HHD

If you haven't heard of gcrm check here for the concept. http://gcrm.gocacher.com/ . Basically it says that any cacher can replace your cache after 5 mins of looking per difficulty level. I have a previous thread where we discussed gcrm as a concept and the overwhelming majority expressed their negative opinions of this concept. So I'm starting this thread to hopefully bring more attention from tptb. With your help we can stop this lazy cache owner philosophy before it spreads any further. Thank you for your comments and support.

I highly recommend the delorme pn40. There are videos of them under water still working. They are very rugged and are very accurate. Decent battery life. Paperless caching. I recommend getting something off eBay. I grabbed mine for 100 bucks.

If you really are willing to spend 150 you should be able to het a nice used one off eBay. I snagged a delorme pn40 last month for under 100. WAS enabled, paperless caching, amazingly accurate, rugged, topo maps and everything I wanted. Do your homework and find one you like. I waited a year before I bought mine. I was a phoner for a year. So I asked all the local cachers what they liked and went out a few times with them and that helped me decide

I recommend eBay. Snag a used one. I got a delorme pn40 for under 100. I agree with looking up...I also say there is almost always a trail so find the path of least resistance, have fun and bring your dog when you can. Mine loves caching.

We have a few Christmas caches that are great around me. It is even more fun to find them in the summer so you know that Christmas is right around the corner.

I know in Wisconsin we use a code for them in the title...wsq means Wisconsin spirit quest. Won't help you right now but maybe you can help institute something like that in nh.

Wow that is such a cute idea. It is sad you can't continue in the same vein but I guess I can see where Groundspeak is coming from with the false dnfs and the blog link. As a cache owner myself I wouldn't have an issue with it at all. It sounds to me like you need to move in the found it direction now. Maybe stash impressed tptb at Groundspeak and he has been in training for the last few months and he is now super stash the cache finding geohampster.

I used to be a phoner, (a cacher that only uses a smart phone) and I placed a few caches that were published and found the coords to be 40 feet off. I tried to compensate by good hints and easier hides that were move inventive than hard. I just got a new delorme pn 40 and now feel comfortable doing some more complicated hides since I feel my coords will be better. However my phoner skills are pretty good now and I now have a natural 40 foot circumference at gz which I hear is a good thing. I love FTF and while I agree it is no fun to dnf due to a coordinate issue it makes for some good stories. I looked for a multi once that had just been published it involved math, not my strong suit. I messed up the math looked in the wrong place in 2 foot snow drifts for 20 mins, then decided to go back to gz and recheck my math. Met a local FTF hound there and he did the math right and we walked to what we thought was gz and searched for 30 mins. He had to go to work so he left. I, being a phoner, emailed the co from the field and thankfully she responded about 10 mins later. She gave me the coordinates she had which led me to an open field...again in 2 foot snow and then she gave up and told me where she hid the cache. On the back of a sign right next to my car! Lol we both had a big laugh and she is now one of my closest geo friends. It is all in how you treat things. I'm not saying you are wrong to be frustrated. I'm just saying unless this is a habit of this cacher (which may require some additional issues) just remember it is a game we do for fun.

There is an evil monkey/evil duck that is on an islands and in a tree that has no branches for 16 feet up, it requires a ladder and at certain times of the year a boat and it is a 1/5

What a cute idea.

I've only been caching for a little over a year now...can anyone fill me in on the downfall of virtuals? I'm sure it was abuse and over use but I am interest in getting a short history lesson from those wiser then I.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCTB63 Here is an example of a hide by the same cacher. It is not a throw down cache. It is a well thought out hide in a nice location. However....it has been nm flagged several times almost all of the logs from the last year have been stating the poor condition of the hide and there is yet another note from the co asking for us to maintain the hide for them. I don't mind p&g hides. I love them in the winter since we get snow here and a lot of it. This has nothing to do with the type of hides. It has to do with owners trying to come up with ways to get around maintaining their hides. Note this one was placed before gcrm so its not in the listing but clearly the co is advocating for it...and still a year later nothing.

Challenges seem fine but due to the lack of integration I haven't really been thinking about them. It's too bad they decided against the virtual caches I was really looking forward to doing some fun history ones in my area. Maybe one day they will have a history cache.

I thought I read something earlier this year saying we were going to be getting virtuals back again. Was that not correct?

Yeah, we know. The guidelines require that a cache owner demonstrate an acceptable maintenance plan. Groundspeak has decided that posting "I'm not going to maintain this cache, 'cuz I'm too dang lazy to do the job I agreed to do when I submitted it for publication. As such, I expect others to take on these duties for me." in big honking letters, on the cache page, is an acceptable maintenance plan. While I don't agree with their stance, I recognize that it's not my sandbox. There are plenty of cache owners who in order to avoid maintenance turn their caches into virtual "virtual caches". They allow finds even if you don't find the container (or replace it). When such a cache is reported to a reviewer or to Groundspeak, some action is always taken. Generally the reviewer will disable the cache and give the owner 30 days to replace the container and archive the cache if this doesn't occur. It should be clear there is a difference between that and a cache owner who says "If the container is missing you have my permission to leave a replacement and claim a find on the cache". If nobody were to leave a replacement, the cache owner is either going to have to replace the container himself or let the cache be archived. There are a number of geocachers who are more than willing to help out with maintenance so that others will have a better experience at the cache. While many people (including myself) have given reasons why replacing a cache just because you couldn't find it isn't a good idea, especially without owner consent, GCRM is an easy way for owners to give consent. Nobody is forced to leave a replacement for a GCRM cache. It is entirely voluntary. Using GCRM, the cache owner still has the primary responsibility for maintaining the cache, they are simply letting anyone who wants to help with maintenance that they as an owner are OK with it. Here is where I have to say shananagins. The concept might be that but the specific situation mentioned above is just one example of gcrm gone wild. The cache owner has no intentions of replacing the log and that's why they used gcrm...it is a throwdown style cache to start and if it goes missing the co will just archive it rather then maintain it. So he is hiding behind this concept of community involvement maintaining rather then co responsibility.

It's fun first and foremost, i love hiking into the remote areas and seeing places few dare to go. I love seeing unique and challenging hides and the care that most people take in preparing hides. I like the treasure hunting aspect of it to. It gets me off the couch, and its almost free.

Well, you don't necessarily have to agree with him. Groundspeak may in fact some day take a stance against this. But probably not with what would surely be a Premium member for life who hosts an annual Mega event. So you believe that because of what he and his wife have given to the caching community they get to play by different rules? Seems like they should be held to a higher standard if you ask me.

I agree with you tozainamboku, it isn't a violation of the rules...yet. I'm hoping that at some point Groundspeak will come out against the practice. I will say that if this concept were not being used as a way to get around doing the co maintaining in my area I might have a different opinion. However, the only experience I have with it is this negative impression.

It is exactly the reason they are not allowed.

This isn't a matter of doing the neighborly thing and performed Cache maintenance on Caches that you visit that may be in need of a new log etc.. Or even about the times we may have actually replaced a Cache container for one that the lid may be broken and so on. Typically, in those cases a responsible CO would be heading out to their Cache to do their own maintenance after the temporary fix was performed. This is about a Cache Owner posting a Cache and stating in the Cache description how everyone is SUPPOSED to maintain it for them and how they are to do it. Yes, most of us are good to each other and help out when needed, but it is just wrong and quite irritating when a Cache is posted that EXPECTS me to do their job of maintenance. The bottom line is that it is in violation of the guidelines most follow when posting a new Cache to basically state that they will not be doing their part in maintaining their own Cache and as such it should not even have gotten approved with out a very good explanation in their posting notes to the reviewer. Quite sure that if the reviewer questioned them prior to approval as to their intentions, the reviewer would most likely recommend a diffent wayh of wording it in the Cache description. If the cache owner were to actually say that he wasn't going to maintain the cache and that if people wanted it maintained, then they should do it themselves, then I would agree with you. However, that is not what is being presented in this thread. Instead, we have cache owners who welcome cachers help in maintaining their caches. I have not seen evidence that showed that these cache owners wouldn't themselves maintain the cache if the community didn't. If you check the above listed GC code you will see an example of the co saying just that.

I have fixed the error in my GC code...stupid phone and your auto changes to my words.

Here is an example of what happens... GC2QW47 log is soaked and needs to be replaced, the co is responding in the typical manner for them "will the next geocacher please replace the wet log...it will keep the game going & help out your fellow geocacher (thanks)." This cache is close to the co's home and obviously they aren't willing to do the maintenance. This is a gcrm cache and I get that it is only a wet log, the problem I have is that this is a habit for this co. Not for all their caches but for a good majority. I appreciate having hides to find but it is not my responsibility to maintain them. It is the co's job to do the maintenance. I can list probably 40 caches from this co that have this same note for assistance. Pair down your hides if the burden is too much.

This is the reason I dislike gcrm caches. The concept is great in theory but it promotes lazy cos and trash caches.

Broken or mangled maybe but not missing. Also to place that responsibility on the cacher is not right. I have no problem with replacing a log or something but to be asked to fully maintain the cache is a bit much don't you think.

I agree they are a very well known team and should be setting the example for us all.