jlggps
-
Posts
5 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jlggps
-
-
It’s sad that I had to make most of my caches member only, but I hope you will understand why, particularly my new series which took a considerable time to set up.
TAG
I can certainly understand that - fortunately I'd printed off the series the day before, and I've managed to add myself to most of the watch lists after the fact. I won't be able to log the finds unless something changes, but to be honest that's less important to me than following a great series in the outdoors such as this.
-
I pay my sub monthly by PayPal. It's 3 USD a month, which at the moment is about 2 GBP.
I stand corrected Sir!
And Cassie's Crusaders, I'm East Northants too and saw your caches change status, as well as an example of what we're talking about (which I'd fortunately visited a short time ago before this). Shame, but understand.
I suppose there are a few categories of people who do this:
- People who remove caches because they have no permission to be there,
- People who remove caches because they feel they shouldn't be there because of the specific nature of the area (areas of SSI etc) even though there is permission to place
- People who are malicious and enjoy the negative impact on others
- Random vandals who simply come across the cache (usually kids)
The 1st group of course have right on their side (if the land owner/agency), though it would be nicer to contact the cache owner to negotiate a solution or at least notify them they need to move it.
The 2nd group although in the wrong if there is permission to place, are perhaps possible to negotiate something with.
The 4th group is a fact of life, but not usually a problem in non urban locations.
The 3rd group is evidence of some of the more unpleasant tendencies of human nature
I think pretty much the only thing we can do is to accept it is a fact of caching and continue as best we can. On the plus point, it does make me want to actually start placing some caches (with proper permission) which I'm long overdue for
-
Some profilic local cache owners here in Northants are now starting to make all caches for premium members only. It is a shame they feel forced into doing this, especially for those of us who are non premium members (and midway some big series grr), and for those new who might wish to take caching up.
Also of course this won't stop someone who is determined and prepared to simply pay $10.
I wonder if it might be possible to make some more vulnerable caches available only to those with more than 5, 10, 50 or 100+ finds? Then at least someone would need to actually cache in order to be a problem, and a ban would be significant.
The whole idea of maintained caches being environmental trash is of course silly - all the more so since Geocaching promotes CITO (Cache in Trash out). One can only assume people who steal caches are just idiots. Rather ironically all they are actually doing in effect is encouraging more people to pay a subscription to a Company which promotes Geocaching (which I'm guessing is the opposite of what they want)...
As well, life is full of idiots, caching isn't guaranteed to be an exception.
-
It's literally just started - be interesting to see what influx of new cachers we see. Countryfile was how I got into it in 2005
'Envioronmental' Cache Vandals
in United Kingdom and Ireland
Posted · Edited by jlggps
As someone mentioned, banning IP is likely not the answer, particularly for those ISPs which have dynamic (or semi-dynamic) IP allocation. It might not work, may ban a legitamite cacher who inhereits the banned IP or can simply be bypassed by other measures.
I feel this situation is unforunate and sad, especially for those cache owners affected who have put a lot of effort in placing caches which I and others have got lots of enjoyment from.
As a non-premium member - it's sad to see the Google caching map around where I live - it's now a desert (though again I understand why caches have been made premium)
The only thing I would say though is that for someone looking mostly at the map, it does give the impression these actions are working and caches are being removed by the owner - further encouraging it.
If this blows over then fine. If more long term action is needed and premium listing don't work I wonder is a key based cypto system of gaining cords might be possible. It's even possible to set up ourselves if GC.com ignores this problem. Or perhaps placing less costly to replace containers, and having virtual criteria a backup for logging finds if the container is stolen.
Not ideal and we're not there yet, but I'd rather do that than give up caching and permit this person to suceed.