Jump to content


+Charter Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sagefox

  1. ...and the more in depth I read about geology, the less I understand, so I'm always paranoid I've screwed something up. That rings a bell. I have crawled all over the subject areas of these caches and have taken local three-day geology courses/field trips and read books and papers. Early on I felt I knew a ton about those areas but the more I read and think about them the deeper the mystery goes. I've been humbled by how much there is yet to learn. But what a beautiful journey. For the ECs I am concerned about it appears to me to be a situation where someone was more interested in publishing a large number of ECs rather than spending the extra research time needed to make each site accurate.
  2. I searched the guidelines and the forums but could not find a prior topic on this subject. I know it must be out there somewhere. I discovered some Earthcaches, all by the same owner, that have gross errors. The wrong bedrock, impossible rock type contacts, applying information gleaned from geology books to the wrong terrain and inconsistencies between their own ECs. These caches are in an area that I know well and it kills me to think that hundreds of folks have read the information thinking it must be true. I have contacted the EC owner twice giving them a lengthy, logical discussion with comments specific to multiple errors on each EC. This was done without an emotional or accusational tone - once about two years ago and again more recently. There have been no changes to the EC pages and no reply from the owner. I have thought about this at length, tried to forget about it for a couple of years and finally came to the conclusion that it should not be ignored. It puts a shadow over many of the earthcaches I visit in areas I am not familiar with. Is there a place to report to? Do I post a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archived log? I have specifically excluded reference to the ECs in question because it would not be appropriate to discuss them here. It is a matter for the EC review team to examine.
  3. Yes you do! That is one cool travel bug. If that happened to one of our trackables I would delete all the virtual finds - especially the European logs. You know where and when you made it available for people to see so you can figure out most of the US virtual logs too.
  4. Oh. You thought we would all go to sleep and not check. Everyone here pretty much told you it would be a bad idea to log that cache as found. Team accounts are where folks, typically a family or significant other unit, log cache finds under one account. The account find total represents the team effort - they do not log team finds on individual accounts. These teams typically do not enlist one-off efforts where a temporary member actually finds the cache.
  5. Pretty much reminds me of back in the days when the vacationers and other travelers helped populate the rural areas with caches. Our former home county, an area larger than the state of Delaware, only had caches placed by vacationers and once I got in the game I maintained those caches on the tourist half of the county so other vacationers would have something to look for (in addition to our cache placements). And when those later vacationers placed new caches I maintained them too. Vacationing cachers were always happy to come to our tourist destination because there were plenty of caches in addition to the natural beauty of the rural coastal area. After several years a local cacher community sprouted up and became self-sustaining and vacation caches were no longer needed. And what was the harm in that? As long as the container is viable does it really matter who replaced it? When it goes missing and people no longer replace it then it gets archived - problem solved!
  6. I mostly agree. I do use the NA option a few times each year. Exception: I have no problem with a cache like OPs example being replaced. People like this cache, and you could even say the need it. This comes under the heading of The Community Cares about this cache and has made it viable again. Exception: I have no problem with throw-down LPC containers because I typically don't care about LPC containers, whether they live or die. The issue here is the timing of a NA log. The longer people hesitate to post a NA the more likely a throw down will happen. A throw down makes the cache viable again whether the CO is active, or not.
  7. I'm not 100% invested in this cache one way or the other except for OP's main subject: Photo-logging is carp! I totally agree. But as to these other two items: Case for throw down: This cacher replaced a micro with a micro, likely in the correct spot. 30 accounts could not find a container in a very small search area. Clearly the cache was missing and clearly it was a micro. It has been said that the area is lacking in caches and this seems to be confirmed because 25 accounts would not likely have searched for a micro with more than 5 dnfs if there were plenty of caches around. This is only a throw down for one person. Future finders will be very pleased that the cache is back in action. I would easily and quickly replace a container in this situation for the good of the game though I would not (and do not) claim a find for it. Archive: Always appropriate when a cache is missing or in very bad shape and the owner is not responding to repeated calls for help. But someone took an action here and now there is an viable container in place. No harm in letting a desired cache live on. Its day to die will eventually come but right now it's as good as new.
  8. It is unactivated... delete your picture on the cache, This bears clarification. You should never post a photo of the tracking number or put the tb tracking number in a log. People are collecting these numbers and spreading them around for folks to post virtual find logs when they didn't actually see the trackable. And, yes, you should delete that photo.
  9. Looks like the cache has been missing for 11 months and 9 photologged it while 21 dnfed. I think that qualifies as a bit sad. I don't recall too many caches with 30 dnfs so it must be in a popular visitor place. Now someone has come to the rescue and placed a container, likely very similar to the original. They say there are not many caches in BA so this replacement will be quite welcomed by future finders. I hope the reviewer lets it live.
  10. You are describing a Virtual Cache with ALRs. This idea just limits them to nature. There are many good reasons why Virtual Caches were ended as a cache type and the reasons are still valid. Container geocaches provide the means to get us out into nature.
  11. Cached Out by Russell Atkinson - A Cliff Knowles Mystery. Apparently self published. My daughter bought it for me so she must have Googled for it. I enjoyed reading this book. I will be looking for the other Cliff Knowles books soon. First to Find by Morgan C. Talbot. I read about it in another forum topic and got it from Amazon for Kindle. This was a fun read although somewhat unrealistic in many respects, especially in the stature of geocaching among the muggle community, the importance of FTFs and I never knew anyone who cared that much about a missing microcache. The characters were likeable and the story moved right along.
  12. That is just a cool graphic and is not unique to each travel bug. The free bar code scanners for smart phones will read QR codes so if you are using a phone ap for geocaching it is easy enough to switch over to the bar code ap and read these new tags. The ap will then give you the link to the trackable page. You already have at hand everything you need.
  13. NYPC you are hereby absolved of any harm, real or imagined, to this game. One, or a couple of instances is not enough to bring action against you in this courtroom. Your confession did contribute nicely to the conversation but since it is not common practice for you, you are hereby released and your bond will be returned.
  14. Especially if you are an experienced geocaching veteran. "Greetings From Germany" did not suddenly appear in full force. One person must have thought it up, then their friends joined in and then it went viral.
  15. So then that makes it o.k. to encourage other cachers to do the same, spread it to other caches and have new cachers think it is the norm?
  16. It does because it encourages others to post false finds, especially when people new to the game see that a highly experienced player does it and a cache owner is complicit. It certainly qualifies for 'Found It = Didn't Find It'.
  17. I am clear about one thing and that is that creative, or should I say experimental, finds are most likely a small number in your find count and that ratio carries a lot of weight for me. You have made the point that your count total is not important to you and I believe that. But what about the integrity of cache? That takes it outside your caching world and puts it in the common ground of the game. Is it o.k. not to care about the cache?
  18. Then I don't understand why you would log it as found. Why not log a Note? That would be the appropriate log. This seems like a very weak justification for logging a false find. People do care about this witness the topic Found It = Didn't Find It with its 195000 views.
  19. I don't understand this. Because C/Os and finders are willing to abuse cache find logging it is therefore o.k. to abuse cache find logging... and multiple times such as in this case?
  20. Yes. Delete, delete, deltet, I say. I think the trackables were listed on two separate lists and during the mega-logging people didn't know they logged twice. Delete away!
  21. It depends. If it is a worthy cache site and I had an appropriate replacement container (which typically I don't carry with me) and a cache at that location did not compromise the natural setting then, yep, I might replace it. Perhaps even more so if the CO and maintainer have gone dark. It is not geolitter if I perform maintenance regardless if the owner is active, or not. As long as there is a viable container at the site it makes no difference who did the maintenance. Eventually the cache may need maintenance again and at that time someone else will either come to the rescue or start the NM-NA process. When no one is willing to keep it alive it will die its due death. It doesn't matter if that death is within 3 months or three years.
  22. We were on grandkid duty this weekend to give the parents some well deserved time off. We just move into their house and have fun with the kids. We did get a chance to visit a Washington State Park 100th anniversary cache and three others. The kids (ages 4 and 7) love geocaching. Here is a shot of Dead Man's Island from Kopachuck State Park including a crabby travelbug.
  23. I just did this a couple of weeks ago and plan on doing it again next week. The risk of these caches not being published is very low but even if the next one doesn't get published it is no big deal for me to jump on the bike and go retrieve it.
  24. Why would you want to do this? What purpose does it serve to "visit" a cache that you didn't find?
  • Create New...