MuzzaDazzler

Oddly it appears my formal complaint re their system never got a response. However they went back to the cacher involved. A more satisfactory reply was given. And second or replacement log left to stand for now.

Lololololololololol. Love it.

From the terms of use. Misrepresent the location, permission status or legality of a geocache you have submitted through our services. - What does misrepresent the location mean then??? Upload, post, transmit or otherwise distribute (including by emailing us) any content that threatens or attacks others on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, religion, age, disability or disease; is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, profanity, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, embarrassing, harmful to minors; or is otherwise reasonably objectionable to any person or entity. -Not a lot of room for negativity with that last generalisation. But really time to let this go. Will await to see how GS respond to my “official” complaint but it does look like they cover their bases.

K13. Brilliant. I shall remember this response for future logs and may even go back and edit my own log. Hilarious approach. I wish we had all written that. Still laughing. It’s so good I think you must have been there.

I do appreciate the input here and respect that I cannot quote. I was not the logger so have no access to the original log. So yes, I don’t think it was personally abusive but I cannot quote. I read it as it was published and then was informed it was deleted for abuse. That Groundspeak have stock answers is possibly correct. And I guess “mistakes” will slip through the net. I’m also aware that these can become a witch hunt on platforms such as this and fb which was why I declined to give a GC number for identification. My agenda has never ever been to castigate the CO, the reviewer nor to have the cache archived. It was amazement at the fact that they upheld deletion when kids safety is at stake. I now see that no one really feels that is their remit (I do) but then I question why they allow logs to be deleted in this manner so that others can inform the next cachers what to suspect.

niraD I guess you come close to answering this actually. In stating that they don’t police “attributes”. I guess one persons safe location to another can be different. But pretty sure everyone would call this unpleasant for everyone. But food for thought. Thanks.

It is part of a series where several previous logs question access to others in the series. So we were not on the road nor able to drive away. This matter was also escalated to Groundspeak after a couple of system messages exchanged that became personal. However my post still seems unanswered in my view. But then perhaps I never got my “feelings of concern” across correctly with respect to groundspeaks reply. IMO the access right is not valid here as that’s up to reviewers. It isn’t what bothers me either. I’m sure millions of caches are placed around the world with out permission Do others think it ok that Groundspeak allow log to remain deleted because of describing the location as disgusting and not looking at why it was described as such? As the rest of the log clearly states the fear of safety for kids and dogs.

Cerberus1 and nira and probably also Keystone. Hard to explain for me. Yes if Groundspeak had asked the CO why they thought it child friendly perhaps I would feel better. They just told the logger that not all caches are child friendly (of course) but not questioning that this cache has this attribute. Perhaps it is tough to appreciate. I have been there. It is possibly the most disgusting 1.5/1.5 I have ever done although i have done many extreme caches with a rating of 3 or above where i expect safety issues. And not child friendly. So help me understand Groundspeaks attitude or responsibility please. Is referring to a cache site as disgusting abusive such that they should uphold that it is deleted by the CO? And the questioning of the caches suitability for children seeing as that attribute is used is not?

Keystone I am not expecting them to just focus on a log that shows clear dislike of a cache without wondering why and that the same log calls into question the safety of kids at the site. A fast buck is still me griping over the removal of a great app and replacing with a barely useable one but also the speed of their response and lack of seeing what is really at stake here. A waste of their time yet if in the future a child does get harmed here what then by what amounted imo to a rash reply with disregard to any cachers safety.

Hi Keystone The cache does not violate any listing requirement afaik. A GC code feels tantamount to bullying imho as those involved will be readily identifiable. The log that was deleted as being “abusive” also referenced this can not be child friendly. It really isnt wrt young kids. Maybe 9/10 and above ok. As above my bewilderment is that calling a cache disgusting is upheld as abuse yet they choose not to question why the cacher deems it so and as a danger to kids. Seems odd.

My gripe is not with the cache, the CO either but Groundspeaks reaction. It is a locked gated access one side or through the dump the other. They have ignored the safety aspect and just focused on the use of the phrase this cache is disgusting as being abusive

Very sad to see Groundspeak react so blandly about a geocache that has been placed in what appears to be a locked waste dump site and yet claims to be dog and child friendly. Where somebody mentions it is disgusting in their log the CO has deleted claiming abuse. Groundspeak upheld this and stated that not every cache is child friendly. What is the point of the attribute system then? This cache is listed as being child friendly. This cache is surrounded by pools of animal waste from the manure, broken glass and appears to be on private land. If approaching from the road you need to pass a locked gate. None of this was questioned by GS and they just said they could see why the log was deleted. This seems to me to be a total disregard for people actually going caching with respect to their safety. I was really really disappointed to hear this response and although the cache is abused the CO is not. Yet the CO replied to the person who logged personally abusive on the message system. I think they should have a total rethink regarding their approach in these matters. I started caching because I believed it to be caring and friendly yet of late it appears far from it and becoming more focussed on GS turning a quick dollar at cachers expense. Putting this here as I hope they might see it and rethink.

Don't mean to be rude but I remember seeing another post about a trackable that went on a massive journey whilst still in the packaging with the owner !!! It was that an o and a zero got mixed up that time. Could it be that something like this is going on here? Best wishes for a speedy recovery.

Hi, I have just posted same in wrong forum having not noticed this whole section....duh! Recently been having this exact problem on ipad and two seperate pcs. ipad is using thesafari browser and latest software, iOS6. 1 pc using xp but latest version of chrome , however ie9 works fine. Other pc runs latest versions of browsers but i have the problem with chrome and firefox but not ie9. Operating system is Win7 32 bit. Also a bug noted on iphone app but will post elsewhere. Cheers

Oops, sorry. Wrong forum I think.

hi. had a look around and not seen this mentioned although I guess my search terms could be off base. recently been finding on chrome, safari and ipad that if searching from the browser the cache icons are not clickable. It always seems ok on internet explorer however (this of course only on pc). This had been seen on two pcs. Anyone else? Also when caching using paid app on iphone I find the trackables in inventory only offer grab from somewhere else, discovered and write note. There is no option to retrieve from the cache in which i have discovered it. Can anyone say what I am doing wrong please? Cheers Murray

Actually, PQs are the only way to do it. Near the bottom of the PQ form, there's a table of all the attributes. Oh no!...Really? Back to it again and look again then. Thanks for the heads up.

Spent a while too long (time I haven't got right now) searching the forums and the help. I would like to be able to search for caches in various different places that have specific attributes. I can see no way of doing this other than looking at each cache individually. Again I haven't got this time. Not very good at figuring out PQs etc but don't think I can do it that way either. Any advice greatly appreciated. The reason I want this is to achieve some challenge type of caches where I need to find an underground cache for example. I do use the PC but most of my caching is done via the iPhone app on a 4S if that also helps. Cheers to any that read and thanks Murray

Wow. Have told the CO and she is amazed we couldnt find it either. Both looked hard, but obviously not hard enough. Thanks again. Hope you are better soon.

A million thanks's. This is unbelievable. II have had ttons of people looking and even the CO of the double you hae spotted. Would love to know how you saw it as none of us could. Thankyou thankyou and to everyone for taking the time to look and see!!

Now managed to download pq as suggested and it comes up with 188 finds not including the event cache!!! Dont know what else to suggest. Looked, checked and rechecked. The event had a cache also associated. The event does not show in the list of 188 but the cache does. They are both logged, the event as attended and the cache as found.

Been doing that for hours. Now I believe there are no doubles but an event "attended" cache is the reason I show 189/188. This event attended seems the only thing counting towards my total but not showing as a my find.

Tried to search but obviously didn't use correct search terms as now see others asked the same. But their solutions not showing for me?

Cool link,love it

Hi Noticed that around the time I first started caching using the iPhone that I had several caches logged twice on consecutive days. I also saw that my caching chronology had a number followed by another number a few less with the word distinct afterwards. I have now deleted all the multiple logs I find but my stats still show one different after waiting a few days to update. So right now it says 189 caches (188 distinct) and I think this means I still have a duplicate log. I have tried and searched but see no duplicate. I cannot get a pq to work of my finds as they are spread by some distance and countries and it seems to have a 500 mile radius limit for PQs. I have listed my 189 finds by date cache hidden and still see nothing. Does anyone know how to check this or seen similar before. I feel I want to get it right as now my first milestones have had logs written saying about this but in fact they were not the milestone I thought. Would like to resolve before 200. Any ideas? Thanks for looking.