queue.

You may also email me directly via the link to my profile on the log. Please be sure to include the cache name and GCxxxx number, or better yet, the URL of the cache page.

And finally, after the coordinates were moved 76 feet and no longer appeared on top of a house, the cache was listed and the reviewer provided this note:

Thank you for adjusting the coordinates.

The reviewer did a good job of spotting the problem and working with the cache owner to fix it. With new geocachers, we very frequently see cache submissions that mistakenly use the owner's home coordinates instead of the coordinates for the cache they hid.

I love it when you clear up issues like this with facts. Nothing worse of 3rd party hearsay and conjucture. Kudos to Keystone Approver!!! :anibad:

18.9k · May 26, 2005

Thanks KA for clarifying yet another one. I see nothing offensive about the reviewers comments. I think the question was innocent enough - he was asking if it were a test of some kind or an actual submission. No reason to beat him up over it.

5.3k · May 26, 2005

Here is the actual correspondence provided by the reviewer:

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates. With no description to explain this, I am temporarily disabling the listing. If it is a work in progress, then re-enable it when ready and we will review it then. If it is an error, then please archive it.

Thank you,

{Volunteer Name}

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations...

The reviewers second comment should have been his first. The first never should have seen the light of day.

Isn't it odd how the complaints start when the user isn't spoken to professionally.

I've had a similar reply to one of my cache submissions. I had intended to uncheck the box that says "Yes, this cache is currently active", but missed it (I was just trying to get assigned the GCxxxx code so I could put it on the container). The coords were just rounded estimates that ended up pointing to the middle of a farmer's field. I'm glad the approver caught my mistake instead of listing the cache...and I didn't try to twist the intent of the approver's question to make it rude.

1.8k · May 26, 2005

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations...

I'm not sure I can completely agree with that. I'm sure they see quite a few "accidental" cache submissions that never should have found their way into the approval queue.

If I were my approver and I saw the cache submission as described above, I probably would have asked exactly the same question.

21.9k · May 26, 2005

I see probably 3 to 5 caches each and every week where there are issues on whether or not the submission is "real":

-- mistakenly entering the user's home coordinates

-- zeroed out coordinates on a "draft" cache page

-- empty cache descriptions

-- new geocachers trying to use the new cache submission form to log a find on an existing cache

-- typos in cache coordinates, placing the cache in Lake Erie or the Atlantic Ocean

Recently I had a submission in Ohio that was smack dab in the middle of a ten-track railroad yard, with *no* cache description, by an owner brand new to the site with zero hides or finds. I archived the submission. The owner wrote back and explained what was going on. It turned out he is on the board of trustees of a non-profit railroad museum, and he was trying to hide a cache to get people to see their collection of vintage railroad cars. I was of course able to work with him, after making sure that the cache location was far enough away from active tracks. It sounds like a cool cache and I hope to visit it someday, because I like railroad history.

Erroneous submissions happen all the time for a number of reasons. They happen with new geocachers and with experienced geocachers. If we didn't catch many of them and question them, there'd be forum threads complaining about that.

9.4k · May 26, 2005

"Is this a real submission"??

Quality public relations...

I'm not sure I can completely agree with that. I'm sure they see quite a few "accidental" cache submissions that never should have found their way into the approval queue.

If I were my approver and I saw the cache submission as described above, I probably would have asked exactly the same question.

Well, you're misrepresenting the quote. Now you added two ?? which is similar to how Ceips is misrepresenting geocaching by pulling logs out of context (or omitting things).

Since the reviewer went on to ask that because of the location of the coordinates, you're adding your own inflection and tone to it to make it sound like you want it to sound. So bad public relations? Doubtful. But perhaps there was a lot of thin skin in this situation.

Why place fault in someone's directness?

2.1k · May 26, 2005

I didn't misrepresent the quote, in *my* post, the entire reviewer note is quoted for context. The two question marks (in my contribution to the thread) reside outside of the quotes for a reason. They portray my shock that someone representing a company would ask a customer if they were 'for real' as the saying goes.

What? You misrepresented my post just like Rep. Ceips does! You didn't get my *intention* from what I wrote the way I wrote it? You made it sound the way you wanted it to sound? Perhaps...yadda...thin skin...yadda.

I clearly am not the only one to perceive this inflection, since the person it was intended for did so also and his friend started this thread.

You don't have to treat each customer as if they were walking on egg shells, but to start the conversation by questioning their intent to submit is abrasive and poor public relations.

As I said, and is being ignored by most who have responded to me, the second reviewer note made the same statement as the first but didn't have the negative connotation as to question the sanity/seriousness of a person's actions.

Two different feelings...same discussion point:

Is this for real? You've got a problem with your submission.

There are errors with what you've submitted. Did you make a mistake?

The second should be a skeleton answer that every reviewer should have available to them and should be modified to define the error on a case-by-case situation when submissions come in with common mistakes that suggest the hider clicked Submit too quickly or whatever. You can be as direct as you need to be without needing to be as direct as you can be. It goes a long way to reducing the angst.

24.7k · May 26, 2005

It could of been taken the wrong way, but the rest of the reviewer note clears it up fairly well.

Edit: Spelling.

Edited May 26, 2005 by Renegade Knight

20.7k · May 26, 2005

You're right. It could have been taken the wrong way. If the approver had ended the email with 'Is this a real submission?', I guess someone could take it as rude, rather than direct. However, the rest of the email explains the situation and puts the first sentence in context.

What I see in this thread is that some malcontents want to further their cause and twist threads to their own design. Bah!

edited for clarity.

Edited May 26, 2005 by sbell111

2.1k · May 26, 2005

What I see in this thread is that some malcontents want to further their cause and twist threads to their own design. Bah!

...because it's clear that in today's world, if you're not with us, you're for terrorism.

:anibad:

There's no "cause" here...other than pointing out ways to improve customer service. What?!? The "cause" of this "malcontent" is to actually *improve* the site!?

Or am I a "malcontent" with a "cause" because it makes it easier for you to rationalize marginalizing my valid argument? Whatever lets you move onto the next thread faster works for me.

20.7k · May 26, 2005

meh.

May 26, 2005

hey all....

Well its not a complaint from me, I don't think you guys have read that part. Its of more of a complaint by my friend on this, I have had no problems with any admin in the past when i placed my first cache (with no finds for my self might i add)

And it was just kind of a wake up when my friend called me and said that they were (quote: thinking it was just being a joke...) thats not cool... And Kudos to Keystone Approver!!! for posting the full email that i never got to read it i was only told about... reading it myself i think its not a rude comment i think yes the admin was trying to help him of the problem and my friend was over doing it

and yes i have to agree with ''ju66l3r" that the second comment should have been the admins first..

And yes i am sure its hard ''very hard'' to keep Quality public relations

i meen since the reviewers are only just "volunteers" and this is a web site with 20841+ users with diff views. i think some of us have lost the fact that this is only a game!!!

and i'm not sure about the thin skin thing i am not sure who jeremy is really pointing his finger at

(The reviewer or the cache owner or me for bringing this complant up?)

i meen its not very good PR telling someone new that they have thin skin andi meen some will think that they don't know anything and that they are dumb for even trying and some will brush it off and move on

O yeah why are most of the posts bashing me

like this whole thing is my fault??? :anibad:

not that i have a problem with it its just

i think some of you should read the full forums before posting!!

and one more thing i have found 4 caches and 8 benchmarks

the site only shows how many 'CACHES' you have found

that does not meen i am not out caching i meen some yes i have not found due to them being taken down before i get there or taken off with by a muggle... or other problems. And i have other caches that i am just now logging in

i have other hobbies as i said hence this post is so late being put up on here

......................

COME ON PEOPLE ITS ONLY A GAME!!!

Edited May 26, 2005 by Charles Iverson

21.9k · May 26, 2005

Thanks for clarifying that you never read the material which you purported to quote in your original post as a direct quote, enclosed in quotation marks.

And no, I won't criticize your find count. I'd never stoop to numbers criticism like what was done in this post.

May 26, 2005

not a problem

i'v seen worse cache counts in a post from a player on a player account. and they think they know what hey are talking about. that was just a Example of some counts i have seen in the past

I won't criticize you on anything i know whats going on and i have for a long time, I know you have a lot of finds as you posted them on you admin account

what might be a cool thing is to make it so people can see a admins player count find / hide (from there player account) much like the counter we have now on the player accounts to aid in making it so users (don't get upset that someone with "zero hides or finds" is reviewing your cache submission and possibly criticizing it)

but make it so you can't tell what there player name is or what caches they have found or hidden if they don't want to post it.

like you said on your admin page

(I use this account so that I can keep my logs, activities and opinions as a Geocaching.com volunteer separate from my family's "player" account, where we keep track of the fun we're having.)

i have to agree with that. two accounts make it much more easy

so you can help us the account holder better

thanks for all of the stuff you and all of the admins do to make geocaching what it is!!!

HAPPY GEOCACHING!!!!

Edited May 26, 2005 by Charles Iverson

21.9k · May 26, 2005

If a volunteer reviewer wishes to remain completely anonymous, as is the case with a minority percentage of our group, publishing their true find and hide counts would rather defeat that, don't you think? It's simply a matter of correlating the numbers to likely profiles. There's even a statistics site or two to make the work easier. There are many eager detectives who would set to work on that task with gusto.

You can look at my own profile, which includes a paragraph that explains why my reviewer account has zero hides and finds, while under my separate player account I have more than 25 hides and 1300 finds. Hmmmm after this weekend at GW3 it will be more like 1500. Thanks for reminding me of the need to update that.

9.4k · May 26, 2005

i think some of us have lost the fact that this is only a game!!!

Indeed.

5.7k · May 26, 2005

Is this a real submission? The coordinates are on the roof of a house and coincidentally show as your home coordinates.

This seems to be a completely acceptible question to me. People create cache pages all the time that aren't (yet) meant to be submitted. I really don't know how else it could have been worded. I suppose something like "Are these coordinates correct?" could have been used in its place, but because the coordinates matched the cache hider's "home" coords, I could see why the approver may have suspected that the cache page wasn't meant to be submitted yet. If I was sent something like this, I would be perfectly fine with it.

--Marky

May 26, 2005

If a volunteer reviewer wishes to remain completely anonymous, as is the case with a minority percentage of our group, publishing their true find and hide counts would rather defeat that, don't you think? It's simply a matter of correlating the numbers to likely profiles. There's even a statistics site or two to make the work easier. There are many eager detectives who would set to work on that task with gusto.

You can look at my own profile, which includes a paragraph that explains why my reviewer account has zero hides and finds, while under my separate player account I have more than 25 hides and 1300 finds. Hmmmm after this weekend at GW3 it will be more like 1500. Thanks for reminding me of the need to update that.

what you do is you post yours on your profile so users can find it is very cool

some admins don't even do that and i think that is were the new users that are just placeing there first cache get upset about it

like i said in my last post i think a counter tyed in to the admins (player account) with there finds will work but make it so users can't just click on it and find your (player account) so the volunteer reviewer that wishes to remain completely anonymous can!! and for the ones that want to make there players name known can do so.

Edited May 26, 2005 by Charles Iverson

1.2k · May 26, 2005

Chucky,

Next time either get all the facts or let your friend complain. It really wasnt any of your business. Stop pointint fingers and enjoy the game as you say. This is not the behavior of an Eagle Scout.

Fight your own battles. Let others fight theirs. Dont concern yourself with anyones find count. Since you still keep saying you want to be a reviewer you need to learn these things.

Remember Youth is one of the few things you can grow out of.

Hang in there kid, but pick your battles.

Edited May 26, 2005 by LaPaglia

1.8k · May 26, 2005

like i said in my last post i think a counter tyed in to the admins (player account) with there finds will work but make it so users can't just click on it and find your (player account) so the volunteer reviewer that wishes to remain completely anonymous can!! and for the ones that want to make there players name known can do so.

Let's see...

So what you're saying is my "GoldenStateAdmin" approver account should list my find/hide count.

Let's see...that means everyone can see that GoldenStateAdmin has 2256 finds and 78 hides under his player account.

Now where could I go to find out that information?

You're right. Nowhere. Totally anonymous. If I wanted to remain anonymous, NOBODY could EVER find out that GoldenStateAdmin is really Team Perks in disguise... :anibad:

May 26, 2005

let your friend complain. It really wasnt any of your business. Stop pointint fingers and enjoy the game as you say. This is not the behavior of an Eagle Scout.

Fight your own battles. Let others fight theirs. Dont concern yourself with anyones find count. Since you still keep saying you want to be a reviewer you need to learn these things.

Remember Youth is one of the few things you can grow out of.

Hang in there kid, but pick your battles.

well its not that i was Complaining about it per say..

its just that i found it odd that a reviewer would do say something like that

to a new geocacher (a fellow scout and someone i refered to the site)

on his first hide and he called and asked me about it and i told him the facts of why that might have happend but with out haveing the email right in front of me i want off from what he told me what it said

and when i got the email off this forum i found out what he told me was a misquote

i am not concerned about having a big find count to place a first cache

i meen i placed one before i even found a cache

and it was more of a learning thing then anything

it started me out thinking on how to go out and find my first cache

and what i might find ( from what i am going on is that my first cache is on a beach in sand that some times blows over it and its hard to tell that there is a cache there) so it makes me more aware of what might lay ahead and other cachers with more finds give insite on the cache in turn makeing the me a better cacher and a better hidder

i came to the forums to see what others think about it

and to bring out any problems that they have had in the past

and i am not pointing fingers at anyone

i rarely do that and when i do you can tell

May 26, 2005

bump

Edited May 27, 2005 by Charles Iverson

20.7k · May 26, 2005

I'm not trying to insult you, but your posts sure would be easier to read if you capitalized the first word in a sentence and used punctuation.

20.7k · May 26, 2005

...so lets say

your admin account has 0 finds and your player account has 300 or more

and a new user placeing a cache and you go and review it they will wounder why some guy with 0 finds is reviewing a cache

do they even know what they are talking about?...

You sure are right, this fuzzy looking guy approved my first cache. He still doesn't have any finds. :lol:

Edited May 26, 2005 by sbell111

1.8k · May 26, 2005

yes but some users don't go off the geocaching.com to find out that kind of stuff

some what like the player acount counter that is anonymous from the admin account and vise vesa

but shows the finds count as a grand total when they review a cache

much like what the one on a account details page My Webpage

and still keeps the admins/player counts the same on there pages

so lets say

your admin account has 0 finds and your player account has 300 or more

and a new user placeing a cache and you go and review it they will wounder why some guy with 0 finds is reviewing a cache

do they even know what they are talking about?

well yes but a new person might not know that

and that is when you start getting criticized about it[

Wow. You missed my point so completely I don't even know what to say.

May 27, 2005

yes I got your point and you gave a link to a geocachers ranking site that want from 200-1999 finds what about the admin's under 200 finds on there admin account

my plan was to keep it on the geocaching page to make it so the admin page shows more of a grand total of finds.

And yes your "GoldenStateAdmin" approver account should list your find/hide count.

Knowing full well that you did in fact find the caches

But More so to make it so the admin's have the same amount of finds as there player account

like a box that says the player has a grand total of lets say 800 caches found 400 from admin and 400 from player

Edited May 27, 2005 by Charles Iverson

May 27, 2005

...so lets say

your admin account has 0 finds and your player account has 300 or more

and a new user placeing a cache and you go and review it they will wounder why some guy with 0 finds is reviewing a cache

do they even know what they are talking about?...

You sure are right, this fuzzy looking guy approved my first cache. He still doesn't have any finds.

he does to have finds

jeremy's player account

20.7k · May 27, 2005

oh.

9.4k · May 27, 2005

oh.

Dude. You totally got served.

20.7k · May 27, 2005

On more than one occasion, perfectly good sarcasm was completely wasted.

edited 'cause I felt like it.

Edited May 27, 2005 by sbell111

9.4k · May 27, 2005

Bah. Hate when snarky comments lose their context.

Edited May 27, 2005 by Jeremy

20.7k · May 27, 2005

Its really not fair. :lol:

3.8k · May 27, 2005

...so lets say

your admin account has 0 finds and your player account has 300 or more

and a new user placeing a cache and you go and review it they will wounder why some guy with 0 finds is reviewing a cache

do they even know what they are talking about?...

You sure are right, this fuzzy looking guy approved my first cache. He still doesn't have any finds.

he does to have finds

jeremy's player account

I think we should stop worrying about small stuff and let Jeremy find more caches.

Admin Problems

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