Groundspeak Forums: Caches in Graveyards [Church or Stand alone] - Groundspeak Forums

Jump to content

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Caches in Graveyards [Church or Stand alone] A change of Reviewing Policy within the UK

#1 User is offline   Deceangi 

  • Reviewer with the BIG STICK, trackable of course
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1574
  • Joined: 14-May 06

  Posted 07 July 2008 - 04:30 AM

As I've recently had to Archive a couple of caches in Graveyards, after Groundspeak received a official complaint about them being located without permission.

From the email received

Quote

My anxiety about this is that, in looking for them, people will necessarily be rummaging around, even walking over graves. This is obviously a bit insensitive for those who have loved ones buried in the churchyard


as these have not been the first ones in such locations which have been archived after a complaint was received.

I have after careful consideration after dealing with the current caches have decided to treat caches submitted for Review in Graveyards, in a similar way to caches in Nature Reserves or on National Trust/Forestry Commission land where no Blanket Permission Agreement is in place.

Any cache submitted which which has a Physical component within a Graveyard The owner will be required to submit proof of permission to place the cache, before the cache will be Published.

Any cache already published with a physical component within a Graveyard is of course Grandfathered in.But my advice if permission has not been obtained would be to obtain Permission to avoid the risk of the cache being archived, due to a landowner complaint to Groundspeak.

Once again to make it clear. I'm not refusing to publish caches in Graveyards, just requiring proof of permission before publication.

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

#2 User is offline   The Hornet 

  • G.O.G. (Grumpy old git)
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 1158
  • Joined: 03-February 01

Posted 07 July 2008 - 04:39 AM

Sounds an eminently sensible and measured approach. Well done Deci. :D

#3 User is offline   rutson 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3889
  • Joined: 05-May 04

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:01 AM

Well said (for a GOG ;-))

THIS is the sort of approach we're used to

#4 User is offline   Delta68 

  • Volunteer Geocache Finder
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1544
  • Joined: 05-March 07

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:05 AM

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :D


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!

#5 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:34 AM

View PostDelta68, on Jul 7 2008, 05:05 AM, said:

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :D


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!



Such a prohibition seems rather like making up rules for the sake of it. As long as people visiting graveyards act in an appropiate manner there shouldn't be a problem, if they can't act properly than no rule will have any effect on them.

#6 User is offline   rutson 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3889
  • Joined: 05-May 04

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:37 AM

I don't think it's making up rules for the sake of it. I think it's our one remaining UK reviewer coping with a situation as best he can without the luxury of colleagues to consult with.

#7 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:41 AM

View Postrutson, on Jul 7 2008, 05:37 AM, said:

I don't think it's making up rules for the sake of it. I think it's our one remaining UK reviewer coping with a situation as best he can without the luxury of colleagues to consult with.


Re-read my post and check out who and what I was replying to :D

#8 User is offline   currykev 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2306
  • Joined: 15-February 06

Posted 07 July 2008 - 05:49 AM

Looks like the Churchyard Micros series will need further thinking before placing!..no bad thing really. :D
I too,also agree with Deceangi's archiving of caches that have a detrimental impact on our hobby/sport.

I recently archived 2 of my caches.One was down to permission issues,having received a very polite email,and which I have now tactfully resolved.And another due to probable damage to the local flora,
which is just as important,in my view.

If we all act sensibly then long may we be able to cache! :D

#9 User is offline   The Hornet 

  • G.O.G. (Grumpy old git)
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 1158
  • Joined: 03-February 01

Posted 07 July 2008 - 06:02 AM

View Postuktim, on Jul 7 2008, 02:34 PM, said:

View PostDelta68, on Jul 7 2008, 05:05 AM, said:

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :D


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!



Such a prohibition seems rather like making up rules for the sake of it. As long as people visiting graveyards act in an appropiate manner there shouldn't be a problem, if they can't act properly than no rule will have any effect on them.

To answer both respondents in one go I would suggest you read what Deceangi said:

Quote

Any cache submitted which which has a Physical component within a Graveyard The owner will be required to submit proof of permission to place the cache, before the cache will be Published.

The emphasis is mine. Gathering dates etc. by simply wandering around a public place (which is what most graveyards are) continues to be allowed.

#10 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 07 July 2008 - 06:28 AM

View PostThe Hornet, on Jul 7 2008, 06:02 AM, said:

View Postuktim, on Jul 7 2008, 02:34 PM, said:

View PostDelta68, on Jul 7 2008, 05:05 AM, said:

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :D


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!



Such a prohibition seems rather like making up rules for the sake of it. As long as people visiting graveyards act in an appropiate manner there shouldn't be a problem, if they can't act properly than no rule will have any effect on them.

To answer both respondents in one go I would suggest you read what Deceangi said:



People do seem to be struggling to keep up :D

I would suggest once again that you check out my post and who I was replying to, but to make it simple for yourself and Rutson I'll explain :huh:

The prohibition that I was referred to was Delta68's suggestion (in the post that I quoted, it's not that difficult is it :) ) that caches shouldn't require people to collect dates off gravestones.

Is it really so hard to read a post properly before replying :D

#11 User is offline   maxkim 

  • Platinum Plus Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 07 July 2008 - 07:11 AM

I have one at a church with a lovely Norman doorway, this one was set up as an offset, using dates on head stones, which has kept everyone happy. It also achieves its aim of showing cachers the building without people on hands and knees searching for a physical cache in the grounds. It also means it's a regular size cache and not just a micro. :D Cheers MaxKim.

#12 User is offline   purple_pineapple 

  • Only purple ones round here...
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1651
  • Joined: 27-May 05

Posted 07 July 2008 - 08:14 AM

An eminently sensible solution from Deci. The only cache we've ever not finished cos we felt it was inappropriate was where the final hide was somewhere among some gravestones. There's no real need for caches IN a graveyard - the Church Micro series near us has taken us to lots of churches, and not one of them is in the church grounds.

Personally, I have no problem with getting dates from gravestones - its not really that different to getting dates from inside churches. Oh, and we are certainly not the only people who wander around graveyards - some people do it just for fun!

Dave

#13 User is offline   minstrelcat 

  • a.k.a Adam & Lisa
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 618
  • Joined: 02-December 02

Posted 07 July 2008 - 08:27 AM

View Postpurple_pineapple, on Jul 7 2008, 05:14 PM, said:

Oh, and we are certainly not the only people who wander around graveyards - some people do it just for fun!

Dave


People visit churchyards for any number of reasons - people trying to trace their family tree, or are interested in local history, want to see the view etc etc. People shouldn't be discouraged from visiting graveyards but I agree with the need for proof of permission for a physical cache.

Lisa

#14 User is offline   scottpa100 

  • WHA do you build me up?
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 710
  • Joined: 20-December 05

Posted 07 July 2008 - 09:17 AM

View PostDelta68, on Jul 7 2008, 02:05 PM, said:

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :D


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!



I disagree (with all due respect of course!) A graveyard is, as is death, part of life. We all have a right to go there. Whether to have a look, pay respects, research family trees, do grave rubbings. Whilst some people are obviously going to be very upset, and we should always consider our actions if they would affect others, normal life, unfortunately, still goes on.

I'm for normal life. :D

#15 User is offline   reddeeps 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 249
  • Joined: 13-July 07

Posted 07 July 2008 - 10:31 AM

I think Deci's decision makes perfect sense.

#16 User is offline   Happy Humphrey 

  • Official Groundspeak Cacher of the Year, 1999.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3601
  • Joined: 17-January 04

Posted 07 July 2008 - 11:31 AM

View Postscottpa100, on Jul 7 2008, 06:17 PM, said:

View PostDelta68, on Jul 7 2008, 02:05 PM, said:

I know this has been debated before, but I think getting clues from gravestones should be prohibited UNLESS it is a grave of an important/famous person even if the final cache itself is located outside the churchyard.

We did a multi recently which involved getting dates from random graves and we felt VERY uncomfortable when two obviously recently bereaved members of public arrived to visit a nearby grave. :(


I know the cache setters should use common sense but frankly, some don't!



I disagree (with all due respect of course!) A graveyard is, as is death, part of life. We all have a right to go there. Whether to have a look, pay respects, research family trees, do grave rubbings. Whilst some people are obviously going to be very upset, and we should always consider our actions if they would affect others, normal life, unfortunately, still goes on.

I'm for normal life. :)

I know that this isn't really on-topic, as Deceangi is clearly concerned about physical caches in graveyards rather than virtual stages. But I completely agree with Scott (again, with respect to Delta68's opinion). If the only visitors to graveyards were the bereaved, then they really would become lonely places. If I was to find myself in the same situation as Delta68, I rather think I'd take a break and come back later. By the way, why would the grave of a "famous person" be OK to visit if an obscure one isn't?

Funnily enough, I sought a graveyard cache (physical) this very afternoon. It was in a quiet and secluded part, where many of the graves are very old and weathered and a bit neglected-looking. There's the usual rusty old wheelbarrow, flowers and cracked vases dumped in a corner, that sort of thing.
It actually made me feel like I was doing something useful by visiting this area: many of the graves have been ignored for decades (I felt), and I was carefully trying to make out the names and dates from under the lichen. Probably the first company they've had in years (apart from the gardener). At the very least, there was no harm in me taking an interest.
I assume that the cache had permission. If not, I suspect that the local residents (the VERY local ones!) would be all for it...

#17 User is offline   Stuey 

  • ...and Ozzy the Flatcoat
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3287
  • Joined: 02-March 03

Posted 07 July 2008 - 11:45 AM

View Postuktim, on Jul 7 2008, 03:28 PM, said:

The prohibition that I was referred to was Delta68's suggestion (in the post that I quoted, it's not that difficult is it :D ) that caches shouldn't require people to collect dates off gravestones.

Is it really so hard to read a post properly before replying :(


If it's any help, I knew exactly what you meant :) . I also agree with several other posters that graveyards are public places and as long as one acts in an appropriate manner anyone should be welcome there.

#18 User is offline   keehotee 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3017
  • Joined: 04-February 04

Posted 07 July 2008 - 11:57 AM

View PostDeceangi, on Jul 7 2008, 01:30 PM, said:


Any cache submitted which which has a Physical component within a Graveyard The owner will be required to submit proof of permission to place the cache, before the cache will be Published.

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com


Just for the sake of completeness. and not meant in any picky sort of way (I actually agree with this one :) :D ) does this cover all burial places, or just recognizable graveyards / cemeteries / crematoria of any contemporary faith or local authority?
For example, there are numerous prehistoric burial sites that are not scheduled, protected or restricted in any way - and as another example, would a blanket agreement with a local authority (a city council) also apply to a multi-denominational city cemetery? :(

This post has been edited by keehotee: 07 July 2008 - 12:11 PM


#19 User is offline   Deceangi 

  • Reviewer with the BIG STICK, trackable of course
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1574
  • Joined: 14-May 06

Posted 07 July 2008 - 01:29 PM

View Postkeehotee, on Jul 7 2008, 08:57 PM, said:

View PostDeceangi, on Jul 7 2008, 01:30 PM, said:


Any cache submitted which which has a Physical component within a Graveyard The owner will be required to submit proof of permission to place the cache, before the cache will be Published.

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com


Just for the sake of completeness. and not meant in any picky sort of way (I actually agree with this one :) :D ) does this cover all burial places, or just recognizable graveyards / cemeteries / crematoria of any contemporary faith or local authority?
For example, there are numerous prehistoric burial sites that are not scheduled, protected or restricted in any way - and as another example, would a blanket agreement with a local authority (a city council) also apply to a multi-denominational city cemetery? :(


To answer the points the best I can, as this policy is still in it's infancy

Q: burial places, or just recognizable graveyards / cemeteries / crematoria of any contemporary faith or local authority?

A: yes the permission before publishing applies to all the above where there they are marked on maps as such or the cache description indicates so

Q:there are numerous prehistoric burial sites that are not scheduled, protected or restricted in any way

A: again where indicated on maps or in cache descriptions, these locations are treated as Heritage Sites which have a aproximate528ft/161m proximity boundary around them. Unless permission is provided. Remember the issue we had with a certain heritage web site.

Q: another example, would a blanket agreement with a local authority (a city council) also apply to a multi-denominational city cemetery?

A: this is something which has not yet been finalised, I intend taking advice from wise heads over this. personally I don't believe that in any Blanket Agreement with any Local Authority, the person acting on their behalf would have considered any sort cemetery when considering the agreement. In most cases I believe they would have only considered Recreational Areas. A quick scan of Agreements with city and County Councils in the GAGB GLAD, shows that the agreements are with the Recreation/Parks/Countryside Services Departments,. And is restricted to land that particular department manages.

#20 User is offline   kewfriend 

  • barely competent
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 904
  • Joined: 11-April 04

Posted 08 July 2008 - 02:56 AM

There is one famous cache in the Berkshire area, (is it still active?), that actually took you to an open grave under a rhodo bush in a public park. I am happy to record that one didnt need to be interred to disintere the cache.

Who does one apply to for permission to use an open grave? :( :)

#21 User is offline   The Hornet 

  • G.O.G. (Grumpy old git)
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 1158
  • Joined: 03-February 01

Posted 08 July 2008 - 04:21 AM

View Postkewfriend, on Jul 8 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

Who does one apply to for permission to use an open grave? :( :)

The occupant? :D

#22 User is offline   purple_pineapple 

  • Only purple ones round here...
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1651
  • Joined: 27-May 05

Posted 08 July 2008 - 05:15 AM

rather amusingly, if you have enough windows open, this thread shows up in the windows task bar below as 'caches in gravey'

An interesting concept! no doubt someone would find something to beef about though... :(

#23 User is offline   Sensei TSKC 

  • Sensei TSKC
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1570
  • Joined: 02-March 05

Posted 08 July 2008 - 06:27 AM

View PostThe Hornet, on Jul 8 2008, 01:21 PM, said:

View Postkewfriend, on Jul 8 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

Who does one apply to for permission to use an open grave? :ph34r: :P

The occupant? :D


Might be sometime waiting for a reply unless you employ a medium.

#24 User is offline   purple_pineapple 

  • Only purple ones round here...
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1651
  • Joined: 27-May 05

Posted 08 July 2008 - 07:46 AM

View PostSensei TSKC, on Jul 8 2008, 03:27 PM, said:

Might be sometime waiting for a reply unless you employ a medium.


you mean a regular...

#25 User is offline   rutson 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3889
  • Joined: 05-May 04

Posted 09 July 2008 - 07:48 AM

Yes, I suppose that WOULD be the favored term in these fora these days...

#26 User is offline   The Forester 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1427
  • Joined: 07-October 03

Posted 09 July 2008 - 08:40 AM

Woo Hoo!

#27 User is offline   goldpot 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 509
  • Joined: 03-October 05

Posted 09 July 2008 - 12:45 PM

I supposed this cache won't be allowed, no matter how much fun it looks;

A Dead End

#28 User is offline   Write and Mane 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 225
  • Joined: 04-April 03

Posted 09 July 2008 - 12:53 PM

Well, our latest set of caches visit a number of Churchyards, do have the required permission, are not micros and are located in a pleasant area of South Wales. :sad: :(

Hopefully they will be ignored by those cachers who do not like visiting Church locations. :)

#29 User is offline   The Flying Boots 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 390
  • Joined: 02-March 06

Posted 09 July 2008 - 10:43 PM

View PostWrite and Mane, on Jul 9 2008, 09:53 PM, said:

Well, our latest set of caches visit a number of Churchyards, do have the required permission, are not micros and are located in a pleasant area of South Wales. :P :(

Hopefully they will be ignored by those cachers who do not like visiting Church locations. :P

And theres another older, most excellent cache of Write and Manes called "Cathay's Cemetery - GC14NPF" in the centre of Cardiff which also has permissions where I spent almost 2 hours finding out very interesting facts during an extremely enjoyable hunt recently :( :P .
Looking forward to your new "Church" caches Liz and Gordon. :P

#30 User is offline   scottiebear 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 28-October 07

Posted 10 July 2008 - 01:03 PM

I agree with Decangi.

On a recent trip to Eire, we did approximately 10 caches, of which they were virtually all in graveyards. Surely in such a beautiful country like Eire, you could be a bit more experimental....

#31 User is offline   dino-irl 

  • Lick the lid of life!
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: 14-February 05

Posted 10 July 2008 - 08:45 PM

You couldn't have travelled very far then! Most of my caches have been found outside of graveyards although there are a lot in urban areas.

#32 User is offline   Happy Humphrey 

  • Official Groundspeak Cacher of the Year, 1999.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3601
  • Joined: 17-January 04

Posted 10 July 2008 - 10:23 PM

View Postscottiebear, on Jul 10 2008, 10:03 PM, said:

I agree with Decangi.

On a recent trip to Eire, we did approximately 10 caches, of which they were virtually all in graveyards. Surely in such a beautiful country like Eire, you could be a bit more experimental....

Try a few Windsockers caches next time - experimental isn't the word for them...

#33 User is offline   Happy Humphrey 

  • Official Groundspeak Cacher of the Year, 1999.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3601
  • Joined: 17-January 04

Posted 11 July 2008 - 10:46 AM

View Postscottiebear, on Jul 10 2008, 10:03 PM, said:

I agree with Decangi.

On a recent trip to Eire, we did approximately 10 caches, of which they were virtually all in graveyards. Surely in such a beautiful country like Eire, you could be a bit more experimental....

Try a few Windsockers caches next time - experimental isn't the word for them...

#34 User is offline   Gadgetman! 

  • IT-Consultant
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 28-February 07

Posted 13 July 2008 - 08:04 AM

I'd like to point out a little problem with caches where we have to wander around and read off dates of tombstones.

In some places, particularly where the graveyard is small, some of the graves are 'reused' after a set period, maybe 20, maybe 50 years...
Then you can usually see the old tombstones stacked along the fence, or in a corner of the graveyard.

If the cacher who placed the cache and set up the string of clues doesn't take into consideration which graves and their age, the trail may end up 'dead'...

#35 User is offline   AngelPick 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 15-February 08

Posted 14 July 2008 - 04:36 AM

As someone who has been bitten today by these new rules (or enforcing of existing ones) can I add my twopenneth please. You can usually garner numbers off of noticeboards around the church for use as clues, no entry to the churchyard should be required. The cache can then be hidden away from the church grounds. Common sense - no? If the cacher chooses to visit and walk around the churchyard that is his/her perogative (spl). My latest Church Micro involved walking 3m into the church grounds to get some numbers, no where near any graves but the moderator has told me he cannot publish because it involves a waypoint that is just over the wall surrounding the church, no physical cache just a waypoint. This misunderstanding has now been resolved to all parties satisfaction, as peeved as I was at the time I am glad someone was watching closely and I do appreciate the reviewers are volunteers which is maybe why we should be more careful with our hides.

I have visited some beautiful churches thanks to the Church Micro series (many thanks Sadexpoloration) which I would never have visited without Geocaching and we always walk around these churchyards after finding the cache.

Hiding caches in graveyards does not seem right, asking people to look at gravestones for clues is OK as long as the cacher behaves and watches his step. Surely there should be some guidance on the locations of gravestones to be used, always ones near the path making it uneccasary to clamber over graves.

I believe it is up to the hider to choose where he wants people to go to collect clues, always using easily accessible spots. The searcher should be made aware of the fact that he should not need to leave footpaths in the hiders notes.

A bit of common sense by all really but hides in graveyards should be a big NO, it does't seem right somehow.

Sorry to waffle on but it needs to be said. I certainly will not be asking people to enter church grounds in the future, all clues will be visible from the outside!

This post has been edited by AngelPick: 14 July 2008 - 05:26 AM


#36 User is offline   sadexploration 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 10-September 04

Posted 14 July 2008 - 05:07 AM

Having started the church micro series I agree that the caches should not be in the churchyard. Coordinates are not always bang on and people will poke around were they should not.
ALL 50 of my church micros are hidden outside churchyards and if people need to go to the church I make it obvious were to go ie seat,information board, but even that looks suspect now!
I would encourage anybody wishing to expand on this series to keep to the guidlines and find a suitable hide nearby.

#37 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 14 July 2008 - 05:42 AM

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 04:36 AM, said:

A bit of common sense by all really but hides in graveyards should be a big NO, it does't seem right somehow.

Sorry to waffle on but it needs to be said. I certainly will not be asking people to enter church grounds in the future, all clues will be visible from the outside!


Surely this is just a personal perspective. I have no issues with caches in graveyards. I would have no wish to be buried in a place which excluded everyday living folk and I wouldn't wish for any close friends or relatives to be buried in such a place.

If you don't like caches in graveyards don't do them but please don't foist your views onto others.

#38 User is offline   Flymgibet 

  • Premium member.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 13-July 07

Posted 14 July 2008 - 07:47 AM

View Postuktim, on Jul 14 2008, 05:42 AM, said:

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 04:36 AM, said:

A bit of common sense by all really but hides in graveyards should be a big NO, it does't seem right somehow.

Sorry to waffle on but it needs to be said. I certainly will not be asking people to enter church grounds in the future, all clues will be visible from the outside!


Surely this is just a personal perspective. I have no issues with caches in graveyards. I would have no wish to be buried in a place which excluded everyday living folk and I wouldn't wish for any close friends or relatives to be buried in such a place.

If you don't like caches in graveyards don't do them but please don't foist your views onto others.


Is this not a forum? and is this not what it's about? so have we not just read your view on this matter!!!!!

#39 User is online   Bear and Ragged 

  • *.*
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 7492
  • Joined: 20-August 05

Posted 14 July 2008 - 09:14 AM

Quote

You can usually garner numbers off of noticeboards around the church for use as clues


Notices change more rapidly than the gravestones!
Means the cache placer has to keep an eye on things... :blink:

#40 User is offline   AngelPick 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 15-February 08

Posted 14 July 2008 - 11:33 PM

View Postuktim, on Jul 14 2008, 05:42 AM, said:

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 04:36 AM, said:

A bit of common sense by all really but hides in graveyards should be a big NO, it does't seem right somehow.

Sorry to waffle on but it needs to be said. I certainly will not be asking people to enter church grounds in the future, all clues will be visible from the outside!


Surely this is just a personal perspective. I have no issues with caches in graveyards. I would have no wish to be buried in a place which excluded everyday living folk and I wouldn't wish for any close friends or relatives to be buried in such a place.

If you don't like caches in graveyards don't do them but please don't foist your views onto others.


I'm not foisting my views on anyone, just participating in a forum. My views are valid as are anyones but thats all they are, my personal views.

#41 User is offline   AngelPick 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 15-February 08

Posted 14 July 2008 - 11:38 PM

View PostBear and Ragged, on Jul 14 2008, 09:14 AM, said:

Quote

You can usually garner numbers off of noticeboards around the church for use as clues


Notices change more rapidly than the gravestones!
Means the cache placer has to keep an eye on things... :huh:


[font=Tahoma]Agreed, any good cache hider would do maintenance on all his caches, this would of course include checking clues. The main reason all of my caches are within a few km of my house. Apart from the one in Redhill, but that is where I work - solved

#42 User is offline   The Hornet 

  • G.O.G. (Grumpy old git)
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 1158
  • Joined: 03-February 01

Posted 14 July 2008 - 11:40 PM

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 01:36 PM, said:

My latest Church Micro involved walking 3m into the church grounds to get some numbers, no where near any graves but the moderator has told me he cannot publish because it involves a waypoint that is just over the wall surrounding the church, no physical cache just a waypoint. This misunderstanding has now been resolved to all parties satisfaction, as peeved as I was at the time I am glad someone was watching closely and I do appreciate the reviewers are volunteers which is maybe why we should be more careful with our hides.

I'm a little mystified by this comment. Are you saying that your cache was disallowed because a NON-PHYSICAL waypoint was in the churchyard? And are you saying that it was only published after you convinced the reviewer that the information could be obtained from OUTSIDE the graveyard?

That is not the interpretation I put on Deceangi's original statement (the statement I wholeheartedly endorsed).

Or are you saying that he allowed your cache when you explained that the waypoint inside the graveyard was NOT physical?

#43 User is offline   purple_pineapple 

  • Only purple ones round here...
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1651
  • Joined: 27-May 05

Posted 15 July 2008 - 12:11 AM

View PostThe Hornet, on Jul 15 2008, 08:40 AM, said:

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 01:36 PM, said:

My latest Church Micro involved walking 3m into the church grounds to get some numbers, no where near any graves but the moderator has told me he cannot publish because it involves a waypoint that is just over the wall surrounding the church, no physical cache just a waypoint. This misunderstanding has now been resolved to all parties satisfaction, as peeved as I was at the time I am glad someone was watching closely and I do appreciate the reviewers are volunteers which is maybe why we should be more careful with our hides.

I'm a little mystified by this comment. Are you saying that your cache was disallowed because a NON-PHYSICAL waypoint was in the churchyard? And are you saying that it was only published after you convinced the reviewer that the information could be obtained from OUTSIDE the graveyard?

That is not the interpretation I put on Deceangi's original statement (the statement I wholeheartedly endorsed).

Or are you saying that he allowed your cache when you explained that the waypoint inside the graveyard was NOT physical?


I believe (hope) AP meant your second 'theory' Mr H - cache allowed once it was explained it was a non-physical stage in the churchyard! I agree though that the point wasn't immediately obvious!

I wonder if this misunderstanding (which I assume was it it was) relates to the use of Additional Waypoints, and which of the multitude of options to use for various types of stages - but thats a whole different thread! sorry!

#44 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 15 July 2008 - 01:00 AM

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 11:33 PM, said:

View Postuktim, on Jul 14 2008, 05:42 AM, said:

View PostAngelPick, on Jul 14 2008, 04:36 AM, said:

A bit of common sense by all really but hides in graveyards should be a big NO, it does't seem right somehow.

Sorry to waffle on but it needs to be said. I certainly will not be asking people to enter church grounds in the future, all clues will be visible from the outside!


Surely this is just a personal perspective. I have no issues with caches in graveyards. I would have no wish to be buried in a place which excluded everyday living folk and I wouldn't wish for any close friends or relatives to be buried in such a place.

If you don't like caches in graveyards don't do them but please don't foist your views onto others.


I'm not foisting my views on anyone, just participating in a forum. My views are valid as are anyones but thats all they are, my personal views.


Sorry if my reply has caused offence. Your statement that "hides in graveyards should be a big NO" seemed rather absolute to me. I think it's great to have caches that encourage people to visit graveyards and churches and that it's a real shame to discourage such hides.

Whilst I believe that as individuals we should have subtly different standards of behaviour in and around churches and graveyards, I'd hate to see them treated as off-limits or made subject to extra rules or restrictions. I understand the reasoning behind the decision by a hard pressed reviewer to require proof of permission for graveyard caches a large part of me says that if this is considered necessary for one type of location then maybe it's necessary for all caches. It seems very sad to apply different restrictions to church/graveyard caches, are they really so radically different from the many other areas that a cache could be hidden in?

This post has been edited by uktim: 15 July 2008 - 01:15 AM


#45 User is offline   currykev 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2306
  • Joined: 15-February 06

Posted 15 July 2008 - 02:04 AM

Off Topic - But I do like The Hornet's new avatar.Maybe he's not such a G.O.G. at all! :huh:

#46 User is offline   The Hornet 

  • G.O.G. (Grumpy old git)
  • Group: +Charter Members
  • Posts: 1158
  • Joined: 03-February 01

Posted 15 July 2008 - 03:52 AM

View Postcurrykev, on Jul 15 2008, 11:04 AM, said:

Off Topic - But I do like The Hornet's new avatar.Maybe he's not such a G.O.G. at all! :huh:

I'm just a big softy really :huh:

and before you know who says it - the emphasis is definitely on the BIG! :)

#47 User is offline   cakemaker 

  • Say it with cake.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: 12-February 06

Posted 15 July 2008 - 05:41 AM

Quote

It seems very sad to apply different restrictions to church/graveyard caches, are they really so radically different from the many other areas that a cache could be hidden in?


Yes, it's consecrated ground.

'Consecration is the setting aside of land or buildings for sacred use in perpetuity.'

#48 User is offline   uktim 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: 11-March 02

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:41 AM

View Postcakemaker, on Jul 15 2008, 05:41 AM, said:

Quote

It seems very sad to apply different restrictions to church/graveyard caches, are they really so radically different from the many other areas that a cache could be hidden in?


Yes, it's consecrated ground.

'Consecration is the setting aside of land or buildings for sacred use in perpetuity.'


Does sacred use preclude any other use :huh:

#49 User is offline   Delta68 

  • Volunteer Geocache Finder
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1544
  • Joined: 05-March 07

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:46 AM

View PostBear and Ragged, on Jul 14 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

Quote

You can usually garner numbers off of noticeboards around the church for use as clues


Notices change more rapidly than the gravestones!
Means the cache placer has to keep an eye on things... :huh:



We set a multi last year which involved getting numbers off a notice about max height for gravestones etc.
(No walking round and round the graveyard half a dozen times looking for random graves)

The notice was dated 1973 so we assumed it would be fairly permanent. Within a couple of weeks it had gone! :)

#50 User is offline   cakemaker 

  • Say it with cake.
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: 12-February 06

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:59 AM

View Postuktim, on Jul 15 2008, 06:41 AM, said:

View Postcakemaker, on Jul 15 2008, 05:41 AM, said:

Quote

It seems very sad to apply different restrictions to church/graveyard caches, are they really so radically different from the many other areas that a cache could be hidden in?


Yes, it's consecrated ground.

'Consecration is the setting aside of land or buildings for sacred use in perpetuity.'


Does sacred use preclude any other use :huh:


Don't know! Perhaps permission has to be sought from a bishop +/or reviewer!

This post has been edited by cakemaker: 15 July 2008 - 07:01 AM


Share this topic:


  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic