Hi, thanks all for your feedback. I think the poll has stalled basically because you are not sure what I proposed.

For the record (as voting is still open), as it stands, 3 people (including me) think the principle is OK, 5 think it is tabboo.

I can be very specific now as two of the proposed caches have been published, the third is unavoidably delayed as it is dependent on another project that I have not been involved in being completed. Maybe I'll have the opportunity to help the other project along and thus being the cache to fruition sooner than would otherwise be possible....if that's what cachers would like.

The two caches that have been published are "Around Cabbage Hill" (GC1454N) and "Nuptown" (GC14598). The third, not yet out of the starting blocks, is "Warfield Heritage" (would be GC1459A).

What the three multi-cache routes share is a common start point (Frost Folly Car Park)
and a common end point (a large ammo box). Within the large ammo box are three small locked cash boxes. In order to gain access to log books, exchange items, trackable items etc. you have to complete the route of your chosen cache, calculate the coordinates for and find the micro-cache that contains the key for the corresponding cash box in the ammo box. All waypoints for each route are totally independent, the keys are sited more than 0.1 miles apart and only one of them is intended to be within 0.1 miles of the final (because it's a super hiding place&#33

In essence, you can't complete the cache without the key. The way I'd look at it is that the key caches are essentially the final locations, because the large ammo box is an easy find (as such large caches usually are&#33 and has been placed with full consent of the land owner. Unfortunately, the site with consent for the ammo box is too small to accommodate more than one final location, otherwise this would not be a discussion point at all!

This presents some possible variations on conventional geocaching. For example, for an event (such as a birthday party), two teams of cachers could each take one of the routes, the winners being the ones who complete their route first (the multi-cache waypoints have been chosen deliberately to make the caches roughly equivalent in difficulty), or for an all-day event, two teams of cachers would each complete both caches, one starting with GC1454N, the other with GC1459A, the winners being the team that signed the second log book first.

As you'll see from the two cache listings, they have involved a lot of preparation - and repair after the floods, however before even the second one had been published, someone had complained to me and to the reviewers claiming a conflict with the guidelines. That's what prompted me to create the poll. I did not set out to cause conflict and I'm happy to follow the majority view. If the majority don't like the idea, it will mean scrapping the third and final cache in the series and finding an alternative endpoint for the Nuptown cache.

However, following the publishing of the second cache, the complainant carried out their threat to escalate their complaint to Groundspeak. The current outcome is that all three proposed caches could stand as planned, but my concept has not been accepted and could not be replicated by others.

To be frank, what bothers me most at this point is that a precedent not to allow this concept to be repeated by others has been set on the basis of one complaint, which has essentially arisen through an accident of geography. I personally believe very strongly in the democratic process (which is indeed why I'm a Parish Councillor) and not in dictat. Thus, the outcome, even though I have approval to complete the series, is in your hands through your votes.

After all, the discussion point is around guidelines, not rules or laws. We enjoy a young hobby and in my view, it should be capable of adaptation, if that's what the participants want. To quote George Bernard Shaw: The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

I hope this clarifies the matter and I look forward to your votes and opinions.

Regards, Roderick Parks (Sandvika)