SeattleWayne

The OP emailed HQ and asked what was wrong with the log, and why he wasn't notified. HQ emailed back and told OP what was wrong with the log but didn't say anything about why OP wasn't notified. Curious as to why OP doesn't email HQ back, and ask again for an explanation as to why he wasn't notified? Instead, lets chalk it up as Groundspeak being unprofessional, immature and "too busy" to answer??? Does it really matter why HQ didn't explain why CO wasn't notified?

I've never experienced anything negative from Groundspeak.

It doesn't take long for someone to accidentally stumble across a geocache placed on a bench.

Very, very easy week.

I don't see many NM logs. I see a growing trend of people explaining what's wrong with the cache in their Found it! logs.

Generally speaking. Who cleans up after COs who abandon their cache, is what I was meaning. Not specific to this situation we were discussing.

Curious as to who's going to pick up the trash left behind by the CO? Probably no one.

If you are for certain the cache is missing, and the CO is MIA, I'd log a NA and move on.

Either that or the work load for the reviewers has increased.

I haven't noticed but is there a way to report caches that need maintenance on the iPhone? I've noticed a lot of caches in my surrounding area that people are reporting that the cache is needing attention in their Found It log. I take note of caches that need attention in my notes and log them when I get home.

If there's a legitimate reason as to why they cache has been down for so long, the CO should write a note explaining the reason.

That's cool. I'm planning on taking my road bike out for put a few hundred miles on it just to log 5 Virtual caches and three Earth caches next week. It should be fun.

There's been plenty of caches in my area that have been disabled for 6 months or longer, and I do not hesitate to hit the NA button.

Why not log a NA on those remaining 60 in your area instead of waiting for a reviewer to come around and do it? That way it'll speed up the archival process, and eventually open up those spots for new caches. If the cachers who've hid the caches are serious about staying in the game, they'll do something about their caches needing attention.

I'm assuming we get the souvenir for this week after July 23rd? Asking for a friend.

The cache is not considered abandoned until the Cacher is afforded the opportunity to fix what's wrong with it after it's been disabled by a reviewer. After the cache has been archived it is then considered abandoned if the Cacher has decided to do nothing with it. You can go pick up the trash for them if you want to.

No, there shouldn't be a limit on hides. Cacher A (who is retired) can hide and maintain way more than Cacher B (who is working 40 hours a week at a regular job). GS has allowed cachers to create CITO events who are concerned with the trash left behind.

The "Wow!" factor. Interesting. Thanks for posting.

It's been said many, many times over. There are seasoned members on Geocaching.com who have managed to hide way more caches then they are able to maintain. There are also seasoned members on Geocaching.com who have hid one or two caches, and have decided to go inactive for whatever reason, and have left their trash in the forest for a chipmunk to choke on. Fortunately, none of this has hindered my game play in any way. So I'm not overly worried about any of it.

And you know this for a fact?

And by saying what a great idea this is what I really meant to say is that I'd never do it.

That's actually a really great idea.

I leave nothing, and take nothing.