GeoBain

If you were on a power trail that is acceptable behaviour. Can we maybe change the word "acceptable" to "accepted"? Or "accepted by some". To me it barely resembles geocaching. And unfortunately that "ethic" is seeping into non power trail caches. I've seen a number of complaints on FB pages where someone had a series of caches, or "geo art", where the containers were customized for the location. They had to go out and reset all of their caches after one of these power geocachers rolled through. +1 I have more accolades, but reserve any further support for fear of being... well, for fear of....

1. If I"m ever there, I will. 2. I've posted DNFs and NM on PT caches before. 3. Your point being? Maybe it's time for powertrail.com where you can do whatever you want once you're near a posted coordinate, be it drop your own, rehide at the next coordinate... anything goes... just to make sure at the end of the day you logged 756 instead of 745 (disaster of course) Please dont waste your time posting NM... unless you want drama. If you are still going to do it, let me know ahead of time so I can get my bowl of popcorn ready. I promise you that the max is going to hang you by your toenails. I agree with on4bam in that these might as well be listed on another site dedicated to power trails. This is NOT what geocaching is about. Power trails such as the E.T. are a bastardization of geocaching. If I ever found myself in the area, I would probably posts NM's as well!

1. If I"m ever there, I will. 2. I've posted DNFs and NM on PT caches before. 3. Your point being? Maybe it's time for powertrail.com where you can do whatever you want once you're near a posted coordinate, be it drop your own, rehide at the next coordinate... anything goes... just to make sure at the end of the day you logged 756 instead of 745 (disaster of course) Please dont waste your time posting NM... unless you want drama. If you are still going to do it, let me know ahead of time so I can get my bowl of popcorn ready. I promise you that the max is going to hang you by your toenails.

If I had you over for dinner, would you just eat and leave? If I had you over for dinner, I don't need you to write me a thank you letter. If you enjoyed the meal, that's thanks enough for me. How would you know if they enjoyed the meal? I would most likely see it on their face and hear them enjoy it across the table from me. As for caches, I would enjoy the online find logs I do get, savor the notes that others post in lieu of finds, and trust that I was putting out decent caches even in the absence of any online feedback. When I check the logbook, I would also note that extra names which did not appear online also reflects additional finds which did not result in complaints and therefore assume they enjoyed it. In short, I would hide caches that I enjoy hiding. That's all the reward I need. Exactly! You would be getting feedback. In that case, it would be because they were in your presence, but when a cacher finds your log, he is not. I don't generally check the log book against the online logs. I'm surprised that you do, actually. And as to your last statement, I guess all I can say is that we all hide caches for our own reasons. Me, I like to see the online logs come rolling in. When they stop, I start thinking about archiving the cache. I don't check the logbook. But if I were concerned with feedback, it is one way to get it. And the less email I get the happier I am. I would like to be alerted to problems with the cache though. But regular maintenance takes care of that as well.

If I had you over for dinner, would you just eat and leave? If I had you over for dinner, I don't need you to write me a thank you letter. If you enjoyed the meal, that's thanks enough for me. How are you going to know that I enjoyed the meal? http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=333102&view=findpost&p=5517734

I've yet to see someone do this. So how do they filter out their finds? GSAK

If I had you over for dinner, would you just eat and leave? If I had you over for dinner, I don't need you to write me a thank you letter. If you enjoyed the meal, that's thanks enough for me. How would you know if they enjoyed the meal? I would most likely see it on their face and hear them enjoy it across the table from me. As for caches, I would enjoy the online find logs I do get, savor the notes that others post in lieu of finds, and trust that I was putting out decent caches even in the absence of any online feedback. When I check the logbook, I would also note that extra names which did not appear online also reflects additional finds which did not result in complaints and therefore assume they enjoyed it. In short, I would hide caches that I enjoy hiding. That's all the reward I need.

If I had you over for dinner, would you just eat and leave? If I had you over for dinner, I don't need you to write me a thank you letter. If you enjoyed the meal, that's thanks enough for me.

RIP

The description seems to mention the restaurant specifically to solicit business which is precisely what that guideline is designed to avoid.

Conversely, I would expect a certain amount of scrutiny if I had previous problems with cache hides.

If everyone tried to work within in "spirit" of the guidelines the reviewers would not need to question hides so much. However, there are far too many hiders, not all, but a lot, who try to pick apart the guidelines and figure out ways to skirt around them. Because of this, reviewers cannot always take people at their word. They need to question some hides a little further. I have also found that if you have a situation such as railroad tracks involved, it goes much better if YOU bring this up to the reviewer with some type of documentation such as pictures of where the tracks sit in relation to parking and ground zero. If the reviewer has to bring it up, then they might suspect you either were not aware of the guideline or that you were attempting to slide it by them. Either way, it is not nearly as credible as when you make them aware that you are aware of the guideline in question and this is why you think an exception is warranted.

By HQ or by the CO? Odd if HQ did it. Par for the course, based on previous info, if the CO did it. By HQ. How do we know? I have the cache on watch list and haven't seen anything from HQ stating they removed it. Not that I don't believe it. It is possible. Just wondering how we know.

They do say "Please use this log...", but it has been made more clear to me that this isn't just a kind request. So, to that end, someone local needs to log a NA on this cache. This is where the original, first page recommendation is what Groundspeak also asks us to do: If we find a cache that has a clear trespassing and/or permission issue, we need to report it. We are all cache cops, and it isn't worth a single cache ( no matter if old or whatever other challenge qualifier it provides...) to risk another example of geocaching being an activity which won't obtain permission, allows trespass, and that it can't police itself via users, Reviewers, or the company itself. Well, perhaps the public NA should be avoided by someone that has not been to the cach location. But, there is nothing wrong with someone who is aware of the problems contacting the reviewer and alerting them. In fact, I was disappointed that the cache was not disabled as a result of the reviewer participating in this thread becoming aware of the potential lack of permission. I've said it many times, this game is based on the honor system. We trust each other to do the right thing. And when it is clear that someone is not being forthright, it is our duty to bring this to the reviewer's attention. As NeverSummer pointed out, land managers do pay attention to these issues. If it becomes evident that we are not willing to abide by the guidelines we purport to follow, then they have every right and obligation to kick us off their land. Either we do what is right or it will be done for us.

By HQ or by the CO? Odd if HQ did it. Par for the course, based on previous info, if the CO did it.

Whatever happened to Ambient_Skater? He discovered girls and got a drivers license. That's a shame. I think the list needs updating.

Whatever happened to Ambient_Skater?

You don't understand how errors actually work, do you? There is never an excuse for moving coordinates away from the best results you can get from your receiver. Claiming that it could have happened that way is dishonest and not part of geocaching. Don't get sucked in. Just advise everyone to post the best cords they can achieve and leave it at that.

Just gonna say I would rather have seen the OP report the cache than force, through inaction someone else to do it. It's always better to have someone directly involved contact the review than to force another not so directly involved but devoted cacher to do what is right and protect future fellow cachers from walking into a potential legal trap. Kudos to our Alaskan brother or sister for doing the right thing.

Sometimes (particularly if the log is a wet mush of gunk) I don't log at all.

I do not cache with my phone generally, and when I do, I use the app that I actually paid money for, silly me. I use the app I paid for too. I'm not following...

I'm going to buck the system and reveal that I actually like the message center. I think the disconnect is with people who do not use their smartphone for caching. My problem with the MC is that last I checked, they only offer it for the intro app and not the paid app. I found it quite convenient when testing it in the intro app. If they could figure out a way to allow people to email to a special address and then have that integrate with the MC so not app users could use it easily, I think we'd see a lot less complaints. I'm an old timer, but I have switched to primarily using my phone and it's a nice addition, imho.

As I've been saying since the first power trails started appearing, no good would come out of taking a low impact, low visibility activity and turning it into a high impact, high visibility one. And that's precisely what these PTs and most of the "geo art" have done. I was pretty much a voice in the wilderness in the beginning. Glad to see that more and more people are starting see this nonsense for what it is, a threat to the long term viability of our game. We're already seeing the fallout from power caching in NJ with a new, draconian state parks policy and a total ban on some state lands. +1 Well stated

Well, I feel it's not up to "outsiders" (people not going for that cache) to "go and tell". If I see a "private" sign I'll just let it be and don't go yanking chains. Worst case scenario I would contact the CO if it's OK to go past the sign. So on one hand you don't feel that "outsiders" should "go and tell", but then you state that if you saw a "private" sign you would ignore it. So we should just keep our mouths shut and allow fellow geocachers blindly walk into a potential trap? If we do not regulate ourselves, someone else will do it for us. Do you really want others to step in and do it? That usually leads to more stringent rules and policies, if not outright bans on caching.

I have learned that if it can be done, people will do it. If it can be done wrong, people will do it. If it can be done so as to upset others, people will do it. I've also learned that the only person I can change is me. If that means changing whether or not I allow the way others cache to upset me, well, that is a whole lot easier than changing how someone else caches.