Jump to content

Tassie_Boy

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    357
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tassie_Boy

  1. And ignore the "get a high end GPS" comment from before. It's really not a requirement if you are just hunting. Use the offline lists if trying to Save data or if reception is not available and be sensible about using the GPS to conserve battery life/keep a charger in the car.
  2. That reminds me. COs who quit caching and don't do anything about their hides. As RenMin said, Adopt out or archive. It's Fine to say that but like with most hobbies and the people who stop doing them, they lose interest over time or other things get in the way and geo caching is not at the front of their mind. It's not as though they wake up one morning and say "I've had enough of this, and bugger that cache, it can stay where it is."
  3. I don't think a minimum number of finds will do anything, for all the reasons that have been mentioned. Along with a time limit before hiding (a month is reasonable, it's only 4 weekends) why not a small 10 question quiz on the guidelines that you must pass before being given the option to hide a cache. That way you know the guidelines have been read, that some thought has gone into it and 10 questions should only take 10 min to compete, not long for a pass-time that could last a lifetime.
  4. Out of that whole, long winded post, that's the only thing you question? Seriously though, for some folks in here, it matters. You'll see the occasional comment in here regarding similar behavior, where someone hunts for a cache, doesn't find it, posts a DNF, and the owner, verifying it was missing, offers to let the seeker log it as a find. I've received many such offers over the years. Personally, as previously noted, I don't consider my efforts to equal a find until my signature is in the logbook. But the replies I've read in here following similar comments indicates that not all of us feel that way. It does because it encourages others to post false finds, especially when people new to the game see that a highly experienced player does it and a cache owner is complicit. But if the owner is complicit to what most would agree are cheesy logging practices, or, if the owner is MIA and no longer doing anything about the logs on their caches, the integrity, such as it is, has already been lost. At that point, even a "Greetings From Germany!" log would cause no further harm. Meh, Posting over breakfast on the phone, that's the main issue, logging found it logs and clearly saying that they didn't in fact find it.
  5. I'm not sure one has anything to do with the other? That wasn't very clear. Lemme try again. Imagine I go search for a 1/1 cache by BillyBobNosePicker, called "Along The Trail # 37". I get to ground zero, hunt for a while, don't find anything, so I call the CO to alert him that there might be a problem. BillyBob gives me some hints, none of which pan out. Then he gives me explicit details, and I determine that the cache is missing. With BillyBob's consent, I post the following 'Found It' log: "I hunted this one for quite some time, and with the CO's help, determined that it was gone. BillyBob will fix it later this week, and will post a maintenance visit when he does. Till then, assume it's missing. I took a photo at GZ to verify I was there." Now, I'm not advocating any of the listed behaviors. For me, a find includes signing the log. It's just my thing. My question is, would such a log compromise the integrity of the cache? Even if we alter the scenario, such as making the CO a stranger, or even someone who had dropped out of the game, for those who rely on past cache logs to determine if a cache is worth looking for, my log is an accurate account of my experience, and clearly points out the fact that I did not find it. Such a find log might qualify as cheesy, but I can't see that it harms the integrity of the cache. Why does it matter if you called the co or not, you've been there but you still haven't found a thing. You can go to the pub but you can't say you've picked up unless you actually take a woman Home with you!
  6. I certainly don't agree with any random person replacing containers however can someone please explain this 3 DNF "rule"that I've seen in a few threads now? Why is it considered that 3 DNF's and the cache is missing and we should hassle the CO about replacements or start leaving NA logs? What if it is well hidden, our well enough hidden that it leaves lazy cachers wondering at anything that is more than just a container under a rock?
  7. Play with other containers, blood sample vials are one I plan to test out in the future, they are made to keep water in after all.
  8. Just to be fair. I suspect that many, if not most, throwdowns are meant to be a temporary fix. Cachers who leave a throwdown are usually pretty sure the cache is missing and also that it has been missing for some period of time. The cache owner has had ample time to check on the cache, or at least disable the listing. Since the owner seems to have been unable to do this, the person leaving the throwndown is trying to ensure the other cachers will have something to find at ground zero. When the owner gets around to doing the maintenance they can replace the container if they don't want it; they can rehide it or another container in the manner they want; or they just remove it if they find their original cache is still there. Given the intent is a temporary stopgap until the owner does maintenance, those leaving the cache are not particularly concerned with quality. If cache owner is unable to do required maintenance, unable to arrange for maintenance or unable to disable the listing until they are able to do said maintenance then it should be archived, let's face it who is going to look after the throw down? I'm sure that if that particular spot is such a great spot someone else will come and place a decent cache there in time.
  9. The easy answer to there being many "left over" hiding spots is to simply not use them. Asset some point people need to realise that a) not everyone can, should or needs to place a cache and that at some point there will need to be a mass clear out of these old crappy caches to open up space four new, decent caches to be placed. You don't need to place a cache just because there is enough of a gap between other caches, you place a cache because you can make a good hide from the space that you have found.
  10. I'm going to chime in here as I've had an experience in the last few weeks that has lead to my cache being disabled. In my case I think it depends on what the dnf's say, the first my cache received said that they looked in the obvious spot nearby and couldn't find. as cache was not in obvious spot there was no reason to go out. Second one spoke off looking in obvious spot, not finding and only other thing around was a smashed up stump, cache "was" in said stump prompting visit to see what was going on.
  11. I use the app exclusively for my caching (Android version) and it appears to have updated since I last opened it. However looking at it now, there is a menu button in the top right corner of the screen and one of the options is "Save to offline list". This saves the cache page on your phone so you won't need reception to get the details. When you go to search for the cache it appears that the map is saved offline as well and of course you don't need reception for the compass to work.
  12. Ok so what I can gather, the real problem with this topic is the issue of illegal caches getting through the review stage. Would it be of any help to the reviewers if there was a requirement to post a photo of the cache position as a part of the review process? A reviewer cannot physically visit every cache (I think my closest is 2000Km away in sydney) however it would allow them to "sight" the cache position before knocking it back or giving it the go ahead.... What do you think?
×
×
  • Create New...