Ladybug Kids
-
Posts
1481 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ladybug Kids
-
-
There is a nuance to the Guideline you quoted...Cacher B cannot ask for Cacher A's cache to be unarchived so Cacher B can adopt it. On the other hand, it's entirely plausible that Cacher A could ask for Cacher A's cache to be unarchived. The local Reviewer can unarchive Cacher A's cache if it meets the current Guidelines. Cacher A may then adopt the cache to Cacher B or whomever s/he wishes. Neither Groundspeak or the local Reviewer needs to get involved in the adoption transaction and the cache can then live on as long as Cacher B maintains it. The bottom line, though, is that Cacher A must be involved in the unarchival and adoption. Chances are pretty good that if Cacher A was unresponsive enough to allow the cache to be archived, then Cacher A is not likely to request unarchival and proceed with an adoption. In Alaska, only about 5% of archived caches get unarchived.And an owner can always ask for an archived cache to be unarchived, so long as it meets the current guidelines.
They can ask, but it won't always happen. For example, a reviewer is very unlikely to unarchive a cache simply so the owner can then immediately adopt it out to another geocacher...even if it meets current guidelines.
And that's something I would appeal straight to the top. I don't see why one couldn't do that, especially when looking at the fact that the owner of the listing owns it, not Groundspeak. If the cache listing still meets the guidelines, there's no reason why it couldn't be unarchived.
Perhaps the way to ask is to simple ask for 1 thing: unarchival. Then, once it is unarchived, it belongs to the owner, and they can do with the listing as they please.
I'd be really interested to see how an appeal would go if a Reviewer would not unarchive a cache at the request of the owner if it still meets the guidelines, and simply because it might get adopted by someone.
You can appeal, of course. But your chance of success would be slim. Check out these guidelines for adopting geocaches:
Archived geocaches cannot be transferred, and rarely will archived geocaches be unarchived for the purpose of adoption.If someone did request a cache to be unarchived and then adopted it out soon after that, then I wouldn't be shocked if Groundspeak forced it to be archived again.
-
I personally know reviewers who will allow a year or more for a cache to be maintained if the Cache Owner stays in contact with the Reviewer and the caching community through notes on the cache page. Reviewers generally stay out of making subjective calls regarding whether a cache is "nice" or not since they haven't personally visited most sites and really shouldn't allow personal bias to affect their decisions (though it does happen from time to time).The argument that an abandoned cache on GC.com may be actively maintained on another site seems specious.
Yes and no. In some areas on geocaching.com the expectations on how fast maintenance has to happen are quite high, too high in my personal opinion.
I have no issue to wait a year and more until a nice cache gets finally maintained.
On the other hand, if the Cache Owner is unresponsive and a cache clearly has issues, why not archive it? Many Reviewers have several tens of thousands of caches in their territories. For how long should they be expected to watch how many caches before they finally take action? Archival doesn't have to be permanent...many Archival notes I have seen indicate the archived cache can be unarchived at the Cache Owner's request if the cache meets the current Guidelines.
-
It already happens with Lab Caches. Cachers at the 2014 Going Ape Event were receiving "Greetings from Germany" e-mails offering to trade Lab Cache codes across the pond before the Going Ape Event even started. One "poor" guy made the mistake of sending an e-mail to a Groundspeak Lackey at the event...guess what happened to his/her account?I suppose this is one reason why Groundspeak did not substitute codewords for logbooks. Due to all of the people sharing TB#s without looking at them, the next step would be for the same thing to occur with caches. For some reason having the code seems to make it legit.
-
Not found since August 2013 after more than 200 finds and a Cache Owner who has not been online since May 2014? In my opinion, since a Reviewer hasn't sniffed it out yet, it's past time to drop an NA log on it to get the Reviewer's and the Cache Owner's attention.I don't think logging DNFs is a good idea anymore, due to the willingness to archive a cache over them, such as this one:
http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCY3ZG_johnny-cache
Post a note to keep it out of the reviewers PQs.
If so, then why is this cache still active?
-
+1. we log every cache attempt. Our record for DNFs is four, about once per week over the period of a month before we were successful.I log EVERY DNF for the reasons expressed by others, it alerts the CO to the fact that there may be something wrong with the cache.
Ditto
DNF logs keep a history of the cache and are the first hint to the Cache Owner and the community there may be a problem with the cache. Not logging a DNF for a missing cache assures future cachers will similarly waste their time hunting and the Cache Owner will never know the difference.
-
When nanos first came out in my area, the FTFs would oftentimes unroll the entire blank log sheet and sign the back and then not log their find until someone else posted their find. STFs would come along, see the blank beginning of the scroll and declare themselves the FTF. The cache page flame wars that ensued weren't pleasant.
-
Agree. I modified my post accordingly.NM (Needs Maintenance) - Written in addtion to a "found it' log. The Cacher found the cache and the container and/or logbook need Cacher Owner attention. The Cacher can't possibly know if the cache needs maintenance unless the cacher finds the cache and see there are specific problems.
No?
Let's say a hypothetical cache is hidden up a lone tree in the middle of an open field, as stated in the description. A cacher arrives to find the tree has been cut down and there's no sign of the container. Are you saying a Needs Maintenance would be inappropriate in such a situation? Similar real-world occurrences are not rare.
If not a NM, what log would you suggest? To me, such a cache certainly "needs maintenance".
-
When Favorite Points came out, I easily "back dated" my Favorite points using a "Top 10%" bookmark list I kept that was inspired my Moun10bike's lists. I had left over favorite points, so I skimmed through my list of finds in GSAK and if a cache triggered a good memory, I awarded it a favorite point. This got me down to a couple of dozen favorite points that I reserve for if I get into an area that features particularly high quility hides.
I tend to award more Favorite points when traveling than when at home because I use GSAK to filter on caches with lots of Favorite points and make those caches the focus of my hunts. As a result, I find a higher than normal ratio of better than average caches.
-
...When I knew I was going to be caching for most of the the day I'd bring a note pad to keep track of what I find. I just don't buy the excuse that I found too many caches so I can't remember details about every one of them. I don't think finding as many caches as possible should take precedence over properly thanking those that provide caches for us to find...and I certainly hope that common courtesy isn't considered to be "old school".
+1
Even when paperless caching with my Oregon, it's really pretty easy to put a couple or words in the comment field in the GPS to assist with writing a custom log for each and every cache hunt when I get to a full keyboard. At 7800+ finds and counting, my average log length is right at 100 words with nary a copy and paste string of cache logs in the batch.
-
It absolutely is every cacher's duty to bring caches with issues to the local Reviewer's attention. If everyone thinks it's someone else's job to write the NA log, long non-viable caches continue to not be viable.
DNF - The Cacher looked and Did Not Find. Reviewers look for caches with growing strings of DNFs when checking cache health in their territories.
NM (Needs Maintenance) - Written in addtion to a "found it' log. The Cacher found the cache and the container and/or logbook need Cacher Owner attention. The Cacher can't possibly know if the cache needs maintenance unless the cacher finds the cache and sees there are specific problems. Exceptions to this could include the hiding place indicated by the hint or other information on the cache page has clearly been compromised. This log type does not automatically bring the cache to the local Reviewer's attention, but some Reviewers will filter on caches needing maintenance when checking caches in their review territory, especially since some/many cache owners do not know how to clear the Needs Maintenance attribute from their cache page.
NA (Needs Archived) - Written to get the local Reviewer's attention for a cache with clear Guideline violation(s), growing string of DNFs, or other issue(s) requiring Reviewer and Cache Owner attention. Reviewers aren't normally quick to archive in response to an NA log, preffering to give the Cache Owner time to do the right thing after subjectively assessing whether there really is an issue with the cache, the last time the Cache Owner has logged into the site, etc.
-
Ammo Cans: Here's one that has spent ten years in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Rusty on the outside, good on the inside:
There is no way a plastic container would have survived intact in that climate for so long.
Cache Quality: One can easily find caching "the way it used to be" off the beaten path in Sitka, Alaska, and Maui and other places off the beaten path AND by filtering pocket queries for caches with several favorite points. Here at home in Anchorage, Alaska, there are more mountaintop caches than I could find during the next three years unless I quit work. I've had a blast working on the Texas County Challenge during business trips to Texas. I spent a day last month running around the countryside near Bremgarten, Switzerland, and found only one nano while visiting several interesting locations and VERY clever hides. I wrapped up that trip in Paris having a blast finding nanos and micros along the Champs-Élysées while enjoying the festive Christmas lighting and vendor booths. Quality and fun is where you look for it if you are willing to bypass all the microspew out there.
Swag: What goes around comes around. I still stock my containers with new swag and I still find swag I can't trade for because I left my swag bag behind. Normally, I have a bag full of pathtags, dollar coins, and other similar items for trade so I always trade UP or not at all.
-
One can fix this when creating the POI file in GSAK by specifying the "alarm distance" and selecting a custom geocaching bmp image for the Nuvi to display in place of the typical POI "dot."You can also load caches as poi's but it isn't practical as you have to zoom in so far to see the icon its like driving with your nose pressed to the highway ( this method requires a work-around and was used before paperless handhelds in order to have cache info. without paper )
Geocaches are loaded to a Nuvi using a gpx file are saved in the "my places" memory and the Nuvi limits the number of "my places." Then, to clear the caches, one has to delete "all" which deletes all places or tediously delete the caches one by one. Conversely, by saving the caches as POIs, the Nuvi will digest an unlimited number of caches which can be deleted simply by deleting the POI file.
I like using the Nuvi to navitage to parking because it allows for heads up navigation for the driver while leaving the handheld GPS available for reading the cache description or planning the next few caches.
-
the circumstances would have to line up perfectly for me to allow anyone to replace my cache:
1 - The original container would have to be clearly documented as defective
2 - The replacement would have to be identical or I would have to be able to judge whether it was an improvement. For example, I would never accept a film canister in replacement for a waterproof matchstick container. It would also have to fit in the placement I intended...I would not compromise my cache for the sake of convenience.
Honestly, I could not properly judge it without being there to inspect the container and its placement. Call me anal retentive, but I honestly do NOT appreciate anything that does not follow or improve upon the original intent of the cache hide. Such a thing is hard to judge without being there...so in the vast majority of cases it should not even be considered. In those others, folks intending to replace my caches are in for some frustrating back-and-forth that they likely will not want to bother with. My best advice, don't try replacing a cache that the CO actually cares about. Sadly, a great many COs honestly don't care about their caches...stick with those and you'll be fine.
+1
Cachers "improve" my caches at times, creating more work for me.
I'd be very annoyed if someone unilaterally replaced a container (and especially if they have a habit of not saying so, in a cache log).
+2
None of the replacement caches placed for my caches without first consulting with me have been "correct." Without fail, the original container was right where it was supposed to be and I removed the replacement container to recycle somewhere else if the container was worth recycling.
-
The GeocacheAlaska! Forums for your home state have an active thread on the topic of cache replacement here.
Regarding TSA...I keep all my geocaching items in a small fanny pack that fits inside my lapttop backpack. I place the pack in a bin all by itself so if all the cables, batteries, electronics, geocoins, and pathtags look suspicious on the x-ray, the TSA representative knows exactly where to look. I'm never certain what catches their interest...most of the time, the pack goes straight through without problem. However, last week in the Netherlands, I had to explain the geocoins I was taking as gifts to European cachers. Fortunately, one of the guards (TSA is American) had heard about geocaching via Facebook, gave the first guard an explaination in Dutch, and I was quickly on my way.
The two occasions I have had "real" issues with TSA both happened in Fairbanks, Alaska. The first involved a small box-end wrench with a TB tag on it. The wrench fit their definition of a "tool" and I was given the choice of mailing the tool home to myself, or checking it, or surrendering it. The gift shop right outside Security conveniently had padded mailers and stamps which I purchased.
The second incident involved a dud bullet signature item I picked up from a cache. The bullet created all sorts of consternation until they realized it had no powder in it.
-
The EarthCache guidelines may be found on the GSA website here: http://community.geosociety.org/EarthCache/guidelines/guidelines2/
Guideline #4 addresses required Land Manager approval.
-
I think folks are focusing too much on the DNF angle of the situation and not enough on how simply the situation can be mitigated by the Cache Owner responding to a Reviewer's action with a simple note to the effect of "thanks for your note, I'm on it!" Even if the Cache Owner misses the first electronic nudge and a cache gets archived, the Cache Owner can ask for unarchival simply by contacting the Reviewer. In the disablement examples given, there is nothing stopping the Cache Owner from Re-enabling the cache.
Folks seem to looking for absolutes when there are none. Every Reviewer Note/Reviewer Disable/Reviewer Archival has its own unique circumstances behind it.
-
This is optimistic. Fewer than 10% of cachers who receive instruction on how to remove the "Needs Maintenance" attribute from their cache page bother to remove the attribute if all is well with their cache and fewer than 1% of cachers whose caches are archived request unarchival.I believe if Reviewer X involuntarily disabled 2,000 caches with a "check your cache and respond in 30 days or else" note on caches in their fiefdom, a full 1,000, or 50% of the cache owners would not respond.
-
Maps greatly increase cache-hunting efficiency.
1. Using Northwest Trails overlaid on Garmin TOPO on my Oregon, I can quickly ascertain the best route to find a cache or caches. The maps help me avoid cliffs, swamps, and other terrain features that are unpleasant or difficult to navigate.
2. Using City Navigator with the caches loaded as points of interest (POIs) on my Nuvi during road trips, I get a heads up display while driving so I'm actually looking at the road instead of trying to read the fine print on my hand-held. The Nuvi gets me close enough to walk and then I switch to my Oregon to make the actual find. This approach makes it easy to do things such as lay out a 700-mile, 23-county cache run across east Texas. There's no way I could pull that off without GPS-based maps without spending hours plotting things on a paper map.
3. I can plan trips or review routes taken on my desktop monitor, so I know well in advance routes I'm going to take and hazards I may encounter. You can also do this with GoogleMaps or GoogleEarth.
-
I'll also add that sometimes a Reviewer archives a cache by mistake as s/he parses through thousands of caches in their territory. Most of the time, all it takes to have the cache unarchived is for the Cache Owner to send the Reviewer an e-mail that says something to the effect of "ooops, I missed your Reviewer Note/Disable Note, Whatever Note. I'm still interested in maintaining my cache and would appreciate having the cache unarchived." Unarchiving a cache is as easy as archiving it as long as the cache meets the current Guidelines.
Folks also shouldn't get carried away about some sort of automatic algorithm existing out there. It's pretty simple to load GSAK with pocket queries for a region and filter on the last time a cache has been found and whether the last one, two, or whatever number of logs were any combination of Did Not Find, Needs Maintenance or Needs Archiving.
As the writer of more than 750 DNF logs (about one out of every 11 of my hunts ends unsuccessfully), it's my opinion every cache attempt should be documented with a note, DNF, found it, etc. Doing so creates a history for the cache and keeps the Cache Owner, the Caching Community, and the Local Reviewer appraised of cache status and interest in the cache. It bothers me a good bit to be caching in an area, not find a cache, see that it hasn't been logged in any way during the past three to six months, yet every other cache in the area has had a lot of activity. If prior hunters had bothered to write a DNF log, perhaps the Cache Owner would have replaced the cache or the Local Reviewer would have intervened...but now I'm straying off topic. People not writing DNF logs to avoid Reviewer intervention are setting up their communities for a lot more unmitigated missing caches and wasted hunt time.
-
Well there's a cache in Alaska that needs archival then. 1 DNF and no finds in 14 years. Should the map be cleaned up to protect potential finders?
A hard to reach cache in Alaska or Brazil is different than a hard to reach cache in New Jersey or The Netherlands. Reviewers are empowered with the discretion to know when to place maintenance request logs.
Someone who cares more could look at the linked New Jersey caches and provide statistics on how far away the nearest caches are, and how often those other caches have been found during the period where the linked caches had no finds. Without looking, my bet is there are multiple caches within five miles that have been found at least a few times in 2013 and 2014. In Alaska or Brazil, the nearest cache might be 50 miles away.
The referenced Alaskan cache has been discussed at length in this thread.
The single DNF was written by a cacher with 17 finds and he dropped a throw-down replacement cache. A more experienced geocacher might recognize that many GPS devices in 2001 had an EPE significantly greater than newer units and the required search zone is much greater than the typical cacher would examine.
If I get up there next summer to hunt the cache, I plan to remove the throw-down (cachers shouldn't drop a new container unless they know for a fact where the original container was located) as geolitter, pitch a tent, and spend a day enjoying the area and doing a fairly expansive search. If the cache isn't found, all members of the party would log a DNF with details of the attempt to continue the legacy of this cache of interest. Removal of the throw-down cache would make it easier for the Reviewer to ultimately archive the cache because the concern over geolitter being left behind would be eliminated.
-
Sometimes a Reviewer simply makes a mistake and publishes a cache too close to another. When this happens, the Reviewer has the discretion to let the mistake stand rather than "punishing" the Cache Owner and Cache Seekers by retracting the cache.
Sometimes a Reviewer does not know there the intermediate and/or final stages of a multi-cache or puzzle cache are located because the provided waypoints are intentionally or unintentionally incorrect or, if an older cache, waypoints aren't available.
Allowing an exception to the proximity guideline due to a terrain feature such as a cliff, a river, an autobahn, etc., is a slippery slope because it opens the door for arguments about what is a sufficiently steep cliff, how much of a detour is required to get to a bridge across the natural or manmade feature, etc.
-
Communication between the Cache Owner and both the Reviewer and local Caching Community through Notes to the cache page is key. Groundspeak does not have anything against remote, lonely caches. However, Groundspeak does not support remote, lonely caches, where the Cache Owner does not respond to a Reviewer checking up on the status of the cache. No communication is tantamount to abandonment.
-
Results are now posted in a new GAGB Forums "Results" thread.
-
With just 4.5 hours to left for voting, the tally is up to 391 ballots completed.
Will 400 be reached?
I will endeavor to have results posted in the GAGB Forums no later than 0300 GMT, Saturday, 29 November. I have personal commitments today that most likely will keep me from posting earlier.
1 DNF + 1 unresponsive owner = archival
in General geocaching topics
Posted
The way the adoption process now works through geocaching.com/adopt, Cacher A's cache can't be adopted out without Cacher A initiating the process. This is different than early adoptions when Groundspeak or a Reviewer had to serve as the middleman.