bradleyhenley

I was told by the Texas Reviewer to post "Needs Maintenance" for violations so the owner could repair the issue before the reviewer had to step in.Okay, so what do you (and the Texas Reviewer) consider a "violation" worthy of a "Needs Maintenance", but not worthy of a "Needs Archived"? The violations I've seen have been things like caches placed without permission and the owner/manager wants it gone. That's a "Needs Archived", not a "Needs Maintenance". Posting "Needs Maintenance" is for things like full logs or damaged containers, which I'd hardly consider "violations". I've posted "Needs Maintenance" for caches: 1) Attached to live cables. -moved after a note from the Reviewer -the CO said the wires were not live -but the container stated DANGER LIVE WIRES. Refer: http://coord.info/GC24QY3 Sept. 21, 2010 our NM logs have been deleted by owner as well as Reviewers. 2) Attached to a Federal Post Office Mail Box in front of the local Post office. - removed after Reviewer archived the cache. Refer: http://coord.info/GCRTED On both of these cases I posted Needs Maintenance and emailed the Reviewer with pictures. Actually, I would suggest that your first example is really nobody's business but the cache owner and the seekers, just as with a cache that is on a cliff that you need to rappel to. If you don't dare to do it, you should just walk away. Your 2nd example is most certainly a NA log. Think of "NA" as standing for "Needs Reviewer Attention" rather than a strict "Needs Archived". A cache on a USP mailbox is against the law, hence a violation. The first suggestion offers several different issues. 1) The placement was in the top of a cable repair. 2) The placement was not a permanent fixture. The cable would be buried later. As far as your "Cliff Rappel" example: 1) There is an attribute for climbing showing that additional supplies will be needed and a matter of difficulty. 2) Electricity is not an attribute, it is a danger not associated with the sport. Side note: Did you see how many finds and years the post box cache was out? 80 smiles and almost 5 years

I was told by the Texas Reviewer to post "Needs Maintenance" for violations so the owner could repair the issue before the reviewer had to step in.Okay, so what do you (and the Texas Reviewer) consider a "violation" worthy of a "Needs Maintenance", but not worthy of a "Needs Archived"? The violations I've seen have been things like caches placed without permission and the owner/manager wants it gone. That's a "Needs Archived", not a "Needs Maintenance". Posting "Needs Maintenance" is for things like full logs or damaged containers, which I'd hardly consider "violations". I've posted "Needs Maintenance" for caches: 1) Attached to live cables. -moved after a note from the Reviewer -the CO said the wires were not live -but the container stated DANGER LIVE WIRES. Refer: http://coord.info/GC24QY3 “ Sept. 21, 2010 our “NM” logs have been deleted by owner as well as Reviewers. 2) Attached to a Federal Post Office Mail Box in front of the local Post office. - removed after Reviewer archived the cache. Refer: http://coord.info/GCRTED On both of these cases I posted Needs Maintenance and emailed the Reviewer with pictures.

Just a few quibbles about your Mission Objectives page:Ignoring claims about the "mission of every geocacher", there are violations that call for "Needs Archived" rather than "Needs Maintenance". Actually, most things I would consider violations fall into that category. A "Needs Maintenance" log is for things like full logs or damaged containers, not violations. Just because you can't find it doesn't mean the cache owner needs to do anything, or that the cache needs maintenance. And the signs of an abandoned geocache are usually full logs and broken, leaking containers, not DNFs. Some caches will need maintenance more often than once a month (especially early on, when they're being found frequently by the local geocachers). Others can go much longer than three months between owner visits. Thank you for not encouraging throw-down caches. FWIW, another problem with non-owner replacements is the CO may no longer be active, or may think the cache has run its course and prefer not to keep the cache going. In such cases, archiving the cache is generally a better choice. Helping active owners maintain their caches is a good thing to do. But it is never required, and those who don't provide such help are not being irresponsible. #1) I was told by the Texas Reviewer to post "Needs Maintenance" for violations so the owner could repair the issue before the reviewer had to step in. #2) on that one I base on my geocaching in my area where when you place a geocache it get 5-10 finds in about 2 weeks then left untouched for months. We have just about gotten all the abandoned caches archived from Hurricane Katrina. #3) the 1-3 months maintenance window is what I relate to geocaching.com's guideline of cache maintenance. #4) thank you for the additional view on the statement. #5) I know helping is never required. The entire page titled "Mission Objectives" is to offer reasonable ideas, like geocaching stating CITO on every outing. We both know not everyone will CITO on every outing. I don't expect everyone to follow everything stated on the page. They are personal missions I set for myself.

Do you realize that the Geocacher's Creed is abopted by Groundspeak. refer to: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=46

Geocacheresponsibly.info Redesigned.

Nothing about my sight should be original. The site is a place I am gathering the links to the state and federal laws. The website is to inform people that there are State and Federal Laws governing the sport of Geocaching. Also on the redesign I am working on right now. I will be placing links to different articles that talk about the sport of geocaching.

Why would you think that? http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=306 1.3. Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements 1. If your cache is reported by the land owner or land manager as being an unwanted intrusion, Groundspeak will respect their wishes, support their request and take action. 2. Additional regulations and laws that apply only to your country and region may further restrict cache placement. Some park systems also have specific geocaching rules. Local geocaching organizations or your local reviewer are often able to provide information on regional requirements. 3. A cache may be disabled or archived if (list is not exhaustive) one or more of the following is true. If your cache is located within one of the areas listed below and you have complied with special regulations by obtaining written permission or a permit, please explain this in a "Note to Reviewer." o Placement does not meet all guidelines. o Cache placement is in an area that is highly sensitive to additional foot and vehicular traffic including but not limited to archaeological sites, historical sites and cemeteries. o Cache defaces or destroys property (public or private) either in the hiding of or searching for the cache. o Cache is near active railroad tracks. In the United States we generally use a distance of 150 ft (46 m) from tracks. Other local laws may vary. o Cache is problematic due to its proximity to a public structure including and not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings, military bases, schools, hospitals, airports and other such locations. 4. The Review Process outlines steps to take if your geocache has been placed on hold, temporarily disabled or archived.

I thought cemetery caches were no longer allowed? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2PJ4F

I see nothing positive in cherry-picking and misinterpreting a small handful of game elements, and then mashing them together in such a misleading way. How about something like "you are preaching to the choir but you have some good ideas. Keep working on them and learning from the community so you can evolve your site into something educational and informative for the community." It would be totally insincere for me to say anything like that. There are no good ideas there, and the site is totally redundant. There is noone forcing you to view my website nor continue on this thread.

Everyone has their own ideas and ways of doing things. I have said my 2 cents. Geocache - Responsibly is my way of informing the geocacher and muggle populations that the game is here and there are State and Federal laws governing the sport along with the rules/guidelines as described on Geocaching.com. Groundspeak, Lackeys, and Reviewers are free of most any punishment set forth by any governing body due to the fact that while processing your geocache placement you (cache owner) check the two boxes stating that you have proper approvel and the geocache is within all Geocaching.com, State and Federal laws/rules/guidelines.

The intro page is a little long winded. I will be changing this upon update. As far as the "expert" I never claimed to be. I want fellow geocachers to investigate further into the state and federal laws. when the sport was young it was to be hidden/ secert. now there are too many people involved to keep it quiet.

SWAG stands for: S-stuff W-we A-all G-get that inculdes but not limited to childrens toys Sad, The only thing I state about swag is that, As being a perpaired cacher you being swag as part of your repair items. the swag is for the children. Remeber this is a family sport and children enjoy finding trinkets.

Which is why IMO it's important that caches which are no longer there and abandoned by the cache owner get archived. When I'm having trouble finding a cache I always have at the back of my mind that it may no longer be there, so usually prefer to wait a while to see if any more finds appear rather than tearing up GZ looking. Yes, abandoned geocaches should be archived. The issue here is that when you place a geocache about 5-10 cachers max hit the cache within 2 weeks then it is forgotten.

I don't think he created the federal rules for the national forests in his area. Other forests, of course, have their own rules -- some of which, like the Daniel Boone or the Alleghaney require geocaches to be moved or removed within a year (which does not seem to be followed). Others have no restrictions. So I can agree to the extent that he advises people to be familiar with the rules in their own area,. I agree that the links on his one-man group were important to caching. It was his ad hoc opinions in the E.T. Archival thread that bothered me. I am sorry I got off topic. I just saw another example where the informed Geocacher could have been pro-active and contacted the NDOT and met with and made an arangement long before this drastic archivel of the E.T. Highway. You sure think you've got all the answers for someone who is so new here. BTW no arrangement could have been made to make that highway a safer place to cache. It was unsafe. They NDOT would not have added turn-outs for the caches, so no, I don't think a meeting would have helped in that case. Since I have never been to Navada I could not have known that. But it was an option.

I'm not saying that veteran cachers world wide are the issue. But here in my neck of the woods veteran cachers are an issue. Of my 167 I have found all 167. I have searched for over 300 and placed NM logs then after some time NA. Prime has archived over 100 caches for the issue of abandonment. When I started the process I was contacted by multiple veteran cachers that stated "that cacher does not live here anymore just put all caches from 'said' cacher on your ignore list." When I started posting NM and NA logs I was told by the local veterans that the reviewer will not do anything stop wasting your time. And in the year or so I have been caching I have found many former cachers sick of the game because of the massive amounts of DNF's and the cache owners non responce.

I don't think he created the federal rules for the national forests in his area. Other forests, of course, have their own rules -- some of which, like the Daniel Boone or the Alleghaney require geocaches to be moved or removed within a year (which does not seem to be followed). Others have no restrictions. So I can agree to the extent that he advises people to be familiar with the rules in their own area,. I agree that the links on his one-man group were important to caching. It was his ad hoc opinions in the E.T. Archival thread that bothered me. I am sorry I got off topic. I just saw another example where the informed Geocacher could have been pro-active and contacted the NDOT and met with and made an arangement long before this drastic archivel of the E.T. Highway.

I don't think he created the federal rules for the national forests in his area, which are also used by a few other national forest areas. Other forests, of course, have their own rules -- some of which, like the Daniel Boone or the Alleghaney require geocaches to be moved or removed within a year (which does not seem to be followed). Some require permits. Others have no restrictions. So I can agree to the extent that he advises people to be familiar with the rules in their own area,. Geocache - Responsibly is a movement stressing the need to inform ones self with all the information associated with the sport. You have rules and guidelines of geocaching. Then you have City, State, and Federal laws to adbide by also. Please inform yourself.

Not to mention his re-write of the guidelines and self created federal rules. Re-write of the guidelines and self created federal rules. HAHA Please Refer to (http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/texas/recreation/policy/geo_cache_regional_policy_fs_manual.pdf) If I created the Federal Rules then I must also work for the Federal Forest Service in Texas HMMM.

I got the e-mail about midnight. Untill then I did not even know this thread existed. Funny I received the e-mail form you at 11.28p.m. and your bashing me at 8.55p.m. States alot about you.

Me too. I guess it could be worse though... it could be called the Geocacher's Doctrine or some other heavy-handed relig... er, nevermind. Geocache - Responsibly Came from the thinking of a Responsible Geocacher. Geocache - Responsibly is a movement to inform geocacher and muggle alike.

How is this a "nanny like thing"? I am trying to bring awareness to the state and federal laws that everyone should follow. When this game was young the idea was to keep it quiet, and secret. Now with over 5 million cachers It is impossiable to keep the game secret. With all the bomb scares and the like we should think pro-active, be the solution not the continued cause. By being informative and pro-active we could stop a lot of unwanted negitivism toward the sport.

SWAG stands for: S-stuff W-we A-all G-get that inculdes but not limited to childrens toys

[#103128] The administrator has limited the number of new posts you can submit within a short time frame. Please wait 15 seconds before replying or posting a new topic. Thats new. Strange.

The ads are from godaddy the host company. They will be removed when I update the site and purchase hosting.

Huh, interesting link. Small membership at the present time, but its a positive step. Its a start. Thank You. Sorry took so long to get here. Just received your email. Ha, Look I have my own thread on geocaching.com. Tell me what you think so far. I just received the email. From: Geocaching <noreply@geocaching.com> To: bradleyhenley@yahoo.com Sent: Tue, March 1, 2011 11:28:00 PM Subject: [GEO] knowschad contacting bradleyhenley from Geocaching.com I'm inviting you, if you wish, to post to a thread that I created on the forums to discuss your website. I just didn't want that discussion getting in the way of the E.T. Highway thread. See the thread about your website here: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=269575 User's Profile: http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=eb1885f1-429c-4f18-88e5-8935a341f289 ------------------------------------------------------------ Forward abuse complaints to: contact@geocaching.com