Lemon Fresh Dog

It's quite interesting to see the overwhelming support for guns in this thread. I'm wondering if it is: - a US thing - a outdoors-person thing - other Personally, I'm anti-gun to the Nth degree. I find the number of gun deaths in the US to be absurd. That doesn't matter here, my answer to the question is "no, I don't carry a gun". I'm not interested in dicussing why I hold an anti-gun stance (either it falls on deaf ears, or I'm preaching to the choir). I'm not that interested in knowing why people are pro-gun. Why? It becomes an emotional debate devoid of factual exchange in most cases. Hopefully that's okay. However, I am interested in something relavent to the initial question - especially from the US posters (and this is just curiousity here - no hidden agendas). How many people have ever had to actually use a gun in defense against either a human or an animal? (law enforcement and conservation officers aside) The reason I ask is that I do enjoy visiting the US (although I'm getting a little freaked out here) and was planning on caching in the Pacific Northwest sometime, but want to get some idea about how crazy this might be if I am unarmed. Disclaimer: if anyone is offended by my anti-gun sentiments please feel free to print out a copy of this post and shoot it.

I just recieved a log entry for one of my caches -- they found the cache, it was fozen into the ground, the lid was still exposed, so they were able to log it!. We're heading to -26 (celsius) as a HIGH this week and for me - that's COLD.

Good idea. I will place some in my caches!

My preference is to not carry a gun. A) In my area it's illegal (Canada) I don't desire to own a gun (and belive me, I'm resisting the urge to get off topic here) C) if I have to carry a gun to an area to feel safe, I don't want to be in that area. D) I'm just not that afraid of wierdos and animals. Good head, travelling companions in remote areas and a noise-maker will ussually solve problems here. I'm not surprised at the reponses in favour of weapons in this post though. If you live in an area where well-armed, scared and wierd people are roaming around - it seems to make sense to protect yourself in kind. I'm just glad I don't live in such an area! Fortunately, I have a special "bullet proof bubble suit" that protects me from all harm as I drift from cache to cache. I don't even open caches anymore because I am afraid they are bombs. I don't even turn on my GPS anymore because I'm afraid "they" might find me -- the wierdo's with tracking systems -- you know them.

Now that would be a cool cache! I've noticed some logs -- including one w/travel bug -- how cool is that? I think for now, I'm going to keep an eye out for that travel bug and see if we can't get it to the North Pole (magnetic count? -- after all, it is a wrench!)

On the topic - are the 60CS and 76CS effectively the same unit, with the 76 having more memory and marine maps? I'm thinking of getting a dedicated unit (I use a CF card on a PocketPC) and am having a heck of a time deciding which way to go. Also, what store do you recommend purchasing from? Where do all the *cool* kids shop

This is where I'm located and have been lucky to travel the area (pre-geocaching though) when I lived at the bottom of the mountain you mention. I've enjoyed reading some of the entries here -- it seems to be that 5/5 and particularly clever caches are those that get people interested in traveling.

Hello there, I have a Toshiba e755 and the new Dell Axim 50v. They are great. Are you planning on using a CF GPS card? I use a Rayming, but am not 100% satisfied as it takes awhile to acquire, I have to use the antenna, and it snapped! grrrr... However, for software: 1) Mighty Sync -- allows you to sync files to different locations than Active Sync. This is handy for placing maps onto CF or SD cards 2) GSAK for the PC -- allows you to pull waypoints from geocaching, and transfer them into mapping software (I use Microsoft Mapoint and then export into Pocket Streets) -- you can just go straight to Pocket Streets because it is cheaper -- unless you want auto-routing, etc 3) MobiPocket -- if you are a Premier Member ($30, I think), you can load your caching queries onto the PDA in eBook format for MobiPocket and read the entry and logs while "in the field" Remember - these PDA's are not waterproof! Exercise caution if in wet environments. That combo works for me. There is plenty of other cool and helpful software at www.handango.com

If they just download waypoints, will a SBA make a difference?

oh... Yes and Yes to the first question -- lot's of FTF chances in Antartica!

Okay -- 200 countries. Is there one in Greenland? Is there one in Antartica? What cool caches have you seen or heard about that would make you travel a great distance to see them? Geo-tourism? Busloads of geocachers travelling to areas that are cache-laden? It *could* happen. Where would YOU send 'em?

Good call. Give your kids a hug, right?

Opps. Let me take the high-road on this and apologize if I caused anyone consternation. I really wasn't aware that not everyone read the logs. I just thought this was part of preparation for a hunt -- I'm pretty new here, so I'm just shy of my 1000th cache -- like, by about 995 caches. I do, however, own and maintain 9 caches. I thought I was pretty clear in my posts about log reading and my surprise that this was less common than I thought. If someone suggested I my cache be removed (which is how I would interpret an SBA), then I'd be disapointed if I hadn't been contacted. The kernal of my argument against using the SBA is that it can be avoided by seekers scanning the recent logs and avoiding those with many DNF's. You don't need to read them, just look and say "ooooo - it seems nobody can find this one. I'll hunt another, or read a little about what happened". You should always post your experiences and warn of spoilers too. The SBA is a trigger that involves getting "mom and dad" involved (Groundspeak). Maybe before we hit the alarm (SBA), we could send a note to the cache owner ("if you don't maintain that cache, I'm telling mom and dad!"). I find the argument that it acts as a warning to other seekers as falicious. It states to archive, not to check or maintain -- although, I have also learnt through these discussions that it does trigger that activity through Groundspeak (mom and dad will check to see if we aren't playing nice before taking away our toy (cache)). It seems that we are asking a lot of them if it is being used as a flagging tool rather than an alarm of concern. That's up to them to decide I guess. Again, sorry if any of my posts contained language that was not clear -- or ironic -- in any way. Peace and Love

I agree. A little advance planning goes a long way. 5 DNF's - especially by well-known cachers in the area, are a good indication that the cache may be gone. If it's rated 1, 3 DNF's might be enough, if it's rated a 5, then maybe 5 or 6. DNF is also a good alert to the owner that people aren't finding their cache. Go check it (perform maintenance) or give some more clues. Unless it's not really intended to be found easily.

Won't miss it if everyone properly posted their DNF's. So, tell me why it would be improper to post a DNF if you couldn't find the cache. Could you please provide me with a quote of where I stated that it would be improper to post a DNF if you couldn't find a cache? I never stated that. I'm saying you SHOULD post a DNF if you don't find a cache. Then, IF people read the logs, they could see that there are recent DNF's and make the appropriate decision as to whether to seek the cache or not. I've since been schooled and told that many people don't read the logs. I stated my opinion on that too, and in light of the fact that people don't read the logs there has to be a better way of indicating cache problems while respecting the owner of the cache. Thank you for asking me to clarify, please let me know where I suggested that people should not post DNF's so that I can comment properly. The topic at hand is the use of the SBA button -- I've stated my opinions on that, as have you. They are different.

If you DON'T read the logs -- then you might not read a spoiler, but you might also not read an entry that said "Cache appears to be missing". From your entries, I surmise that you advocate the use of the SBA button as a way of noting that a cache is no longer valid in your opinion. I disagree -- sorry about that -- I think a note is appropriate, because your opinion (while nice) is not what the owner of the cache may think. Of course, I also think placing **warning: contains spoiler** on a note is a worthwhile courtesy as well. Of course, if you only read recent DNF entries, then you would both avoid spoilers AND avoid visiting caches that *may* be missing. My assumption that a DNF is unlikely to contain a spoiler. As for "getting it" your response contained one word "ironic" -- not exactly much to go on as you made no comments in relation to what your thoughts were on reading logs. Although I AM a log reader, I am NOT a mind-reader. So, give a guy a break. It's not obvious what you are thinking, because we obviously have a difference of opinion -- hence, this is a discussion forum. The word "ironic" on a single line with no further information, while a comment, is not much in the way of a discussion on the topic at hand. I've pretty much outlined my opinions in all the posts I have posted above. However, you may not have read them -- and that, my friend, is ..... ironic.

I agree that automation may not be the answer, but then there does need to be some way to bring it to the attention of Groundspeak if there is no owner maintaining it or responding to posts. This means.... dare I say it.... that the only option is the SBA button! aaaaa! Especially if people don't read the logs! Yipes. Now that this has been "brought to light" for me (not reading logs, absentee owners), I really do like the idea of an SBM (Should be Maintained) button that both alerts the log owner AND someone that can act on behalf of the log owner in their absence (Groundspeak). I still maintain step one is to post a note for the owner, but in the absence of any other choice, it seems that SBA is the only way to escalate a non-maintained cache to Groundspeak. Which makes sense.... non-maintained is the same as abandoned IMHO. Of course, wacky as this may seem -- people that place caches could just read their e-mails when someone posts a note that there is a maintenace issue they could respond. On the other hand, people could post a note to the cache prior to hitting the SBA button to give owners the chance to respond. And, on a the other foot (because I'm out of hands) people could accept the fact that if they do not read the logs, they might miss an important comment such as "this cache seems to be missing" and not be sad when it becomes a DNF.

Not reading the most recent logs is the equivilent of not being prepared in my opinion, but that's up to the individual I guess. I'm glad that this has been brought to my attention and will definately not rely on them to convey information that is critical.

ug.... not a nice find at all. Maybe I'm too empathetic, but I cannot even imagine how horrible it would be to carry the remains of a child to a quiet part of the woods and just leave them there. Personally, if it was me: I'd return the remains (hinding them very well and marking it as "do not remove: child's ashes" Do up a memorial cache to children and post a note explaining the situation. I know that's a little extreme, but the remains are of a child and that kind of gets to me.

I know of people who NEVER log on to GC.com but who DO read the cache logs as they come in and they check on their caches promptly if there is a reported problem. Just because someone isn't logging on to GC.com doesn't automatically mean they're derelict in their duties. Agreed, but the 6-month "sweep" would just act as a heartbeat check. "Still out there? good, thanks" It doesn't mean they would remove the cache, it would just be a way to check that someone is still assuming responsibility for it.

More irony. Umm..... I'm probably missing something here.... why has this sentence been quoted from my long post and indicated as being ironic? Do people not read logs before caching? Irony is defined as the incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs. To me, not reading logs is a set-up for no-finds, closed parks, blocked roads, etc. For example, if I place a cache in a remote location where there is access via logging roads, I will indicate that there is active logging in the area from Mon-Fri, 6am-4pm or whatever. Seeking the cache during this time can result in meeting a very large, very loaded truck coming around a very sharp corner -- not good. I will post notes as warrented (when logging stops, during shutdowns, etc) I have several caches prepared for just such areas that will be placed. However, on weekends it is encouraged to visit these areas as they are stunningly beautiful! If people aren't reading logs -- I'm a little scared. Anyhow. What are your thoughts on the following? I think that SBA's come to the attention of Groundspeak and cause their involvment in the "possible" removal of a cache. I think that notes are for the cache owner and fellow seekers. By posting the SBA, are you escallating the problem prior to giving people the chance to resolve it themselves. If it's an emergency I think it's a good idea (as I've stated), if its a maintenance issue then I think a note is sufficient. Should be Archived means just that: It should be ARCHIVED...not maintained, ARCHIVED My assumption is that people go to caches prepared. For weather, safety, simple repairs, awareness of recent logs. If this is not the case, then I'm somewhat shocked. Given the quote and irony comment about my "read the logs" sentence -- I may be asking too much.

I guess I should just answer the question originally asked in a more straightforward way.... 1) No 2) No 3) Yes -- you're loading the question by suggesting people will seek a cache that isn't there --see my response to your 4th suggested reaction. 4) Yes -- it avoids the situtation you suggest is caused by people searching for caches that aren't there because it it is very important to read the logs before you go caching in case there are warnings about times of entry, permissions to property, construction in the area, etc. IMHO: SBA's are a serious warning to Groundspeak - see my previous posts Notes and Logs are warnings and informaion to owners and cache seekers who can make their own decisions re: maintenance and seeking. Thank you for asking what I think.

Short answer: IMHO SBA should be used for an issue that is time-senstive and relates to the safety or legality of a cache. SBA should not be used as a method of self-appointed cache maintenance.

Does Groundspeak track absentee owners? My thought is that if someone does not log onto the site for --- maybe 6 months? and they have caches, then they should be contacted by Groundspeak with a "Pending Archive" note for ALL their caches. If they respond - great. If not, then those caches should be archived -- because there is no maintenance being done on them or contact with the owner. Then, if they are known to be good caches by local cachers, they can be adopted or replaced by someone able to do the maintenance. I hope if I tragically die in a car crash that someone will say "where the heck did that guy go -- let's maintain his caches because they are in such beautiful places" Just try to contact me first, okay? As for a "cache-cop" deciding that they want to maintain my cache.... go away. I'll maintain my own caches thank-you, you maintain yours. If you replace a container you find broken, you have my thanks, as you do if you post a note for me to replace it. If you ask Groundspeak to remove it, then you are over-stepping your bounds. Get a uniform if you must, but leave my caches out of it. Thank goodness all the local cachers here treat each other with respect. SBA button? Safety, tresspassing, danger. I do NOT think it should be used for "missing" caches or "missing" owners -- although I think a purge process should be introduced for absentee cache owners. If a cache is no longer in a place you once found it in, then send a note to the owner and post a note on the log - don't SBA it. People should read logs before they go to a cache anyways. I haven't found many caches, but I did once return to a cache with a friend to introduce them to the hobby -- the cache was gone! As we walked past a gentleman on a nearby bench, we noticed a strange object next to him -- a GPSr! So much for missing. As for purging unfound caches -- that's harder. If I am maintaining a cache, but it has never been found (remote location), then it is still valid -- As long as I can be contacted about it. Unmaintained caches are litter. However, maintaining other peoples caches is sort of rude if you aren't asked to. Imagine if someone started doing your yardwork and planting uninvited -- it *seems* friendly -- but is just plain wierd. If they clear some snow - that's nice and neighborly. I guess to my way of thinking -- SBA is like pulling a fire alarm. It needs to be there, but don't be the little cacher that cries wolf. (except here....there really COULD be a wolf....)

The only caches I don't like, and I mean TRUELY don't like, are ones that are missing or destroyed. Micros, I don't run out to find first, but they are ok, I have ranted about them but that is just a little venting. Guess you'll never know till you are in the shoes. Well... I use the filter to elimintate caches that haven't been found in awhile, I then sort out those that have lots of DNF's (especially if they are rated 1's or 2's). Then, I go out and enjoy the hobby. However, I'm new as well. It just strikes me as odd that people are so concerned about other people's caches and maintenance habits. If you do not find - then DNF. You don't know if they are missing or destroyed. If you do -- then why are you hunting them? If you are out on a hunt and there is an obvious addition of an environmental or health hazard then post a note. If you find a cache with live ammo, drugs, or pornography in it then SBA. Maybe I just don't get it, but is seems so obvous to me that SBA is basically saying "take this cache off the site" The only motive for that should be A> if you see danger B> if you see the cache contents scattered all over the place (and common decency says pick it up and re-cache it or return to the owner) As for running around and revisiting caches you've already found and then SBA-ing them....well...no comment on that.`