Jump to content

ConsHaltonCache

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ConsHaltonCache

  1. Wholeheartedly agree with justintim1999.
  2. No. Please no. (Have to jump in when silica is mentioned.) It will not keep a cache dry. Will not keep a log dry. You need a quality container that is well maintained! Dido this. so many times it is the ziploc that caused a failure by being caught in a seal. I still use them because everyone seems to THINK they are necessary and add them themselves (even when I've used clearly labeled waterproof paper) if I don't but I make sure the ones I use are small enough not to get caught in the seal. In reality the ziplock is not going to save the log if the container fails. Wrapping containers in plastic is just gross... A cache container does not necessarily need replacing once a year but I think all caches would benefit from an inspection and scrub once a year, especially if they show any sign of wet inside(at anytime) I do switch them out and take the old one back for a full wash, scrub and drying indoors. If it proves watertight after that I will reuse. Often it is just dirt and debris in the seal or cachers who visited in the rain. (I don't cache in the rain but some do, that alone can cause a moldy log book if never aired out). Only use genuine Lock-n-lock or pelican or such. (cheep dollar store knockoffs fail quickly) Yep, dido this. (I hate camo tape. period.) And I like to do the scrub under some running water to be sure. (then fully dry) In the field scrub is a stop gap until I can get back with a container to place while the original is cleaned. (although my farthest one I have use the nearby stream, a towel and a nice hot dry sunny day) + 1 +10 Truly wish people used NM when needed! Emergency stop gap is fine if you wish/have means, but the owner STILL needs to come out and address the original issue that caused the problem. Always post a NM.
  3. None of my caches are PMO and I never get false NM logs. 95% of visitors just DON'T log a NM when needed...I know of many PMO caches that are in terrible state and have been for months and yet not a single MN has been logged. It's amazing how many people are afraid of a MN. Owner and visitor alike. It's irrational. If it is a false MN just clear it after you have determined all is well with the cache.... making all caches PMO is really not helping attract new members or encouraging casual cachers (just makes the cache less visited, which I guess is fine for owners who never want to go out and do actual maintenance, lower visits will mean lower maintenance in general but from what I've seen PMO does nothing to improve the cache content, or quality, and maintenance need is usually determined by visitation and just general age... but thats a whole different topic.)
  4. Completely disagree. The idea that in the circumstances described a needs maintenance log is some form of insult to the cache owner is completely ridiculous. The CO overreacted and an appropriate response would have been to thank you for the information and to temporarily disable the cache and post occasional updates as long as it remained disabled. I agree with you. The reason I suggested in my previous post to post a NA to alert the reviewer is because the CO is slacking on temp disabling the listing and keeping geocachers posted on the cache. Dido. The cache owner was rude. There is no need for swearing at all, and the reaction was prity extreme for a simple NM. It may have been more considerate to message the cache owner privately about the situation first but based on the extreme response to a simple NM I am not sure the owners response would be any different to a PM and a NM is nice to alert the other cachers that there may be an issue at the site if the owner is slow to disable. As an owner I would be happy with either form of contact to let me know there was an issue. Certainly no reason to take a NM personally. Its an easy attribute to clear once the issue is resolved. If the cache was still active but the trail maintenance prevents access then a Needs Maintenance was perfectly acceptable. The cache page needs action from the cache owner. Needs Maintenance is to inform the cache owner that they need to take action of some sort, either physical or to the listing. In this case the maintenance was not to the physical cache but to the listing. No need for an owner to get upset about being given this information. If the cache owner refuses to disable the cache while it is inaccessible then I would likely to post a Needs Archive after a month or so in order to alert the reviewers of the situation. Edit: TriciaG's solution is better, alert the reviewer privately is a good solution if the owner takes no action. Its inappropriate to leave the cache active if there is no hope of accessing the area or if one is trespassing to access it....
  5. I feel just the opposite. I don't bother looking for caches that only contain a log. Dido...just a log is boring... Especially when you have little ones along, they just don't see the point of a container with only a log, but even myself I like to see whats there and enjoy leaving fun toys in my caches for kids. I get really really tired of just a small container with a paper...sig items are especially cool.
  6. I agree! I wish people were NOT so reluctant to post the NM and NA appropriately. To answer the original post; I am not reluctant to post NM or NA if I feel it is appropriate. If I find a cache that is soaked or moldy or broken I do not hesitate to log a Needs Maintenance. A Needs Archive I am a bit slower, but still not reluctant. If it does not already have a Needs Maintenance then that is my first step. If there is a NM and there has been no response for months I try to contact the cache owner by message or email. If I do not get a response at all after a month then I often contact again and give a bit more time, if still no response and no maintenance performed on the cache then I will post a Needs Archive. (BUT I think a cacher could post a NA on a cache with multiple NM logs and no attention but I try contacting first as a courtesy). If there is a long long string of DNF and NM then I may just post a NA straight away... I actually WISH people would post NM on my caches more often...I hate getting out there to find a cache that has clearly been wet and soggy for quite some time (IE signatures clearly made on wet soggy paper that tore, or multiple replacement logs that are also now wet...) but there has been no mention of it in the logs. I try to check up on mine regularly but its not always often enough. Cachers: Don't be afraid to tell the owner something is up with their cache! At the very least up it in the find log or a note...(but if I get a hundred logs over a long weekend I may miss something!) I do not see why the name should be changed to a 'needs reviewer attention', a Needs Archive is almost always posted because it DOES need to be archived(due to owner neglect)! That does not mean it is forgone conclusion it WILL be archived...if the owner suddenly shows up and solves the issue then it can be re-instated...(but like some have said that does not often happen). I can see a very few situations that could use a separate attribute that is a 'needs reviewer attention' but if the owner cannot/does not correct the issue than the cache needs archiving anyways so the NA is often appropriate in the end anyways. *shrug*
  7. Yes, my example had the only purpose to highlight that situations can be different. The topicstarter provided two examples but the question itself was a general one ("What sort of maintenance is Good"). So, the general answer should be "depending on circumstances". Sometimes even a small maintenance isn't worth doing (like with an abandoned cache which was mentioned above). Sometimes is may be OK to do full maintenance (like the situation I described). We are in agreement here. Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make and the only reason I do respond the way I do. There is a level of responsibility to owning a cache. Newbies need to know that from the start. I would do similar to justintim1999 in that situation. Clearly the cache should not be out in the open, I would gather it up and put it out of site but it is still necessary to log a "Needs Maintenance" to alert the owner of the issue and allow them to deal with it. That's often the key point most people do not do. It's not my responsibility as a visitor to make sure that cache is totally up to snuff, the "Needs Maintenance" is necessary and the owner needs to ensure its properly placed and supplied. I think we are all generally in agreement. I just express the hard line (especially to newbies) because I have seen far to many caches being "maintained" by non-owners (with varying degrees of quality and varying degree of actions) and sometimes this just leads to worse situations (multiple containers, all of them filled with mold).
  8. Quoting original post above. In this case I feel it is unacceptable to perform maintenance. Even just replacing a logbook. Placing a dry piece of paper into a wet cache does not solve the problem that caused the log to become wet in the first place. It only results in yet another wet log. Even if the cache owner is still active they need to fix the problem. A new paper (to also become wet) does not fix the cause... CJ - your example is a very different situation. You had the cache owner on the phone...they confirmed you were at the right location and gave their permission for you to take actions they was fully aware of and condoned. In that example I do think that is fine (Key factor: the owner is aware and involved). Not at all the same as routinely replacing logs for absentee owners or containers that are not waterproof. As a cache owner I want to know when things are getting damp inside. The solution may be as simple as taking it inside to dry it out or it may require a whole new container but that is my responsibility. As a cache finder I really really hate moldy logs (and caches). A replaced log will quickly be just as bad as the first if the reason for the wetness is not dealt with. People cache in the rain, things get humid, snow may fall inside, a watertight container will just let that moisture continue to fester and rot many a new log...a cracked container lets even more in...both need to be solved. Zipper bags: I agree with L0ne.R's comments...they are prity useless most of the time, but I still have my log books in a zipper bag since they seem to be deemed essential by 99.99% cache visitors and I'd rather have one appropriately sized to the log book and cache container rather than ones placed by visitors and jammed in there only to get stuck in the caches seal...
  9. It is the cache owners responsibility to perform maintenance. YOU the finder should NOT be performing maintenance. If the cache owner is no longer active than so be it. Post a Needs Maintenance. If owner does not come back then it needs to be archived. As to the other discussion: I don't see silica doing anything. Proper waterproof cache container should keep the worst of the water out. and I do agree it is the finders responsibility to handle a cache carefully (close properly, do not open in the pouring rain, please!) But that said there are always going to be finders who did not take care and some that will cache in the rain, even just a very humid day and moisture can get trapped inside a good container, so as an owner I am responsible for visiting my cache on some sort of regular scheduled to resolve issues. I often take a spare container, switch them entirely and take the old one home for a good wash and full 24 hour air out before returning. I hate wet cache smell. Edit: See the Help Center for more information on Cache ownership responsibilities: #4. Geocache Ownership: A Long-Term Relationship
  10. What about "Retrievable in winter"? (not that they are going to change it, but something with 'retrievable', or anything along that line, would be my choice to help clarify)
  11. This seems to be veering off topic. I have had my initial query fulfilled. (I will not try "educational notes" but just use NM and NA as appropriate and explain why I am logging such) We do not need another heated discussion on owner responsibilities/maintenance. The guidelines are clear what is required of owners. I do think all cachers should use the NM and NA when needed and when appropriate. There should not be a fear associated with alerting an owner there is an issue with their cache...but again off topic, thats not what my query was really about. I've come to the conclusion that I cannot educate everyone everywhere, some will continue in a behavior even if you asked them not to, and if a cacher really wanted to educate they themselves would read the help center and other resources. Mods feel free to close post if you feel appropriate.
  12. There is "Available during winter" icon and there is a "Seasonal Access" icon. To me "Seasonal Access" means the area will be closed during one season (which season should be detailed in the cache page). To me that does not mean the area is open in the winter...its only about the area NOT being open at some time...not necessarily winter specifically. For example I would use it on a cache that is an area frequented by hunters I may use the "Seasonal Access" icon because the area would be prity much off limits during hunting season, but that same site would be fine to access in the winter. I'm certainly not going to use the "Seasonal Access" Icon to indicate an area is OPEN in the winter. All I was saying is that there is no icon to indicate the area is for sure open in the winter and suggesting is that maybe such an icon is needed if people are wanting to know such information (as that seems to be what the confusion is about: is the area open in the winter). (Personally I would not use the crossed our "Seasonal Access" icon to indicate it is open in the winter as that may just confuse people...) Because this thread was opened there clearly is some confusion on the "Available during winter" icon. Discussion I'm seeing so far seems to lean towards this "Available during winter" icon meaning the cache is likely to be retrievable during winter conditions (and not have to do with the area being open to the public during the winter or not). If an area was closed during the winter then yes, I would use the "Seasonal Access" icon and indicate such in the cache page.
  13. Glad someone asked, good to read. I had originally thought it meant that a cache could be easily RETRIEVED in the winter... ...but recently was told it meant the area/park/trail was open to the public in the winter....not necessarily related to ease of winter retrieving of container. So I was almost considering changing all mine to have the attribute (as all our parks are OPEN to the public in the winter...though most of the caches will be buried in the snow) but this discussion makes me think not (again). So in reality only one of ours can be considered "winter" suitable (based on the majority here. It's inside a viewing blind that will keep off the snow). Wish they had more clear definition so everyone was on the same page! Or maybe have two icons: one for "area open to public in winter" (snowshoes icon?) and one for "cache likely retrievable in winter/snow conditions"? (snowflake icon?)
  14. PS: Thanks Pup Patrol for catching the broken links! I forgot to update after our website was redone. Fixed now.
  15. Thanks for all the great replies. I do work/have contact with my local reviewer. I do try to get out and visit the caches in person before posting NM and NA and I know I could just request the caches be archived but really I was wanting to educate those leaving the throwdowns. I think if the (seemingly fine...because of the throwdown) caches just disappeared one day it may not be understood WHY and that may create some negativity. I do try to check in on the caches on our lands every once and a while and remove garbage from them and let owners know if there are issues but I will not maintain another persons caches. I have placed a number of caches for CH in our lands and will be maintaining those (as long as they let me/its in my job specs...and if that ever STOPPED and someone else was not designated to take over the maintenance then I certainly hope that the unmaintained caches would be archived!). The question was mostly about the educational NOTES about throwdowns and it seems like there is a consensus that may not be a good way to go. So going forward I will use the NM if needed and state that the owner has been contacted about their cache and only they can do the needed maintenance, then if no response is received will continue on with the NA after a few months and again state there was no response from the owner (who is the only one who can do it).
  16. Thanks! Please keep using NM and NA...HATE it when I see repeated "found it" logs stating logbook is soaked and container cracked but not a single NM. As an owner a NM really jumps at me but if I get 30 "found its" over the weekend I may not read them all. But oddly some (although rarely) of the replacements are actually GOOD containers. (which baffles me for other reasons)
  17. This is where it becomes contentious. I hope you have your flame-proof suit on. It's gonna get hot in here! Heh ya...hesitated long before hitting submit here... (but really rather get flamed up front rather than not know how bad I'm stepping on toes or getting flamed in the background) Very good point..It has occured to me I may tend to be to blunt and confrontational by default..I'll work on the wording. BUT the point of posting a public 'note' really would be to raise awareness. If a public messages states "oh I would have replaced it" or "I did replace it since CO is absent" I don't want that to stand alone to perpetuate the misconception this is ok when people go through and re-read old logs. If it was a very recent posting I may message the person in private and explain it and ask them to revise the log entry but the one that got me thinking is very old (I just came across it now in my quest to figure out how a cache with 5 NM logs and no repairs is still found constantly).
  18. So I'm trying to walk a fine line...want to educate but don't want to offend (ya, not always possible). Being a the staff of a land manager who allows geocaches on their lands I feel a bit of a responsibility to keep the caches on our lands in ok shape (we want visitors to have a positive experience). I don't want to be the cache police but if a owner has been absentee for years and its fallen into poor condition I kinda want to see that cache removed....problem is there seems to be a number of people who will replace it just to keep it going. I know the topic has been hashed and re-hashed and don't want to open that can of worms. So my question is: As a land manager is it fair for us to ask that caches be maintained in fair condition? and Would it be really rude of me to post notes explaining to other cachers that replacing containers for absent owners is not proper? I'm thinking of only doing such in situations where visiting cachers specifically say they have replaced the cache BECAUSE they know the owner is no longer active or would have "oh now I see the owner has not been on in over 5 years! Clearly no longer around I would have brought a new container had I known that." I would respond in a note in the log that is not appropriate and why (ok I already posted one note.... ) ...Rude? Ok? (flames?) Something along the lines of : "When a cache container is in bad condition please use the "Needs Maintenance" feature. When a cache has received multiple "Needs Maintenance" notifications and is still in bad condition, combined with the fact the owner has not logged on in years then the "Needs Archive" is in order. No mater how good the location the condition of the cache itself is also important. Only the OWNER can perform maintenance. Never replace a cache container without an owners permission. Sure everyone likely has done it once...as a newbie, but seasoned cachers should know better. If the owner is no longer active the cache should be archived. No one likes finding a moldy soggy logbook. Its nice to help out fellow cachers but its very different to help out (with permission) than it is to try to do patchwork fixes for a totally absentee owner. Read about owner maintenance in the Help Center : http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=404 Or see the guidelines: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx " (I feel like I'm going to get a really bad reputation if I start this as well as start asking for crappy caches of absentee owners to be archived....landowner or not I know some people will hate it....but as a cacher I am REALLY starting to hate the smell of moldy cache).
  19. Agreed 100% A number of times now I have posted a NM and the cache has promptly be archived. Really don't understand that and makes me a bit sad but that's the CO choice...I will continue to post NM if it is needed. I really wish everyone would use the NM and NA as needed! (usually mine are after multiple "found it" logs stating problems and that it needs maintenance or such in the log but no one actually did a NM log!?) PS: also as a cache OWNER it bugs me when people DO NOT tell me something is wrong! I want to know so I can fix it and not disappoint cache visitors with a moldy log book!
  20. Erk, that was likely me...swiping the second last one. Sorry...(but really glad I got mine! Glad I didn't wait till I got home....) I use paypal for everything so the checkout was smooth for me, just need to fill in the shipping info and confirm payment.
  21. Gorgeous geocoin! Just grabed an AS...the only one left but still my fav finish. I would just adore to get the Artist Edition: (Black Nickel) though...
  22. Beautiful geocoin! My favorite aspect of springtime caching is the smells. I love the fresh smell of spring in the forest. I also love seeing the flowers coming to life and seeing the first butterflies of the season! (Cabbage White yesterday! First emerged of the year for me.)
  23. Hehe! Love it. I think he looks much happier now too. My only con crit is I kinda wish he had a neck....disembodied heads always freak me out...but that may ruin the sunburst design a bit. And I may move the 2011 to a different line (maybe one under your username) because at first read I read "Trackable at 2011"...but that may just be me.
  24. Whoot! *dances for joy!* *...as much as she can surrounded by moving boxes...*
  25. Mine went in the mail in the post office as close to the landmark (as I know of) on Monday. Sadly a smaller sized postcard so hopefully my writing is good enough quality to beat quantity. (I also picked up some new postcards for postcrossing while in the office as they had slightly different selection than the one closer to home. We need more postcrossers from overseas! Australia and Africa are on my wish list to receive from!)
×
×
  • Create New...