Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Thot

  • Rank
    Funtime Advisor

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender Male

Caching Name

  • Thot

Recent Profile Visitors

699 profile views
  1. My 1k

    I made lists of the caches that won the contests for best Houston area caches of 2007 & 2008 Unfortunately it appears many of the 2007's are gone and I don't think I finished the 2008's but most on the list are still there.
  2. My Last Cache

    I don't know how to do that. I've only dealt with two reviewers, 9key and this &*$%*&. 9key was the reviewer when I started. In my dealings with him he was a prince in comparison. He always seemed reasonable. Of course, I was a newbie and maybe I just thought what he said was how it really was. I soon learned Jeremy was a prick and began to see the capricious way things work. I think a lot of this irresponsible behavior stems from him. Another problem with the system is, as far as I know, the reviewers don't get paid. If so, he has to humor these people no matter how they behave (unless they annoy him personally or threaten his fiefdom) because his entire kingdom/wealth rests on free labor.
  3. My Last Cache

    The problem is, this prick is the only reviewer in the area and he's messed me around too many times.
  4. My Last Cache

    I can't seem to create a reply to my message without it quoting it. Some of you probably remember my rant about Prime Reviewer archiving my cache at Rocket Park and at the trainer display in front of Space Center Houston saying it was forbidden to have caches in these locations. This forced me to make them into multis. Then he turned around and approved other people's caches in the same two places -- one of which is in the exact same spot. The capriciousness of this system is too much for me.
  5. My Last Cache

    This disapproval marks the last geocache I will ever place. I'm worn out struggling with these capricious as...oles. Some of you will remember the cache name Arrow-Space. I was FTF and thought it was a clever cache. Others must have too, it had 30 favorite points. It was archived a couple of weeks ago. I've had it on my watch list for years. I'd written the owner twice asking to adopt it but he didn't reply. He'd quit caching so I knew it would get archived sooner or later. I'd prepared a cache and a cache page for immediate submission. So when it was archived last week, within a couple of hours I had placed the cache and submitted it for approval. Prime Reviewer immediately disapproved and archived it. Since then I have been in a continuous exchange trying to satisfy him so he would approve it. When, after making many different objections, he finally said a solid no, I appealed. I can't link to our exchange because the cache was never approved so this is all I can do to explain. The following is a summary of our exchange that I posted as my last note to reviewer: ============================================= This thing has gotten crazy. The previous cache that I'm replacing had been here 6 years. You approved it then and the sign you're objecting to now, was there then. The sign is against the curb. The homeowner's association has the area past the curb mowed regularly out to 10-15 feet. This is so residents who park their cars at the curb can let passengers get step out of their cars (which they cannot do with stepping onto the property beyond the sign), and walk on the lawn area without fearing snakes, etc. Also residents play pitch etc. on this mowed lawn area. The home owner's association planted the trees on this area and has them trimmed annually. Residents plant plants and flowers in this lawn area. The original cache was in one of these trees planted and maintained by the home owner's association. Originally my cache was not in or on a tree - it was magnetically attached to the sign and could be done without stepping on the general use property behind the sign. I agreed to add this statement to my cache description, "You do not need to enter the area behind the 'Private Property' sign to do this cache." Then, when you wouldn't let up, I moved the location across the street from this general use lawn area. But, that wasn't good enough, you wanted to know exactly where the cache is. So I told you. Then you came up with this new and entirely different objection -- that people might have to wander around looking for it. Gee, it's like you've never been caching, but I agreed to add specifically that it was on the fireplug, so there could be no wandering. By the way, it's not true that people doesn't use a GPSr to hunt it, you get the coordinates from Google Earth. That's how I did the earlier cache as FTF and everyone I know did it this way. And, I intend to add a coordinates checker so they can confirm they have them right -- which the previous cache did not have. As for it not requiring a GPSr to find it. I never heard of such a rule of geocaching. I know two longtime cachers who don't own a GPSr and cache exclusively with maps, like you're complaining people could hunt this one. Yes, they can, what's wrong with that?. Now you object my new coordinates are too far from my old ones. 30 feet of the change is because it was moved across the street to satisfy you (and I'll explain it's on the other side of the street when I can once again edit the cache description. It is now only 29 feet from exactly where the arrow points which is closer than the cache I'm replacing was -- coordinate checkers provide for more error than 29'. Given your repeated and changing objections, it appears you have something in for this cache or me. I urge you to stop these seemingly endless meandering objections and approve the cache. ============================================= To minimize aggravating him I didn't mention this in the summary. He first thought I had put it on a tree on the not very private "Private Property." When I said the cache could done without stepping beyond the curb onto the "private property" he thought I'd put it on a limb that extended into the street so he said, "If a tree is located wholly on one property, the entire tree is "owned" by that property owner, even if the branches go over the property line." Most everyone who who owns property in Texas knows that's not true. If a neighbors tree extends across your property line you can have all of that part of the tree cut off. I paid a tree trimmer over $100 to trim tall trees hanging over my fence. Tree trimmers know what they can and cannot do. In an appeal they require you to explain what rule the review says you didn't follow. In my appeal I further summarized the above summary as follows: ============================================== It's not entirely clear to me which guideline he is saying I didn't follow since he has changed a couple of times. He originally disapproved it because in his opinion it was on private property, so I moved it. I think he may now be maintaining a cacher does not have to use a GPSr to find this cache -- that it, they could use a map. My argument is that this is true of many if not most caches. He may be saying the cache location is too far from the puzzle solution, but the location is within 29' of the solution. He may be saying the cacher has to wander around too widely from the puzzle solution. The nature of the location means the solver cannot be very far off and I intend to add a solution checker. Even if the puzzle solver were to go to the location without checking their solution, I conceded I would say specifically where to look (on a fireplug) when the solver arrives at the location and since it's the only fireplug anywhere around, there should be no wandering. This requirement is confusing because Geocaching normally involves wandering. I would have already made these changes but I'm locked out of editing my cache page. =============================================== They denied the appeal, saying: ============================================== Thank you for using the geocaching appeals process for your cache. The appeals team has viewed your listing and the correspondence between you and the reviewer. We agree with your reviewer's assessment of this geocache listing and the advice given. There were multiple issues cited by the reviewer during the review process- from private property concerns to the lack of GPS usage. All would have to be resolved before moving forward. Thus, your cache cannot be published as-is. We recommend that you follow the guidance of your reviewer and/or refer to the Cache Listing Requirements and Guidelines and make the necessary changes. Since the listing has been archived, you would need to start over with a new listing if you wish to pursue your placement. We will inform your local reviewer of the outcome of this appeal. Regards, Chris Geocaching HQ =============================================== I don't think it's possible to overcome the objection that after you solve a puzzle it must not be possible to use a map to go to the actual cache location. This objection applies not only to all puzzle caches but to almost all caches, period. Knowing my request that all caches that can possibly be found using maps must be archived will not be honored by GC com, I quit
  6. Appealing a Reviewer Decision

    Thanks, if he doesn't reply to my last attempt in three days I plan to appeal.
  7. It seem like I remember reading somewhere you can appeal a reviewer's refusal to approve a cache. How's that done?
  8. How Many People Are Having This Problem?

    I got to thinking about what you said. All these were non-premium hides. I changed them to premium only. I hate to do that because it prevents new cachers from hunting them but all the caches I've had trouble with were not premium.
  9. How Many People Are Having This Problem?

    That's not one of the caches I was talking about. For one thing caches in that series go missing a lot, but it rarely the same ones over and over.
  10. Lone Star Reviewer

    There was another reviewer jumping on caches that needed archiving since West Texas and before Lone Star --- TheScarlettReviewer.
  11. Starting a couple of years ago I began having my caches stolen. Back then it was just one but it had not disappeared since it was placed 3 years earlier. After it was first taken it was stolen as quickly as it was replaced for two years. Since then other of my caches have begun to mysteriously disappear. Within the last past three weeks three of my caches have gone missing. One had never gone missing in six+ years since placed, another had never gone missing in 4 years. The latest one went missing a few months ago for the first time since it was placed in 2006. I replaced it a month ago, it was found once, a few days after I replaced it, and it's reported missing again today. It discourages me from maintaining caches. When I say these caches were stolen they almost have have been given the way they're hidden and how long it's been they haven't gone missing up to now. If it were just one, maybe, but three in three weeks! Are other people having this problem?
  12. That's what I meant. Then why have the map link at all? I tried to use it to confirm I had used the real coordinates and not the fake ones since I had been working with both of them.
  13. I'm not sure if we're talking past one another. While preparing a new cache, on the screen where it shows the final coordinates it has a map link which I assumed would confirm where the coordinates take you, but no, it just shows the map with all the sprinkling of caches but the final isn't there
  14. One can never tell When I click the map link I get the map without my new cache showing
  15. You solved every problem !!! Many thanks. Now, how did you ever figure that out?