[GeoStL] Re: Mass Caching Question
- From: BruceS <bruces3418@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:11:55 -0500
-
On 7/10/05, J.A. Terranson <measl@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> -
>
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, BruceS wrote:
>
>
> I've noticed that almost nobody reads the actual rating guidelines...
> You're right - most 3/3 caches are really 1-1.5s. Of course, there's the
> occasional "1.5" that is really a 4.5, so I guess it's hit and miss. The
> reason we started going for 3/3 or higher was that the 1/1, 2/2 etc were
> just rediculously simple, and no challenge. The 3 and ups at least
> [generally] require a decent hike, although very few of them are really
> difficult once you arrive.
>
> When a cache is first reviewed, does the local admin doing the review
> check for the rating, or is that left to the discretion of the placer?
>
> --
It is always left to the discretion of the placer as only the placer
actually has been to the cache site. The reviewer only reviews what
is submitted not the actual cache. The reviewer might make a
suggestion if someone turns in a 5/5 that is in a Walmart parking lot
or a 1/1 that requires a 10 mile hike but it is really at the
discretion of the placer. In general a 1/1 is pretty obvious but the
difference between a 2/2 and 3/3 is often negligible. I don't pay any
attention to the rating of a cache unless it is rated 5 for terrain
(if it requires equipment). Other than that it is a cache to be
done... If a cache is too short and easy of walk for you park 2 miles
away and walk to it... turns a 1 terrain into a 3 :-).
****************************************
Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com
Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
Mail List FAQ's: //www.freelists.org/help/questions.html
****************************************
To unsubscribe from this list:
send an email to geocaching-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
Subject field
Other related posts:
