[divin3]

Hi

A reviwere didn't like a picture, so he didn't publish the cache until I would remove the picture.
In an other cache was this picture allowed. It also wasn't (IMHO) against the rules. So I wrote an Mail to: appeals@Groundspeak.com

The appeals@Groundspeak.com dind't unterstand my problem (IMHO: hasn't read the mail correktly). The result was: The cache get's archived for no reason.
I can't accept this decision, because there is no reason to archive the cache.

Where can I write to?

[mvarley84]

I am not surprised that they can't understand your problem...I can't understand your problem...I think I get the point thought. You posted a picture with your cache and the cache was denied. The same picture was posted with another cache by another person and was allowed??

Perhaps if you got someone who has some better grammar/english skills to write the email for you. You might get better results that way. No offense, but it is clear that english is not your first language!!

[Keystone]

Appealing to Groundspeak is the last resort. There is no High Court of Geocaching Justice.

1. You could write back to Appeals and explain what you think they misunderstood.
2. Accept that it is not a perfect world, and move on. See the first line in my signature tagline below.

[Gitchee-Gummee]

From the Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines

Quote

Please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches. This means that the past publication of a similar geocache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the publication of a new geocache.

Groundspeak is the governing authority regarding placements listed on this site. You have no appeal higher than Groundspeak.

Discussion with reviewer 'usually' resolves some issue. I would recommend discussion with the reviewer. If the photo in question is the entire or primary basis for the desired placement, well....... You might consider other alternatives.

[Keystone]

mvarley84, on 02 May 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:

Perhaps if you got someone who has some better grammar/english skills to write the email for you. You might get better results that way. No offense, but it is clear that english is not your first language!!

It appears that the OP speaks German. You should know that Groundspeak has an employee who speaks German, due to the popularity of our game there. So, I don't think that's the issue.

OP, if you wrote your appeal in English, you are welcome to try again in German.

[Singletree Expedition]

divin3, on 02 May 2012 - 03:30 AM, said:

Hi

A reviwere didn't like a picture, so he didn't publish the cache until I would remove the picture.

Can you post the picture here? That might help in understanding. Or at least be entertaining.

Nevermind. I see it: http://coord.info/GC3FTGD

This post has been edited by Singletree Expedition: 02 May 2012 - 07:09 AM

[Moun10Bike]

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

[Gitchee-Gummee]

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

Ah yes...... Now comes "the rest of the story".........

Who would've guessed?

This post has been edited by Gitchee-Gummee: 02 May 2012 - 07:20 AM

[J the Goat]

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

[DragonsWest]

I'm gussing my next geocache, hidden in Moun10bike's fridge and recommended be found while he's at work isn't going to get published either.

[St.Matthew]

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

I see what you did there.

[Gitchee-Gummee]

DragonsWest, on 02 May 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

I'm gussing my next geocache, hidden in Moun10bike's fridge and recommended be found while he's at work isn't going to get published either.

Might be some decent SWAG in there......

[DragonsWest]

Gitchee-Gummee, on 02 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

DragonsWest, on 02 May 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

I'm gussing my next geocache, hidden in Moun10bike's fridge and recommended be found while he's at work isn't going to get published either.

Might be some decent SWAG in there......

Well, we all know the cache shouldn't be hidden with food in, but hidden in the food? Some room for interpretation there...

[The A-Team]

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

Doing a rough Google translation of the logs, it does sound like the reviewer is referring to the image as being the problem. I'm assuming the reasoning is that it has an element of an "agenda".

[Don_J]

The A-Team, on 02 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

Doing a rough Google translation of the logs, it does sound like the reviewer is referring to the image as being the problem. I'm assuming the reasoning is that it has an element of an "agenda".

Yes, the archive note mentions the "logo". The CO's response shows that the image is being used on other cache descriptions.

The image is a film can on a guardrail with a red circle and slash through it.

[Lil Devil]

Let it go. It's not worth fighting over. If it is worth fighting over, then it's an agenda, and should be archived based on that.

[GeoBain]

Lil Devil, on 02 May 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Let it go. It's not worth fighting over. If it is worth fighting over, then it's an agenda, and should be archived based on that.

I agree it's probably not worth fighting over.

But being willing to fight over it does not make it an agenda. (Unless you consider wishing to have guidelines applied consistently to be an agenda)

[The_Incredibles_]

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

And the CO is whining that their cache was archived?

[Chrysalides]

Lil Devil, on 02 May 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Let it go. It's not worth fighting over. If it is worth fighting over, then it's an agenda, and should be archived based on that.

Catch-22?

[JesandTodd]

Let me put my shock face on. GS has decided to randomly archive a cache based on sketchy rules. Do the play bingo with GC codes or something?

I can't imagine why GS would get so BH over an image that says 'quality over quantity'. Many of us on here feel the same way.
It's kinda a load of BS.

Oh wait...quality over quantity is an agenda..,riiiiiiight.

[Don_J]

Chrysalides, on 02 May 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Lil Devil, on 02 May 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Let it go. It's not worth fighting over. If it is worth fighting over, then it's an agenda, and should be archived based on that.

Catch-22?

With such sketchy info, I'm kind of wondering, if there is an agenda, who's agenda is it? Maybe the reviewer really likes guardrail micros?

[The A-Team]

Maybe the reviewer didn't like the placement as mentioned by Moun10Bike, and was looking for some excuse to archive it.

Edit for spelling

This post has been edited by The A-Team: 02 May 2012 - 04:36 PM

[adt1982]

But the placement is a perfect reason for the cache to not have even been published to begin with.

[Joshism]

Regardless of why the cache was archived, how did it get published in the first place? The railroad yard seems pretty clear on the map.

[divin3]

The first reviewer had a problem with the picture (other reviwers allowed the picture).

The appeals team (cathy) didn't read it correctly. She thought, the problem is the location.

I finally agreed to remove the picutre (IMHO the picture is still not a violation of the rules, but, if they say so "ok").

But then they thought, that it's not allowed to place a cache there, because it's private property - but - its not

After I told them (again) they said:

We have now identified that for this cache location to be publishable, you will need to show that you have the appropriate permissions to place this cache. Even if this is on public property, we will be referring to the following excerpts from the guidelines to support this assertion:

From the introduction: "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed."
Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements (section1.5 and 1.6)

So I've asked the owner of the property and he gave me his permission. I've sended the appeals team as requested with a feedback.


All appeals are discussed with more than one team member, regardless who emails you. And any comments about poor performance by Cathy are grossly mis-representative of her thorough and careful work.

Further, the concerns of the reviewer have been identified. The cache is not at a publishable location and you have not shown a reason to change this decision.

You need to accept our decision and not contact us about this matter again.

Sincerely,

I just wrote that she hasn't read my mail correctly and now they are acting like a child? lol..... Looks pretty bossi to me....

I told cathy that I wanna write to her boss, not to "sandy" the "Community Relations Manager". Is there no way to do that?





I just wanna make a cool, allowed cache for the community and give something back. It's a pitty that they have to act like an emporor on a high throne....

This post has been edited by divin3: 07 May 2012 - 10:59 AM

[TheAlabamaRambler]

Work with Groundspeak, maybe you can get them to create a Located in Railyard icon.

[Mr.Yuck]

divin3, on 07 May 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

The first reviewer had a problem with the picture (other reviwers allowed the picture).

The appeals team (cathy) didn't read it correctly. She thought, the problem is the location.

I finally agreed to remove the picutre (IMHO the picture is still not a violation of the rules, but, if they say so "ok").

But then they thought, that it's not allowed to place a cache there, because it's private property - but - its not

After I told them (again) they said:

We have now identified that for this cache location to be publishable, you will need to show that you have the appropriate permissions to place this cache. Even if this is on public property, we will be referring to the following excerpts from the guidelines to support this assertion:

From the introduction: "At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed."
Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements (section1.5 and 1.6)

So I've asked the owner of the property and he gave me his permission. I've sended the appeals team as requested with a feedback.


All appeals are discussed with more than one team member, regardless who emails you. And any comments about poor performance by Cathy are grossly mis-representative of her thorough and careful work.

Further, the concerns of the reviewer have been identified. The cache is not at a publishable location and you have not shown a reason to change this decision.

You need to accept our decision and not contact us about this matter again.

Sincerely,

I just wrote that she hasn't read my mail correctly and now they are acting like a child? lol..... Looks pretty bossi to me....

I told cathy that I wanna write to her boss, not to "sandy" the "Community Relations Manager". Is there no way to do that?





I just wanna make a cool, allowed cache for the community and give something back. It's a pitty that they have to act like an emporor on a high throne....

This is because they are from a war mongering Country, that doesn't have a Government Health Care system. Just kidding, but the thread where the Canadian guy dropped that on us is closed, so I had to use it somewhere.

Now I don't know if the unfortunate death of a German Geocacher a few months ago has made them take a better look at Safety in Europe, but per what Groundspeak Employee Moun10Bike says in his post to this thread I can see this cache being unpublishable, under the quoted section of the guidelines above in your post I'm quoting.

Sandy would be the proper person up the chain of command, I doubt any customer service complaints ever get escalated higher up than that.

[divin3]

LOL!

Thanks for you help so far... Let's see what they will decide. I'll give you the latest news...

[JesandTodd]

Mr.Yuck, on 07 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Now I don't know if the unfortunate death of a German Geocacher a few months ago has made them take a better look at Safety in Europe...

I severely doubt that...

[Sandy]

Noting that in the email received by this cache owner, 'publishable' was an error, as clear from context. 'Publishable' should read 'unpublishable'. This has been explained to the cache owner and sent with an apology for the error.

[Mr.Yuck]

Sandy, on 07 May 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

Noting that in the email received by this cache owner, 'publishable' was an error, as clear from context. 'Publishable' should read 'unpublishable'. This has been explained to the cache owner and sent with an apology for the error.

I'm confused. So has this cache been rejected by appeals, decision final?

[Sandy]

Mr.Yuck, on 07 May 2012 - 01:14 PM, said:

Sandy, on 07 May 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

Noting that in the email received by this cache owner, 'publishable' was an error, as clear from context. 'Publishable' should read 'unpublishable'. This has been explained to the cache owner and sent with an apology for the error.

I'm confused. So has this cache been rejected by appeals, decision final?

Correct. This was explained to the cache owner via email prior to us posting in this thread.

[LightHouseSeekers]

For those us watching the drama who can't read the German on the cache page.
Are we understanding correctly that is an active railyard where the cache was placed and the photos are of that yard?

[I!]

This just looks like poor communication: either GS not adequately explaining to the OP what made the cache unpublishable, or the OP making it appear that way by not relaying the full facts.

[Ambient_Skater]

Quote

You need to accept our decision and not contact us about this matter again.

What are they going to do if you contact them again? Refuse to publish the cache?

[AZcachemeister]

GeoBain, on 02 May 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

Lil Devil, on 02 May 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

Let it go. It's not worth fighting over. If it is worth fighting over, then it's an agenda, and should be archived based on that.

I agree it's probably not worth fighting over.

But being willing to fight over it does not make it an agenda. (Unless you consider wishing to have guidelines applied consistently to be an agenda)

This is an obvious agenda.
Your caches will be archived forthwith.

If you wish to appeal, be sure to reply in Swahili.

[JJnTJ]

divin3, on 07 May 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

Groundspeak said:

And any comments about poor performance by Cathy are grossly mis-representative of her thorough and careful work.

You've put Groundspeak's emails into this thread. Would you be willing to post your own emails as well? From the quote above, it sounds like there is much more to the story than what you have shared so far.

[divin3]

Hi Sandy

Thanks for joning the conversation

Quote

Mail Sandy:
You will need permission or the cache cannot be published.

I've mailed her the permission. Haven't receved an answer, so I've asked again

Quote

My Mail DiViN3
You've receved the persmission, so there is no reason for not publishing the geocache - I look forward for your activation.

[cezanne]

Don_J, on 02 May 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

The A-Team, on 02 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

Moun10Bike, on 02 May 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Are you sure that the issue was the picture and not the fact that the cache is located on a structure in the middle of a busy rail yard, with suggestions that seekers only hunt for the cache at night when the yard is gated?

Doing a rough Google translation of the logs, it does sound like the reviewer is referring to the image as being the problem. I'm assuming the reasoning is that it has an element of an "agenda".

Yes, the archive note mentions the "logo". The CO's response shows that the image is being used on other cache descriptions.

The image is a film can on a guardrail with a red circle and slash through it.

The reviewer had indeed an issue with the logo which has been designed for a quality over quantity initiative, but also with the fact that apparently the logo has first been deleted and reinserted again after he published the cache and this sort of action is a no go for most reviewers and I definitely understand that reviewers feel annoyed by this sort of dishonest strategy.

Cezanne

[cezanne]

The A-Team, on 02 May 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

Maybe the reviewer didn't like the placement as mentioned by Moun10Bike, and was looking for some excuse to archive it.

I do not think so. Such caches are still published in some parts of Europe without being questioned.




Cezanne

[cezanne]

Keystone, on 02 May 2012 - 04:06 AM, said:

It appears that the OP speaks German. You should know that Groundspeak has an employee who speaks German, due to the popularity of our game there. So, I don't think that's the issue.

OP, if you wrote your appeal in English, you are welcome to try again in German.

I think nothing of importance would change if the appeal were written in German. It's more a cultural issue than a language issue. In my experience, people coming from the US or the UK typically formulate much less direct than people from German speaking countries (there are differences within those countries as well) and even what is regarded as perfectly normal and polite for a born German (which I do not believe to be the case in the situation discussed here), might be understood as respectless in the UK/US. The culture of complaining about things is very different.



Cezanne

This post has been edited by cezanne: 21 May 2012 - 12:42 PM

[OZ2CPU]

I love the logo, the idea about quality over quantity !!
your ideas are good and good intentions..
May I come with another friendly suggestion ?
your cache page and hint is written in German only..
your city and area is a well known turist location,
some may find it hard to understand all important details and even can not find your cache simply since
they can not understand your page,
why not please add a few lines in English, and make hint in English too ?
you can then add the attribute Turist Friendly and get alot more happy faces :-)
you dont need to be perfect in English at all, we dont care at all about grammer and such,
we just want to be able to see your cool location and find your cool cache :-)

[cezanne]

OZ2CPU, on 22 May 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

I love the logo, the idea about quality over quantity !!
your ideas are good and good intentions..

Both the initiative and the logo are not due to the OP.


Moreover, it is certainly subjective how quality for a geocache is defined.

I would not be compelled to go to a freight station at night or at weekends outside of the operating hours and visit a location where I'm not supposed to be
and would not feel comfortable to search there for a cache that does not have a reasonable hint.




Cezanne

[NYPaddleCacher]

Wow. It looks like the photo that was asked to be removed is still there. The cache page has no found it logs, one DNF and seven notes (two that should have been DNFs), an Archive log, escalated to appeals, denied by appeals. the CO asked not to respond about the cache again (ignored by the CO)....

There's a term that I've seen used to describe other caches like this....train wreck, which is kind of ironic given it's location.

[Pup Patrol]

An out-of-context reply posted by the OP in a thread in a different forum:

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=261217





B.

[OZ2CPU]

>I would not be compelled to go to a freight station at night or at weekends
>outside of the operating hours and visit a location where I'm not supposed to be
>and would not feel comfortable to search there for a cache that does not have a reasonable hint.

I speak in general, since I have not been to this specific location (yet)
real life can look alot different compared to the very old pictures you see on google earth.

well, some caches do push the limit specially to some visitors,
if you do not feel comfordable about a cache location or its hints or lack of it,
please dont go there.
I agree I normally like/prefer a spooky or private or offlimit location,
to have a written permission on the page, and if needed special instructions about how to behave there if it makes sense.

However the caches we enjoyed the most and can remember the best
are caches that one way or another pushed the limit for this sport / hobby
for us, with our skill level and experiance level.
for others it can be alot more or alot less it takes to impress or make your day.

This post has been edited by OZ2CPU: 22 May 2012 - 03:58 AM

[cezanne]

OZ2CPU, on 22 May 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

>I would not be compelled to go to a freight station at night or at weekends
>outside of the operating hours and visit a location where I'm not supposed to be
>and would not feel comfortable to search there for a cache that does not have a reasonable hint.

I speak in general, since I have not been to this specific location (yet)
real life can look alot different compared to the very old pictures you see on google earth.

My comment was also meant to be a general one - I have neither used satellite maps nor have I been at the location.
What I tried to say is that quality of geocaches is something very subjective
and from the fact that someone uses this "quality instead of quantity" logo it is not implied that the
concerned cache is necessarily one that is a cache that is both excellent and also well suited for a site like
gc.com.

Quote

well, some caches do push the limit specially to some visitors,
if you do not feel comfordable about a cache location or its hints or lack of it,
please dont go there.

I would not go there anyway, but this does not mean that every cache should
be published on gc.com. For example, geocaches hidden at active rail road bridges
certainly have their fans and push their limits, but do not have their place on
a site like gc.com.

Quote

However the caches we enjoyed the most and can remember the best
are caches that one way or another pushed the limit for this sport / hobby
for us, with our skill level and experiance level.
for others it can be alot more or alot less it takes to impress or make your day.

Geocaching has went mainstream - so I do not think that the top level priority is what impresses
geocachers the most. This can taken into account, but only after ensuring a few other more important aspects
like legal issues.



Cezanne

[divin3]

Hi OZ2CPU

My wife is scottish and she could translate it very well.
I had the same idea, to translate the cache. But at the mometn I don't wanne put more effort in it. I was also thinking about closing the Wolfgottesacker-cache, bacuase my idea was to give something back. And after all this, I don't really wont to "give something" back and support GC.com....

Sandy told me that she's working with the reviwer (that was a month ago). Still no news... Don't know what's the problem. The landowner said it's ok, so why not just allow the cache? ......

Don't know what your talking about. The cache isn't aginst any rule - so just allow it - even if someone dosen't like my attitude or the enviroment or what eva...

This post has been edited by Keystone: 20 June 2012 - 03:06 AM

[divin3]

I waited now over one month - no responese, so I wrote again - let's see what's the answer

[Redfist]

divin3, on 28 June 2012 - 08:49 AM, said:

I waited now over one month - no responese, so I wrote again - let's see what's the answer

They even said (paraphrasing) "The answer is no, deal with it and leave us alone."

Perhaps you should accept that the answer is no. Then... "deal with it". Then... "leave them alone".

Food for thought.