JacobBarlow
-
Posts
287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JacobBarlow
-
-
We now have the ridiculous situation where the same two caches are both in play, which is against GS rules.
But both caches AREN'T in play. Someone just grab and toss the UK container, please - then all can move on.
Yes, exactly. Please.
-
...ensuring that Jacob' s rules are complied with.
I don't have any rules, Groundspeak does.
Quite correct JacobBarlow, GS makes the rules you have to ensure they are complied with, I apologise.
However what most people on this side are interested in is a reply to my suggestion that Jacob' s cache is shared between the US and the UK.
Will you consider this ?
How do you propose this be accomplished? Are you or someone else going to travel from USA to UK to accomplish this?
As I said in making my suggestion. There are already two of these caches, one, the original still safely hidden in England, the clone or new one in Utah. Therefore the movement across the ocean was virtual not physical. Since GS haven't intervened in this the assumption is that this is permitted.
If I had to guess there have been twenty to thirty times that a huge virtual jump from another part of the world to Utah has occurred, it's the way it goes with moving caches. I can't get attached to the container because they don't last, they get stolen, they get picked up and people forget to hide them, there are many reasons but every time a reason comes up I just start a new one. So do the other moving cache owners.
You're quite correct, Jacob. Recently I was monitoring a moving cache in Pennsylvania (my review area) that had ground to a halt. The owner successfully "re-spawned" the traveler in North Carolina. Yay!
Now, if there were two containers in play at one time, sharing a single cache page?? That would be stopped pretty darn quickly.
Several of the times were when a person picks up the cache and waits a few months because life gets busy, eventually after having my emails ignored that long I will "re-spawn" a new version and after it get moved a couple of times that person will suddenly put the other back out. Which I guess technically makes two, but in my mind the old one is done when the new one is made.
-
...ensuring that Jacob' s rules are complied with.
I don't have any rules, Groundspeak does.
Quite correct JacobBarlow, GS makes the rules you have to ensure they are complied with, I apologise.
However what most people on this side are interested in is a reply to my suggestion that Jacob' s cache is shared between the US and the UK.
Will you consider this ?
How do you propose this be accomplished? Are you or someone else going to travel from USA to UK to accomplish this?
As I said in making my suggestion. There are already two of these caches, one, the original still safely hidden in England, the clone or new one in Utah. Therefore the movement across the ocean was virtual not physical. Since GS haven't intervened in this the assumption is that this is permitted.
If I had to guess there have been twenty to thirty times that a huge virtual jump from another part of the world to Utah has occurred, it's the way it goes with moving caches. I can't get attached to the container because they don't last, they get stolen, they get picked up and people forget to hide them, there are many reasons but every time a reason comes up I just start a new one. So do the other moving cache owners.
-
Anybody who has had their valid log deleted by the CO should contact GS and ask them to reinstate the log. CO's should only delete Found it logs if they are in violation of GS's Terms of use see link
Funny, I have been told by Groundspeak many times if I don't delete logs they will archive the cache - without that I would just let anyone log it... I don't like policing caches.
I did say valid logs....
Just because you disabled the cache doesn't mean that people weren't finding it and moving it as per the cache "rules" and hence they can ask for their logs to be reinstated.
The few valid finds that were deleted had accompanying emails asking them to log the find without saying they hid the cache, so that they could both have a find and stop tricking people into thinking that cache was still the cache. Most deleted logs were from people who broke the rules.
-
Anybody who has had their valid log deleted by the CO should contact GS and ask them to reinstate the log. CO's should only delete Found it logs if they are in violation of GS's Terms of use see link
Funny, I have been told by Groundspeak many times if I don't delete logs they will archive the cache - without that I would just let anyone log it... I don't like policing caches.
-
Likely the NA will be dismissed by a Reviewer as 'sour grapes'. The CO of this cache is doing what he interprets as what GS wants of him as CO. I wouldn't doubt that he has had contact with GS regarding these moving caches of his.
Possibly. But I find it difficult to see how GS can think things will be better in US - where it appears abuse is rife - than they were in UK - where it was minimal!
Yeah, you keep saying how minimal it was. I guess we will pretend.
-
Much as it pains me to say, I think this one has gone away from what it was originally and it's time has come to be archived.
Wouldn't I be the only person who knows what it was originally? This exact thing has happened many, many times over the years - not only with all of my movies caches but with all the others as well.
-
...ensuring that Jacob' s rules are complied with.
I don't have any rules, Groundspeak does.
-
I agree that in general finding a disabled cache should be a legitimate find, but I do feel the UK cache should be unfindable after I have asked several people who were in possession of it to take it out of play for me. I can only assume they have the attitude of "what's he going to do? He's on the other side of the world" when they see my email asking them to take it out of play, agree to do so and then change their mind and put it out for more friends to find. Obviously I have no way of taking care of the finds on my cache when people act that way, so I thought it would be better to have it nearer to me geographically.
-
Wow. I see this caused quite a stir, let me see if I can explain.
Over the many years of maintaining these caches I have been contacted many times by Groundspeak telling me that the caches have started to be "passed around" or taken to events and mass logged. That is not allowed and I have been told if I don't police it better and stop that from happening the caches would be archived.
Personally I hate deleting logs, but in hopes of keeping these unique caches alive I have tried to police them. I do not enjoy being the police and instead prefer to let people do what they want.
There was recently another rash of "illegal" behavior with the caches and I was faced with the need to stop it, I thought about just archiving the caches because it is not fun to babysit people who can not follow the simple rules on the cache page.
I temporarily disabled the caches and asked the people who had them to take the caches and either hide them as a new cache hide in a permanent place or take the contents and put them in another cache. I thought that way there would be no "litter" caused by leaving the caches places and I would have time to decide what to do.
I was of course ignored in my requests to those people, and the people who continued to find the cache while it was disabled.
I have so far decided to keep at least one alive and given it a fresh start closer to my home where I can hopefully keep a better eye on it.
I expect to get the other two going as well but the blatant refusal to my requests is starting to make it go back towards archiving all three.
Hope that helps?
-
Maybe we'll hear something today since everyone is back from the (US) holiday Monday.
Sure hope so!
-
I am truly shocked that anyone here is defending zero information in the cache description as a good practice.
Name, size, ratings, maps, that doesn't sound like zero information. Lots of descriptionless caches are published all the time out here, most are mine
-
Hi,
We placed a cache just a few days ago and pretty much all contents gone.
I start them empty and they quickly fill up.. wish I had your problem!
-
Sometimes I won't be able to find a cache and I'm never sure if I should log a DNF right away or only after trying a few times. I'm hesitant about logging a DNF right away because I don't want to discourage other geocachers from thinking the cache may have been muggled or something when it might just be that I wasn't looking in the right spot.
When do you log a DNF? Right away? Only after trying again?
I log a DNF when I look for a cache and don't find it, weather its my first time, 10th time, even if I've already found it and am just there because the friend I'm caching with still needed to find it.
-
I have noticed over the last few weeks and tested it with friends to be sure, we don't get emails when our logs are deleted anymore, is this a glitch in the website or an "on purpose change?"
-
Ammo cans and LocknLocks.
Agreed. Little else holds up well out in Nature or keeps water out as well.
LocknLocks only last a year or two in my experience, anything plastic is that way.
-
I was really into HAM Radio ( my geocaching name is my callsign ) and have been so into geocaching I haven't touched it in years.
-
I don't know if this would violate the guidelines... if I have obtained permission to hide a cache on a local course from the owner (it is a very small course 9 holes)... and he told me that in order to find it, they would have to pay to play... would that violate the guidelines? I have seen a cache listing at a local skaterink... so you would have to pay to skate to find it. This is similar... correct?
I have found several caches on golf courses, I don't know if they should have been there, but they were, so I went and found them.
-
I think you should have placed an EarthCache there to confuse people even more!
And a waymark and Wherigo, all on top of a benchmark, by a webcam, and locationless.
I've had fun trying to pile caches on top of each other before, put an earthcache and a traditional on top of a virtual, then have a multi start there with a virtual first stage, and a mystery... could do a Wherigo too I guess..
But a simpler way I've seen it happen was a cacher had their puzzle cache final location destroyed, so they moved the cache to another nearby location and changed the puzzle... the problem was I had a cache in the EXACT same spot, also a puzzle... she had not solved it I guess, and didn't look in the bush for caches before she dropped hers in... so there are two, regular sized caches in the same bush, literally touching each other.
-
I'll get in touch with a local cacher in that area. Most of them hang out on the UTAG forums, maybe they can get a post on that site for you.
Let me know if you make it to the Las Vegas area (CES?).
I posted it here : http://www.utahgeocachers.com/forum/viewto...p?p=43100#43100
I could probably come on the first day, and the 2nd if its in the evening.
-
Record time for a muggled cache?
Before it was published!
-
I've seen one being a magnetic key holder on a clearance tester bar above a 24 Jack in the box drive through. No one could get it because it was ALWAYS busy.
I would have gone for it, I love caches in high traffic areas, if someone wants to put a cache where it's "ALWAYS busy" then I take that as permission from them to get it in front of everyone.
-
Just curious.
Do you think its right to log Archived virtuals that been disabled for more than 3 years? We just recently seeing people do that. Thats why asking. An Archive cache is just an Archive cache right?
Do you think its right to log a cache twice. I know some people do by accident and just forget about it and some caches allow a double log.
What do you think? If there were two caches in the same area for the same cache, like two log books, would you log the cache twice?
We did log an event twice, way back at the beginning when we first started, but since then deleted the log once we realized that our numbers are off.
I don't log caches twice, but don't look down on those who do. I do actively seek out archived caches that I can honestly find and log, just because its archived doesn't mean someone can't look for it, and if they "find" it then log it.
-
Hello there. I just wanted to post a story about one of my caches to get some opinions and to find out if anyone has seen this before.
I have a series of caches hidden in a popular "rails-to-trails" area. The caches were all meant to be easy finds, but the 4th one in the series has proven to be more difficult to find than I had intended. It was published in late August of 2007 and has only had 17 finds logged, with 14 DNFs logged. The few logs may be partly due to parts of the trail being closed for a long time for restoration, and partly due to heavy snowfall in the winter making it extremely difficult to access. Anyway, apparently this one is tough. lol
The cache was found in September last year and not logged again until this year. One DNF in May and two in June. On 23 June a note was posted by an out-of-province cacher that said simply "Plan to replace this cache". I wasn't sure what exactly that meant. Was he telling me to replace it, or asking if I will replace it? I decided to ignore it for the time being and check on the cache the next chance I got. Later that same day I found out what his log meant. He posted a found it log saying that he and two other cachers had searched for 15-20 minutes, determined that the cache was not there, and placed their own cache as a replacement. Two of them logged found it logs for the cache that they placed. I visited the cache site 11 days later and found my cache still in its original hiding spot. I also found the replacement less than 5 metres away. I removed the "replacement", posted an owner maintainence log, and edited the cache description and hint a little to try to make it an easier find.
Does anyone else find this completely bizarre? I know geocachers sometimes help each other out with maintanence and replacement of missing caches, but wouldn't you wait for confirmation that the cache is actually missing?
Coincidently, I spent 15-20 minutes each searching for this guy's caches in the same area without success. I just assumed they were there and I didn't look in the right spots.
There are several of us in Utah who hide a lot, we are friends and just maintain each others caches without being asked to, I've stuck replacements out and logged it found for them and they for me... it just saves a trip for the owner. But I wouldn't do that to someone I don't know, because as we can see in this thread, it upsets some people.
"Moving" type caches
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Yeah, I've been told specifically by Groundspeak that they won't allow moving caches to be adopted because they want them to phase and and not exist anymore, but obviously others have recently been told otherwise.