OzGuff

shymntmn now has the newest extreme night cache in western NC listed and ready for business. The Beta Beta Testers -- Nuwati (34), Flowerdoc (my 70 year old father-in-law) and I (44) -- had an absolutely fantastic time last Monday night. (And some of Tuesday morning...) [The Alpha Beta Tester -- Rabid Chipmunks -- gave it a run through two days before us.] I can't really say much without giving some of the unique features away, but you WILL enjoy this caching experience! And it 100% HAS to be done at night! (Not just because the cache owner wants you to do it at night but because there are stages that are impossible to complete during daylight hours.) At one of the more extreme stages Flowerdoc initially said he would let us younger (and more insane) cachers get it done. But after watching us have so much fun he decided to give it a go. And completed that stage with a huge s***-eating grin all over his face! I have found a few caches over the last five years. This one immediately vaults into my list of Top Ten Caching Experiences!! You really have to experience it in order to understand how cool it is! However, if you attempt this cache think carefully about group size. Three is probably the perfect number to attempt this, as all will get to make sizable contributions throughout the night. Four is maybe OK but you are pushing the limit. More than that and some of you might as well have stayed in the car and had the others just sign the logbook on your behalf. (Please note that all stages have now been weight-tested under actual caching conditions to 240 pounds.) (I'm not telling which of us three weighs 240...) I look forward to reading the logs of those who attempt Athena's Curse! And I thank Jurgen/shymntmn for spending the last year putting this epic caching adventure together! IMHO this cache truly rivals -- if not surpasses -- all other extreme caches in western NC!!! (Even the original TUBE TORCHER...) Make plans now to head to Columbus NC!!

I have a multi-cache where one stage takes you to a point where there are two obvious choices -- following either will eventually provide you with coordinates. If you choose wisely you will get the correct coordinates to the next stage; choosing poorly will get you the coordinates of a nearby lightpole where a magnetic strip directs you back to the other wiser choice. As there is something physically there placed by me at that "poor choice" it is listed as a "Stage of a Multi". You may not have to visit that spot if you initially make the wise choice but it still needs to be listed as a physical stage. I think...

Forgive me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that GC.com benchmark stats on a cacher's profile page ONLY include found benchmarks. Clicking on the benchmark icon then brings you to a list of ALL benchmark entries -- found, not found, destroyed, notes -- but the number reported on the profile page is only for found benchmarks. Am I mis-reading something here?

FYI -- I went ahead and added the photographic evidence requirement to the ALR. Only one cacher had logged the cache as a find, and she had 99 photos of the 150 benchmarks she had found/recovered. (And has photos for more but just hasn't loaded them.)

A Century Of Benchmarks I don't expect it to be found frequently. Those who do will have earned it!

I have a cache with an additional Logging Requirement -- you have to have found/logged at least 100 benchmarks before logging the cache. Do you think I should make the ALR a little more strict by only accepting benchmark finds that also include an uploaded photo of the benchmark?

I believe that the purpose of this thread has been achieved. It appears that the vast majority of responders to my original questions feel that armchair NMs and armchair NAs are a mis-use of those types of logs which should usually be reserved for cachers who can provide firsthand accounts of the state of the cache and/or cache location. The discussion has devolved into one cacher working himself into a fevered pitch while others throw well-aimed fastballs at him. In order to stop this before anyone gets hit by a pitch I will bring the thread to a close. As we are finding out it is usually a losing battle to argue with the self-righteous... My one hope is that out of this thread a new verb will come to be used by cachers the world round -- "RanHefner". (As in, "That cache has been out of commission for months; wonder when it will be RanHefnered?")

Ack! I've been RanHefnered!!!

It depends on the type of caches you prefer. Bent Creek is definitely a great place if you like hikes/bikes in the woods. My personal favorite in the area is God Kissed The Earth and Called It Asheville (GC2A30). It includes a nice walk around the downtown area, then a short drive to a bird sanctuary. You might also want to check out ncgeocachers.org, where there is a Greatest Hits section showing caches around the state that are noteworthy. Feel free to email me if you want more info about caches in the area...

I would hate to be one of those posters... Hope you are having fun at GW6 Matt!

You didn't mention what type of caches you like, but in that area I like The Honeymooners Cache, Wayah Bald, and Fabulous, Fantastic Fire Tower Friday.

"Never" truly IS a long time, so I will have to admit that there probably are circumstances where an armchair NA is appropriate. But those circumstances are likely the exception. Since RH has become the de facto Poster Child for armchair NAs I direct the following mainly to him. One of the first lines of the Cache Listing Guidelines is "As the cache owner, you are responsible for the placement and care of your cache." Well, how about that -- cache owners are responsible for the care of their caches. Not someone sitting halfway around the world -- or across the state -- getting eye strain from staring at a monitor all day. The two boxes that every cache placer checks when they submit a new cache say, Read the above carefully. We agree to abide by the terms of use agreement. Fair enough -- Groundspeak doesn't want us doing illegal things. And we agree that we have read and understand the guidelines. Read and understood. Not read and promise to follow the edicts blindly without consideration for any other life-impacting event. However, it is entirely possible that you RH are right. But right isn't always right. Leaving a bad taste in a couple dozen cachers mouths may lead to them deciding to NOT place more caches, and then we all suffer. An NA email may lead to an active cacher getting disheartened and leaving the activity, and then we all suffer. My guess is that you will continue to log armchair NMs and NAs. Hope you don't mind then if -- when I hear of another armchair NA -- that I continue to think of the south end of a north bound horse. You may be right and within your right, but there are better, less abrasive ways to deal with caches needing maintenance.

I have found a perfect cache for an armchair Needs Archived -- Once more unto the breach, my friends, once more by RanHefner. After a series of DNFs the cache owner said that he would have it back up in a week or two. That two week "deadline" has now been reached. The guidelines on Cache Maintenance say It appears that the cache owner has abandoned the cache and it needs to be archived. Should I pull the trigger?

I went out and re-found the cache that got me involved in this thread. Nine hours and many miles later I can officially re-log the find. And it really was a ton of fun! Cool views, cool puzzles, day-caching, night-caching -- it had it all! The cache has not yet been archived, and I truly hope it is not! There is a group heading out Saturday to begin their assault. This cache has the potential to be compared favorably to TUBE TORCHER and TUBE TORCHER II!

Good thing an armchair NA wasn't posted as that would likely have led to an unwarranted archival!

First of all I would again like to thank all that have replied! The fact that the vast majority of folks here considered my "find" legitimate was nice to hear. However, I have decided to wait until I complete the rest of the stages in order to re-log the find. P24K obviously has a lot tied up in this cache; if our relationship is salvageable -- and it is a pretty big "if" -- then this is the first step.

P24K: You have quite the selective memory. In an email I sent to you on the morning after I logged your cache -- maybe10 hours later, I wrote, "As you have already guessed I did NOT find all of the stages. In fact the only stage I DID find is the first -- though I have calculated the coordinates for about half of them. The book provides a whole lot of info that enables you to get much of the missing info, and then a few assumptions gets you the rest of the way." The assumptions were mainly mathematical; believe it or not, Sudoku puzzles have practical applications for solving missing digits of cache coordinates. My now-archived online log as well as my physical log were written in an ambiguous manner so it wasn't immediately apparent if I had found all of the stages or not. I did this intentionally as I knew that there were folks working on finding all of the stages and that they would be signing the logbook probably later that same day. I wanted them to go, "How did he do that?" The reactions to my find have been, IMHO, disproportionate to the situation. And Kim, for that I am sorry. Graeme

P24K: As I pointed out in my last post the coordinates ARE calculable from information contained in the book with NO information about you and/or your past. If I scanned the relevant page and loaded it here I am sure that folks would have a decent idea what road to drive in order to get to the cache within half an hour at most. When you "encoded" the coordinates you should not have also encoded the numbers representing the full degrees; that alone gives anyone five digits for free. Ask RC to verify if he had the coordinates -- within a hundred feet or so -- way before getting to the second last stage. I didn't lie. I used no "inside" information. I used my brain and saved myself much time and effort. And I still plan on going out with someone to find the rest of the stages. I am sorry you feel the way that you do.

I pointed out this thread to the cache owner in question so that she could follow along and -- if she desired -- add her three cents worth. Since she has now jumped in feet first I can be a little more direct: The coordinates for the physical cache are available for anyone to calculate from the information provided by the cache owner with NO previous knowledge of the cache owner. By using simple substitution and then some basic math all of the coordinates can be filled in with the exception of one -- the second decimal of longitude. (And it can only be one of three numbers.) The distance between using the three numbers is less than 400 feet, but once you arrive at the obvious parking spot for all three points you will see a sign that basically lets you know you are in the right spot. The use of one's geo-senses then directs you to the cache. (Plus the original hint was very specific once in the general area.) [i have also had communication with one of the two finders who found all stages -- he says he had the coordinates for the final long before completing everything but decided to continue stage to stage.] The cache is based on The Twilight Zone and each of the stages is loosely based on a different episode. The cache owner refers to the stages as "episodes". The logbook has a section asking for your favorite/least favorite episodes. I answered based on the synopses included in the book -- and my memory of many watched TZ episodes. Apparently the cache owner was looking for opinions on the stages of the cache hunt and not opinions on the TZ episodes. A mis-interpretation at most. But as I understood the question I did not lie. I swapped trade items -- I left two can openers, two lanyards, and a completely new never used and still in the box wireless phone. (I also dropped in a GJTB and a geocoin.) I took a pen and a geocoin. (And inadvertently took a $10 gift certificate that I stuck in my pocket while checking out the loot; I meant to put it back in the cache before leaving but found it still in my pocket on the drive back home. I told the cache owner that I would replace the gift certificate ASAP.) I think I definitely traded up. There is no doubt that the cache owner has put an incredible amount of time, effort, and money into the cache. The investment -- emotional too -- has been great and over a long period of time. Having had a similar experience with one of my own more extreme caches I can empathize. But still feel that with my signature in the logbook I deserve the find. And I still plan to go out with some friends and find the rest of the stages.

I just figured out the final coordinates to the above referenced cache while sitting in my living room in Asheville NC. Nice idea for a cache but the walk through the Arbor Hills Nature Preserve -- except to find the final -- was unnecessary. BTW -- the cache in my situation is listed as a multi.

WG: You know me. We have cached together. We have broken bread together. How could you possibly think that I would create more drama and escalate the situation? I still DO plan on finding the rest of the stages as it sounds like a ton of fun. And still not sure what I will do -- if anything -- about the deleted find. Thanks to all for the feedback!

TGB: My online log does NOT mention that I skipped stages, but it does say that a ton of work was put into the cache. (As evidenced by the 36-page book printed like TV Guide -- and shrink-wrapped -- found at the first stage.) But I know exactly how the cache owners feel! I have a fifteen cache series -- 8 in the first level leading to four leading to two leading to one. The FTF on the 15th cache had not found any of the previous 14 and were able to make a few guesses based on info provided on the cache page. I was initially ticked off, but then I got over it. (And I never thought about deleting their finds.) I reworked the cache page to make it almost impossible to find the last one without having found the previous two. It was definitely my fault for designing the puzzle so poorly, and kudos to those who were able to utilize this loophole. I suppose that an additional question related to my original questions is, "Is it a given that all stages of a multi MUST be found in order to qualify for signing the logbook and then claiming an online find?"

Thanks to all who have replied so far. I have already communicated with the cache owner about the possibility of keeping the find, but her reply was not all that positive. It was fairly obvious that she did not take the time to read my reasoned logic; her reply was, "I am not getting into drama with you. It was a given to locate all stages." (Though she did offer me the opportunity to log a Note.) The vague Find log suggested by KBI would not have worked as there were apparently some problems at a number of the stages/episodes which warranted cache owner contact so that the other two could continue. Since I did not contact the cache owner to request clarification she was already pretty sure that I may not have hit all the stages. Deleting the find was what really threw me! I would have been happier had she asked me to change it into a Note. (Though I'm still not sure how I would have reacted to that request...) But I tend to agree that finding the cache and signing the logbook -- without any help from the cache owner I might add -- seems to qualify as a found cache.

My apologies for resurrecting a four-year old thread, but I couldn't find another that directly addressed what I wanted to ask. (If someone can direct me that way, great!) A new cache pops up in my area and it looks like an epic adventure based on a well-known TV series. At the first stage a book is provided with information on the seventeen "episodes", many with seemingly intricate puzzles to solve and a couple that will have to be completed at night. After a complete read of the book I discover that the location of the final cache is pretty darn obvious so make the 40 mile round-trip drive, find the cache, sign the logbook, and swap some trackables. I also send an email to the cache owner letting them know what I did, how I did it, and promising to complete all of the other stages in the near future and in the company of a couple of friends. The cache was found by two cachers later that day who completed all episodes, some in the company of the cache owner. My Find log gets deleted by the cache owner who claims that they were getting flak. (Quotes from emails include, "It was not fair to the group who spent two days searching and locating each episode." and "I was put in a bad situation with other cachers being not to happy about it being there ,so I removed it!") At the time I signed the logbook there was nothing on the cache page about having to find all episodes in order to find the cache, but it now contains, "YOU MUST FIND ALL EPISODES TO LOG THIS CACHE! IT IS A REQUIREMENT!" In the big picture this is no big deal. I plan to find all of the episodes when time allows. (The two who completed all 17 episodes took about 14 hours.) I know that a cache owner has much power and latitude with their caches, but should my "Find" have been deleted? Was my "Find" legitimate?

Aren't there guidelines about civility here in the forums? Where is a hall monitor when you need one? RH: Yelling at someone who holds a differing opinion does not make your case stronger. We are allowed to disagree. What I have asked for in this thread is information on the official Groundspeak guidelines for the uses of NMs and NAs. My guess is that Groundspeak actually wants to keep the "rules" a little fuzzy as Groundspeak (and local reviewers) probably don't mind hall monitors and armchair geo-police keeping tabs on cache maintenance issues. But until word is handed down on the proper usages of NMs and NAs many of us out here actually finding and hiding caches will continue to believe that the practice of armchair NMs and NAs is not kosher. To me it is sort of like receiving a speeding ticket because someone told the police officer that I was speeding -- and the police officer was not on duty and fast asleep at the time I was allegedly speeding. (OK, so the analogy may not fit, but I am pressed for time and had to type something!)