J the Goat
-
Posts
1394 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by J the Goat
-
-
If they've been archived for very long, the chance that the reviewer will unarchive them simply because you're back is slim. Make new caches. Change them all up just a touch if it makes you feel better about calling them new
-
First off, I've found two caches so far using my iPhone. I'm officially an addict! Looking forward to getting a GPS to do some serious geocaching.
Anyway, my trouble (or general question really) is about my second cache I found. It was in very poor shape. In the cache listing, it has the "needs maintenance" icon. But this poor cache was in really really bad shape. It's inventory showed that there was a travel bug included, which there wasn't. And the darn thing was filled with moisture. To the point where there was visible water in the bottom of the container. The log sheets (all sticky notes, and a few receipts with log info on the back) were all soaking wet, even though they were in a sealed plastic bag.
My question is, what do I do about it? I only live about three blocks away from it. It bugs me that it is in the shape that it is in. I want to fix it up, so more people aren't disappointed. What's the proper protocol for fixing it? Do I just fix it? Do I contact the owner? And then fix it?
Fixing the cache is the first thing. But what about the travel bug? How do I tell others that it isn't where it is listed as being? Should I go to the
travel bug's page and make a log note that it is MIA?
The cache:
http://www.geocachin...b0-6318385a4e85
The travel bug:
Me, I'd post an NM. Then I'd put a Watch on the cache. In one month if the CO does not respond I'd post an NA (Needs Archive).
I checked the status of the CO. They haven't been on the site since 2010, so it's likely that the cache is abandoned.
Another thing I would do if the cache is close enough - when the Reviewer archives the cache go back and collect the mess and dispose of the geo-junk.
This. And welcome
-
I have to ask, did you actually check and confirm stage 1 is there before logging your "Owner maintenance" log? If you did, you didn't mention it in your log. The way the logs read, someone logged a NM and you just cleared it with an OM without even checking on it.
So you think every time some random person (who did not even search for the cache) decides to put a NM log on a cache, the owner has to drop everything and run out to see if it's OK?
Can you imagine any way that might lead to abuse?
Take it as a compliment that they're travelling all that way and have chosen your cache as one they want to find.They don't sound like the kind of people I would want finding my cache. If they can't be bothered to email the CO directly asking about it, but take the lazy way out and log an NM, then I think the OP's response is appropriate.
Well stated.
-
Okay maybe I will get myself in trouble for speaking out but really it needs to be said. You are very quick to point fingers and play the blame game. The Ontario reviewers (all 5 of them) are VOLUNTEERS they do not get paid, they hold regular jobs and do what they do for the betterment of the game. It is not their job to police every single safety issue that you feel should be addressed. If it's unsafe in your eyes don't look for it, its not your place to get the whole world archived although you seem to feel it is. You don't need to look out for my safety, I can do that myself. Secondly why do you always "assume" it was placed on private property without permission? You placed a cache in a Conservation Area and made no mention of it in your description, that doesn't mean I "assume" its on private property it means I "assume" you have proper permission. Why? Because I trust that most people abide by the rules. Apparently I am naive!!
We will have to agree to disagree. Volunteer reviewers do have a role to play in some cases of safety issues- what role and what level is something GS needs to set out. But yes they do indeed have a role and should be trained for these things. It is simply not enough to turn a blind eye and say we are not responsible. They need to be accountable.
If it is unsafe- I personally will not look away, I will deal with it as I see fit.
No assumptions have been made, evidence is gathered and analyzed and appropriate actions are taken. As a cacher I see this as part of my role. Like using appropriate tools such as email messages to NA to get issues addressed- each case is different.
So I ask directly, since you didn't address my suggestion in my previous post, why don't you post NA logs on every cache everywhere? Every cache has an element of danger. Some more than others, some of different types, but all are dangerous. Since you've taken it upon yourself to second guess reviewers, CO's, and GS, where is your blanket NA log?
-
#1: It's in the guidelines for hiding caches, please read them before hiding any caches.
#2: That's completely up to you. Different people enjoy finding different types of caches. Make sure that however devious your hide, it falls within the guidelines mentioned above
-
On second thought not only would I not log it, I agree with those who say it shouldn't be replaced.
It's an unmaintained cache that is only being propagated by replacing it. If it goes missing the day after you leave, it will be missing until the next person decides to take a trip to the area and replace it while there, and the cycle continues. It really needs to be archived.
Chalk me up to a vote in this crowd. The CO agreed to maintain the cache when he/she put it there. With no regular maintainence, this one is not only destined to disappear again, but it runs afowl of the guidelines. Let it die.
-
Some safety issues are glaringly obvious:
I would expect any reasonable person/cacher to do the right thing when they come up on something as obvious as this.
No, my word is not gospel, but it has gotten 100% of the caches I posted NA logs for dealt with, and made caching not only safer but better in my community . So apparently my words do have power.
Bottom line: Step up and do the right thing when you see something that is clearly wrong and places people at risk.
That could be anything from an NA log to let a reviewer decide to removing it on the spot- that would be your call to make.
I do not sit on fences- I take actions.
As we have seen other organizations (like the VDOT) are taking actions as well. Bad CO's and cachers made this mess, it will be up to the good ones to try to turn it around.
I'm assuming that that's not a cache and is just here for shock value
Every one of your caches is dangerous. Every one of mine is. They all pose a threat to whoever seeks them. Lets just archive them all and call it a day. I maintain that safety issues should not be addressed by GS. Legal issues, permission issues, landowner/agency requests? All yes. Judging for safety is in the hands of an individual. If you're enough of an uh.... daredevil to reach into exposed wiring to either place or retrieve a cache, that's all on you. That's dumb. You've made a dumb decision. That's nobody elses fault but your own. If you decide to walk on a busy road to get an altoids tin from the guardrail and you get hit by a car, that's on you. Repelling; on you. Scuba? Yup, that too. Risking getting stung by a bee at a park? Yes. All on the seeker. To suggest otherwise is jsut evidence of the lack of accountability that our culutre seems to have taken on. We're all responsible for our own decisions. If somebody makes a poor decision, they suffer the consequences.
I don't advocate caches like the above listed train wrecks. I'd love to see a ban on guardrail caches, walmart parking lot micros, and the like. Not, however due to safety or even quality. Quality means different things to different people as well. The permission issue is where these fall into problems usually though, and like I've stated before, caches placed without permission affect the game for those of us who play by the rules.
-
Some CO's don't take into account common sense and safety. GC33GRH Was placed on an island of land bordered by three major highways- the only way to access it was to stop on one of these roads. There are no designated stop areas and to boot there is a major busy truck stop on the corner.
Oh, and it was on land owned by the Ministry of Transportation without permission. When they found out about it the terms "disaster waiting to happen" and "grossly negligent to put people there" were used. I would imagine this raised a few red flags and they, like other jurisdictions they will come out with their own policy soon enough. All because one CO was more interested in his cache than the well being of others.
And yes, it was me that brought this to the local community safety committee I sit on, the local police force and the ministry officials- all of us were in agreement. Call me a "cache cop" if you want- I will NOT sit around and let other geocachers put the people in my community at undue risk for the sake of a game.
On the same hand Cachers looking for this cache should also have had enough sense to realize the danger they were placing themselves in, and taken action to be pro-active and report the situation. Instead they gave it a bunch of favourite points. I think we are in an age where common sense and critical thinking are things of the past.
On another note- if a reviewer had taken a close look this one should not have been published int he first place.
I have asked GS to specifically detail how reviewers are selected and what type of training/guidance they receive- so far they just wont answer me. I find it concerning that I have found caches that clearly violate the guidelines (most in a minor way) that are approved by reviewers, then later on logged by the same reviewer as a find (under their caching name), yes we know who they are here, rather than dealt with as they should be.
People get so wrapped up and obsessed in this game that they ignore some of the basic principals that will keep it "healthy" In the end Geocaching will suffer with more rules and bans placed on it by outside agencies- Like provincial, state and federal agencies. It is already happening. What is GS doing about it?
GS has absolutely no obligation to explain their process of finding/training reviewers to you or anyone else. Your idea of safety may becompletely different than somebody elses. I refuse to let people with your attitude dictate how and where I can go geocaching, your word isn't gospel. Deal with it.
That being said, this issues is another example of how "numbers cachers" and folks who put a cacher here just because there isn't one here can affect the game for the rest of us. Rest stop caches can be quality caches. Getting them banned because of altoids tins on guardrails just goes to show that. Unfortunately, those who cache irresponsibly won't recognize that and there will be more and more agencys that decide they don't want to deal with cachers at all based on a small minority that give the rest of us a bad name in said agency's eyes. Will caching get a complete ban? Nope, not a chance I say. Will we see more of this kind of unfortunate policy? Absolutely.
-
Newbies: There's nothing intrinsically wrong with numbers and I'm pretty sure that Wal-Mart has realized that people are molesting light poles in their parking lots on a regular basis. Caches there are a handy way to figure out where to go if you need a quick battery fix or other emergency caching supplies.
I'll agree with that if you put in the word "responsible" in there. Numbers caching can have a negative effect on the rest of the game if done irresponsibly however, and that's where my beef lies. Permission issues, trampling an area jsut to get the cache, negative run ins with law enforcement, etc....
So newbies, if you can play nice, please play any way you want. If your actions are going to affect the way my like minded cachers and I play the game, be prepared to hear negative statements about the way you do things
Man is this off track. I don't know what I said that set Jumpin' Jack cache off. Are they mad that I met Alamogul? I could drop the name of a 30,000+ finder whose house I've been in, and has a TB named after me.
Trust me JJC, no newbie is reading 10 consecutive posts by 2 posters, and thinking something is intrinsically wrong with numbers. The only advice newbies need is to stop logging our caches en-masse with 2 word or less lame logs. 
While in Geneva, did you find the one along the shoreline with all the goose poop nearby?
I don't think so. Did the virt, and the lock-n-lock by the pedestrian tunnel. Did not do the one at the boathouse, or the multi, Mrs. Yuck wasn't interested. There's a nano I definitely wasn't interested in. That's pretty much about everything, right?
On topic, thats a good post by Redsox Mark a few posts up. There is nothing wrong with having lots of time, and finding lots of caches. But I will of course not back down from my first post to the thread, before I became somone's personal target; I don't consider all caches listed here to be "equal", and I don't have to find them all.
My comment, or the discussion in general?
-
The sesame street ones are my favorites. Oscar is great, strong work Chino.
-
Interesting post from a 12,000+ find retired couple. It's rather long, and I'm still digesting it.
Do high number cachers brag? I don't necessarily think so. I've met and cached with Alamogul, he's a great guy, and not the least bit arrogant or braggy. He's also very fast, and hard to keep up with. And you mention Nozzletime, one time No. 1 finder in Canada. Yep, met him, and great guy again. He is not even close to being retired by the way. 
Ultimately, I accept your primary point that high numbers people love caching, and are not necessarily about the number of caches they have found. But I like being taken to great locations, and have never felt the need to find anything and everything that manages to get listed on this website as a Geocache. I'm a user and supporter of Alternative Geocaching websites. I do Waymarks (visited 118, 4 last week). I do Geocaching Challenges. Visited an awesome one last week.
So I guess put me down for "it's not all just caching". Give me a Terracache, a Waymark, or a Geocaching Challenge in a great spot over that LPC in the Wal-Mart parking lot, that we all know is on private property without permission in violation of the guidelines anyways.
It is amusing to see that "numbers" people seem to be those who claim to not be concerned about them, and watching them deny it.
More finds = more chances to run into people.
And I'm pretty sure that you won't be so dishonest as to claim that all Terracaches, Waymarks, Geocaching Challenges, ForSquare waypoints, & etc. take you to great spots and that none are on private property.
Snobs, I say.
Snob? OK, yes. For example, I took a mini-vacaction in Geneva, NY this week (Finger Lakes), and the two closest caches to the hotel were parking lot micros. Did I drive by them about 15 times, and find caches in town on the local college campus (placed by an employee) and along the lakeshore downtown? Yes I did. Well yeah, I never mentioned Foursquare, but I do that too. Apparently over 3,000 times in two years.
I stand by my major point. I don't need to find anything and everything that manages to get listed as a Geocache on Geocaching.com. I do other stuff. Or I drive right by them and keep going. I am not a slave to anything that has a waypoint and a cache page is something I need to find.
I don't need to find anything and everything, either.
But I don't make a point of bitching complaining talking about the ones I choose not to practically every day on the forum, either.
Maybe because they don't meet the guidelines, and should have never been listed on this website in the first place, but are listed under an "assume permission, and look the other way" policy? I'm OK with that. I will always be OK with that.
By the way, you don't see the difference with me using my GPS enabled smart phone to click on an "I'm here" button with my fingernail at Wal-Mart, as opposed to acting like a k00k out in their parking lot, and lifting up a bolt weather cover to find an object that was placed there without permission? I can't help you there, then.
You're OK with that, but feel it necessary to mention it (too) often...check.
It's less k00ky to just click "I'm here"...check.
You can't help me...nah, I learn a lot from y'all anti-numbers, wise old timer, forum jockey types...just not exactly what you intend
I'm just trying to provide some balance for the newbies who will see this thread with a good proportion of the "numbers-poohers" weighing in. Seems a few are missing so far, one is on vacation & another seems to be "challenged" lately, but I'm sure they'll weigh in eventually.
Newbies: There's nothing intrinsically wrong with numbers and I'm pretty sure that Wal-Mart has realized that people are molesting light poles in their parking lots on a regular basis. Caches there are a handy way to figure out where to go if you need a quick battery fix or other emergency caching supplies.
I'll agree with that if you put in the word "responsible" in there. Numbers caching can have a negative effect on the rest of the game if done irresponsibly however, and that's where my beef lies. Permission issues, trampling an area jsut to get the cache, negative run ins with law enforcement, etc....
So newbies, if you can play nice, please play any way you want. If your actions are going to affect the way my like minded cachers and I play the game, be prepared to hear negative statements about the way you do things
-
That's probably one of the uh.... silliest statements in this whole thread. You're saying that I shouldn't use quality containers because their quality means I don't have to check on them once a week? That's ridiculous.
Bad CO's are ridiculous no matter what containers they use. That about sums it up.
The container is only as good as the CO is willing to maintain it.
Your first statement it absolutely correct. I do take issue with your second statement. Take an ammo can and set it under a tree and let it sit there unmaintained for a year. Do the same with a black film can with a gray lid. All things being equal, the ammo can outlasts the film can every single time. Of course maintainence will help either one, but to say one is the same is the other is pretty off the mark.
-
I'll log a DNF if I drive by GZ with the intent to search and get dissuaded for some reason. Are people really complaining about DNF logs as a waste of time? Seriously? Don't read them then. You can't complain about people not logging blue frownies, and then complain that blue frownies waste your time
I like to think my DNF logs are informative, at least the first one I put on a cache page. If I return to search again (which is becoming less frequently on crappy urban Walmart parking lot homeless camp hides
) my logs may not be quite as informative unless there's different information to give.I really like that the newsletter brought this to everyone's attention. It's important.
-
Horse Poo Obstacle Course wasn't my idea, however Ejumacashonitivityness was
I need to check on that one actually...
-
The posts that may seem negative towards these crappy containers are from quite a few years of long-time cachers finding soggy, often moldy pulp of a log in them.
We learned (after many trips to fix) and now our few micro hides are all matchstick containers.
You can't blame the containers on CO's who don't maintain their caches. And by putting out 'better' containers, is just an excuse for them not to visit/maintain the caches.
Poor CO's can make any container look bad......
That's probably one of the uh.... silliest statements in this whole thread. You're saying that I shouldn't use quality containers because their quality means I don't have to check on them once a week? That's ridiculous.
-
Cache Page: Syncline Summit #2
Last Visited: 22 June 2011
Reason for unloved: First off, I don't like this term. This cache has 100% favorites. It is not visited because it is minimum 10h 5* terrain scramble. It is also a 1h drive from the nearest small city, and a 2h+ drive from the nearest large city. There are several other caches on this mountian, so it would be a productive day for a cacher.
Edit: Oh, and no trails. You have to do this hike in from the road by pure trailblazing.
100% favorites! 1 finder
That being noted, I'd find that cache, and I'd probably give it a favorite. That's my kind of box in the woods
Stone Cold Rocky Top.... with Trees! Last found August 20 of 2011. To my knowledge hasn't been attempted since. That attempt was a month in the planning as well, it's out there a ways.
It's at least an hour and half drive from the nearest town and that's if the road conditions are friendly. It's on the way to a seldom visited mountain top, we dont' have many cachers that are active around here, most of them like film cans under lamp skirts, and the folks who go hunting near the cache apparently aren't cachers.
It's a shame, this one got stocked to the gills, is a legit large, and as far as I'm concerned the ratings are dead on. Oh well, It'll get some great logs on the rare occasion it gets found [
] -
It's two seperate issues. If you don't have a pen, you'd better have another way to prove you found the cache. False found it logs can affect the way others play the game. Negatively. I really don't care what TOZ has to say, you're supposed to sign the log if you're going to log a find. You don't have to, the system allows for anyone to log any cache any time they wish. The right way to do it, however, is to sign then log.
It might surprise you, but I tend to agree with this.
Only a little. I generally understand what you're trying to say in your novel posts, but they can be tough to follow at times
Often when someone logs their own cache or logs a cache multiple times, they aren't thinking "How can I bump up my find count?". Maybe they chose the wrong log by mistake; maybe they didn't know about the Write note, or Owner Maintenance log; or maybe they truly felt that a Found It log was the best way to share their geocaching experience. What I mostly object to is when some people can't seem to understand why anyone might have logged a Find other than than to bump up their find count. Despite what they sometimes say, these are the people who are acting as if the find count is the "score". Since I don't view the find count as a score, I am not bothered by someone using a Found log except in a few instances where the log might really impact on others ability to find a cache (or decide whether or not they should look for it). In those cases I agree that cache owner should remove the log.
I can see the mistakes, and the misunderstandings. I don't buy however, the CO's who "find" all their own caches, doing anything other than trying to make their numbers look good. There's no other reasonable excuse for a CO with 50 caches hidden to have finds on them all. We have one of those. Does it matter to me? Not aside from being mildly annoying, but it also gives me something to chuckle about. It makes no difference to me, but I certainly think it's in poor taste.
-
If you're going to take the time to make a custom strap, please make a quality custom container that won't leak and break.
I make my straps/holsters out of electrical wire, wound around the container until its about half down. This is a sturdy holster, it bends into place, but takes force so the hook wont un-bend. And the wire can withstand the elements.
And please don't reply with why this is wrong. My reply would be: I enjoy finding film containers more than any other. You know almost all large ones are on the ground hidden by logs sticks or leaves. The small ones are what I find fun to hunt for. And when I find one my favorite part is seeing there creative way to hang it or hide it.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with liking to find challenging and interesting micros. Your wire idea is a good one. None of that changes the poor quality of film canisters. There are plenty of containers that work wonderfully, one of which is mentioned in the post above mine. Soda bottle preforms are stellar. I've seen people use halves of contact lense cases. Decon containers are a little larger but very easily cammo'd and are great against the elements. Lock'n'lock's seem to come in pretty small sizes. The possiblities for good quality micros that can be cleverly camoflaged are pretty extensive. Heck, if you know anyone who's diabetic the test strip containers work really well too...
-
Start with the CO, see what happens
-
I think film canister is GREAT. There are plenty of them aorund for cheap or free, add a simple ziplock bag and a little yearly check-up and your water sin't a problem, and they are very universal
Hide on the ground it's fine if it gets dirty
Hide in the air, perfect size for a homemade strap/holder
Hide anywhere it's small and compact for a great hide ANYWHERE
They're not waterproof and will get wet this way. Plastic baggies don't help; they keep water in, not out.
If you're going to take the time to make a custom strap, please make a quality custom container that won't leak and break.
I've never seen a great film can hide anywhere. I've seen plenty of crappy ones, they seem to be the standard.
-
I think there have been a number of examples where the owner went to do maintenance and found the cache is a different place then where he left it. And of course even is the cache is right where you left it, you can still say the you "found it right where you left it" - particular after someone else has DNF'd it. Despite Keystone's aphorism, you can find something if you know where it is.
As far as someone logging their own cache each time it's misplaced, what is so ridiculous about this. Is the find count a score and logging your own cache multiple times some how messes up the score?
I believe that most geocachers will log a cache only once and will not log their own caches. But some do because to them it fits their definitions of "find". We each have our own definition. What I will call the "purist" definition is not a very good general definition of finding a cache. It works only as good definition for expressing a particular goal in this game, which is to find many different caches placed by other cachers. If this is your goal then of course it makes little sense to log your own cache or log a cache more than once as your find count then includes finds that are not part of that goal.
Here is one of my recent logs:
I found my original container, with my original log, hidden in the original spot, in the original fashion. Standing over it, my GPSr was reading 3'. Don't be confused by the "rock art", trail side, 30' away. That is not GZ.I also scoured the area but could not find the so called replacement cache.
I think this describes exactly what happened. I found my cache. It doesn't matter if I knew where to look. What matters is that I found it where I looked. Knowing where to look just made finding it easier. Of course, keeping with proper protocol, I simply enabled the cache and did not post a Found It log.
What amazes me is that some on this forum seem to want it both ways. They want to revert to absolute literal definitions in a discussion on this topic, then they want to divert to the opposite of literal and suggest that you can't find something if you didn't have a pen with you to sign the log.
It's two seperate issues. If you don't have a pen, you'd better have another way to prove you found the cache. False found it logs can affect the way others play the game. Negatively. I really don't care what TOZ has to say, you're supposed to sign the log if you're going to log a find. You don't have to, the system allows for anyone to log any cache any time they wish. The right way to do it, however, is to sign then log.
If you want to log your own caches as found, that's all on you. What it boils down to though, is that for those folks, their numbers are so important to them that they'll engage in this silly practice just to make their numbers look that much better. So what? Should they? Not as far as I'm concerned. Is there a valid reason? Nope, not other than making themselves look better in their own eyes.
There's nothing that will be done to stop the practice. I don't even feel the need to. Heck, it gives me a reason to make fun of you. It shows me which cachers I probably don't want to go out caching with.
-
I hope these CO's okay'd you putting video of their caches on the website...
-
Please don't use a smartphone to hide caches
That kind of statement can't be used universally anymore. Some smartphones can get excellent reception in some areas. If done properly and carefully, a smartphone can be used in SOME cases. Not all, though. For example, a smartphone in the woods still isn't a good idea.
Right or a smartphone having signal problems, or an older smartphone model or a smartphone with a low battery...
I know that the GPS accuracy has supposedly gotten better. It still just rings as a bad idea to me given all the variables. I'm well aware that there are hides placed by folks who use smartphones that are spot on as far as coords go. That doesn't make it, in my mind at least, a good practice to promote.
-
Please don't use a smartphone to hide caches
Trust me JJC, no newbie is reading 10 consecutive posts by 2 posters, and thinking something is intrinsically wrong with numbers. The only advice newbies need is to stop logging our caches en-masse with 2 word or less lame logs. 
Do high number cachers brag? I don't necessarily think so. I've met and cached with Alamogul, he's a great guy, and not the least bit arrogant or braggy. He's also very fast, and hard to keep up with. And you mention Nozzletime, one time No. 1 finder in Canada. Yep, met him, and great guy again. He is not even close to being retired by the way. 
) my logs may not be quite as informative unless there's different information to give.
Premium Membership
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Not to mention the support you're giving the company that's entertaining you a little financial support to help keep the entertainment going