Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Another new statute from PR

14 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Just in case you didn't know this as I didn't.   PR stated this to me just now.

I said there is precedent.

"That's from years before the Challenge guidelines were even written. Please note from the Guidelines: "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. If a geocache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the geocache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated, the geocache is likely to be grandfathered and allowed to stand as is."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

That has been around for years. I remember being told that 4-5 years ago or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's in the knowledge books.  Reiterated in the Challenge Cache section.  And - it's PR's favorite catchphrase!  I expected it on my Benchmark Types Challenge that published the other day.  Never had a challenge cache publish so quickly.  Was unexpected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah, never try to point to an existing cache as reason PR should publish yours.  He'll trot out that "no precedence" line...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Maybe we can start a "Nighttime Moron" group, cause I am an expert.  LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well I pull the precedence punch a lot.  Old law school habits die hard.  Considering in 98% of the world it does matter.

Baytown Bert likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Maybe we can start a "Nighttime Moron" group, cause I am an expert.  LOL

Let's do that Bert.  I think we could be the charter members.

Baytown Bert likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well, you're good with me, my friend.  Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Prime Reviewer seems to me to be a split personality, for most of us he interprets the "guidelines" in the strictest way possible. But on occasion he will completly ignore the most enforced of the "guidelines". Some examples include a blatently Commercial Cache placement Zumba'd Out of Here! GC2VE24, a cache placed less than 50 feet from an existing (disabled) cache roger Roger GC421HG was placed while Roger! GC18KBR was still active on GC.com, and the latest Quick and Easy GC457A7 placed less than 80 feet from a very active railroad track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah, Duck Crossing #3 got published while the old Duck Crossing #3 was still active 65' away!  Sure, it was temporarily disabled, but it still showed on the map.  Not sure how that happened either.

It pays to have friends in high places.

 

Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah, Duck Crossing #3 got published while the old Duck Crossing #3 was still active 65' away!  Sure, it was temporarily disabled, but it still showed on the map.  Not sure how that happened either.

Yes that was a funny one.  A new cache in GBP published last week 100 feet from a puzzle final which is only a few years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0