Seaglass Pirates

Now see that is perfectly clear and reasonable. But in no way the majority of caches. And could also be covered in the T&C's. And after reading what I wrote i'll add, of course if one were to be adopted, the physical cache would have to be handed into the police station as lost prpoerty and replaced with the adoption cache. The only meagre argument might be - that the intellectual property of the cache owner (the one who has failed to maintain their cache), meaning the listing page details, might belong to them and must be changed in order that intellectual property is not infringed. Well ... cut and paste from wikipedia and various other sites into a cache page aside lol, I would say thats a small price to pay to take on a cache. And of course if they wanted to adopt the cache they would have to attend the cache and therefore their own responsibility while there for their own well-being. But to be honest even their rights to intellectual property could be removed in the T&C's. And that is already done on Pathtags. When you submit a design you have to tic a box that says you give up your rights to the design and that it does not belong to you, before you can order your design. Don't tic the box, and you go no further.

Well the temptation to describe how to extract something is almost overwhelming lol but i'll resist. No I suggested you reread the posts because you have misread exactly what I did write. And then you went off on a little tangent which normally I would let slide but seeing as you have altered the subject quite badly i'll redirect you. But gird your loins cause it will have to be a longun. First let me apologise for explaining myself poorly. I missed out a couple of words one of which was "if" but I had assumed it was clear enough. Assumption being the mother of all f ... mistakes. So sorry bout that. So lets clear that one up first. Oh .... I didnt miss the word if out I thought maybe I had. So to explain further ... IF, IF, IF the terms and conditions were changed to reflect that any non maintained cache could be handed over to an adoptive cacher then Groundspeak/geocaching would be covered as the CACHER would have accepted those rules when they joined. So they could not really complain could they. This was my mistake - by public domain I meant, though again assumption etc, PUBLIC SPACES. I did think it was obvious but I cannot hand on heart say it wasn't confusing. And by public spaces I mean wherever the tupperware is placed. Now - as to iffy english aside lol (and I am only poking fun at you) I do not need to adhere to the laws of Washington State USA because they do not apply to me as I am a British Citizen. Unless I am on US soil. And I am not. Not likely to ever be either. The WEBSITE has to abide by those laws if it is based in the US. But not me. I DO however have to abide by the T&C's. They btw are not laws. They are policy. Oh sure they may be written whilst taking the LAW into account. BUT they are T&C's. And nothing more. I cannot go to prison for not abiding to groundspeaks T&C. I hope that clears that up ... Ish. I dont quite know why you keep mentioning a billion dollar company for. I am guessing that big bucks means the legal team associated or contracted by them are second to none or at least pretty snappy dressers. And whilst that may well be true - I have no idea why you keep bringing it up. Unless it is in reference to my comment about archived caches .... So - this is how I see it. A cache is Archived by a reviewer. THEN - the cache can be removed. Preferably by the CO (Agree there as it is their property), and everyone is happy. A space opens up for a new cache ... YAY. Under no circumstances can we give a cache site to someone else though unless it has gone through the archive process because of this LAW you mention. Now American law does not count here in the UK, so OUR laws say that you cannot remove property which does not belong to you. It is considered theft here. Unless covered by some other law, or contract. Now here is where its ok. "IF, IF, IF" we as UK cachers were to agree through the T&C (CONTRACT NOT LAW) of Groundspeak to allow our caches to be removed by anyone if we fail to maintain a cache, then IF IF IF that were to happen. Groundspeak would be well within their rights to do so by whichever means possible. And please do not say a reviewer does not ask for a cache to be removed because that would be a lie. I have already cut and paste an example. Again if the whole "you undertake geocaching at your own risk etc" blurb is enough to cover groundpeak when we go caching the same blurb can cover retrieval. IF IF IF in the Groundspeak T&C's it said that the LISTING of the CACHE can be transferred to another cacher if a cache is not maintained, then again geocachers would not have anything to complain about. And we could keep great caches going and going. Like oldest caches etc. I really do not think I can make it any clearer as to what I meant. But I do think that you rush read what I did write and assumed I was moaning about Groundspeak. No. I was moaning about your attempt to use this LAW you mentioned in order to appear correct as to why a geocache cannot simply be adopted by another cacher if the original cacher failed to maintain his cache.It has to go through this mysterious Archive process first and that made it all above board and legal. Like money laundering but for tupperware. Well I hope you see my point now. No doubt you will reply with something, either good or bad, but I am not prepared to continue. It appears from your tone that you are getting agitated and I dont want that. I just wanted to be able to keep excellent caches going easily when the cacher fails to do so. If thats impossible because of some LAW, I like to see LAWS. I love LAWS. But I dont like hearsay becoming a "LAW" when it isnt. And please dont think I am being aggressive, really not. I just want the best for groundpeak but more importantly, those that use it. Hence the suggestion of how to go about it. Best Wishes Me.

Hi Deci I think you need to reread the posts. It changes nothing.

And I would like to say thank you to Careygang and whoever else emailed geocaching to bring it into resolution. If they had not I would not have been able to go caching for fear my shoes might break ground on the way to a cache. Poor geohound has had to wear felt booties so he'll be chuffed. Course I did enjoy the hovercraft lessons. And I'll put my electronic stealth cape plans on hold. And again thanks to all including geocaching inc.

Lol nothing. I meant I never thought I would be writing that particular phrase. Not, I never thought I would agree with you. I do totally agree with you btw.

I'll PM you. She would not want to be incriminated in my ramblings on ere LOL!

It's of no consequence Andy. I happened to see moms which has pride of place in her collection. Everyone gets told about it. And One got placed in my cache. One you had made for the Sonatellas I think. I think it is terrific gift, if not time consuming I reckon. Cast aluminium they look like but the folks say its another process from memory. Whichever and however they come about they are very desirable. I'll have to stick to pathtags for now though lol.

And that is definitely your opinion

Yes exactly. I should have. And it was actually my point. Amberel was supposed to bite but you did instead. Ah well the point is made. That despite what we write it can be taken in many ways. Agressive, or in the case of my post about Andy's coins, rude and condescending. I could argue I am correct and in fact I am only stating what I think is true. But really, it is how things are taken, and how it could be taken that really counts. How it is meant to be taken is not always how it is taken. For clarity Andy I think your coins are fantastic. I am very jealous of moms. I had hoped for one for Dead Men one day but the audit log says you have only lingered briefly. Not a puzzle guy eh lol. And genuinely I apologise for any offence my point may have caused. It really was just to show you how easy offence can be taken from a civil statement despite what I might think when making it. Whilst it might be factual and expected it can be seen as unkind. Just because someone may see it as factual etc it still could be seen as unkind.

No Andy I am afraid I will have to pull you up there. Sorry. Here is where you are incorrect. what you meant to say was this - IN MY OPINION and/or FROM MY PERSPECTIVE The log in question wasn't rude, it wasn't even negative, it just stated things as the finder found them, which is exactly what logs are for. Unless you are telling me how to geocache and how to think? In my opinion it could appear rude and could have been put in a much more pleasant way. Clearly the CO thought the same. So whilst it may be your opinion or your way of doing things, it isnt law. on a completely different track i've seen some of your award coins in person. Not quite geocoin standard are they lol but a nice thought and I guess its a nice idea to enrich the geocaching experience. Well done!

Excellent post! And we both know you have not lost the particle. You've probably used it as a paperweight for your point. LOL sorry couldn't resist as I can now see you have a sense of humour. People from the north always do.

Wow that is an extremely looooong reply. So when you asked for an opinion as to why your log was deleted, what you actually meant was - I only want opinions that don't disagree with mine. Ok, no problem lol. Two small points 1. The opinion I gave was asked for by you. Not unsolicited. I acknowledge the other comment by another poster that both negative and positive feedback is sought. But not in this instance obviously lol. 2. I think you have, given your energetic state, muddled what you asked for with what I would have done. I never said I would have deleted your log. I stated why I thought your log was deleted. In effect agreeing with you. It was how you wrote it not what you wrote. So the claims of thin skin etc are I am afraid wide of the mark. I would have ignored your log. And btw thank you for your caching resume. The greater the number of finds the more correct you are in any given situation. Got it. I'll have to get caching quick lol. Make me smarter, better faster!! This is all over a nano right? Not world peace? Curing cancer .... no? oh.

Ahhhhh I see what you have done there. You've gone and bandied the word legal around lol. No. The site belongs to Groundspeak/geocaching and we adhere to the rules within it if we want to play. So if the rules say forced adoption will take place if you do not maintain a cache etc, Groundspeak/geocaching are covered as it is part of the terms and conditions. As to the claim that legally the physical cache belongs to the original CO thats true. It is their property. However it is placed in accordance with the T&C's of geocaching. If for whatever reason they lose that right for breaking the T&C's the cache is now placed in the public domain but without the consent of Groundspeak/geocaching. It would therefore become .... lost property. Which can be retrieved and must be returned to the owner by all means possible. So therefore handed into a police station. The same as if you found a wallet. Otherwise if you accept what you have written as fact then archiving a persons cache when they do not respond is breaking the same rules. Requests to retrieve archived cache containers to avoid geolitter - collusion to break those rules. Then we get into the whole legal drama of different laws for different countries. No, when you say legal you mean "policy" and policies can be changed. Legal is a whole different ball game.

I offered to take over a cache. The not on the cache page from the reviewer was this: "have archived this cache because it has been abandoned by the cache owner. This location is now free if anyone wants to place a new cache here. I would appreciate any cacher removing the cache to avoid leaving geo-litter." I replied via email "Hi, I will happily take that cache in those woods it on, as its near me" And I named the cache but not the GC code. Reviewer "Hi I am sorry but because you did not include the GC code I cannot see which cache you are talking about. I see hundreds of caches every day so if you supply me the GC code I can see which cache you are on about. If you mean you would like to adopt the cache I am afraid this is not our job. Our job is ...... reams of cut and paste ..... and so therefore you will have to contact the cache owner directly. However you can always wait until its archived and place a cache there yourself. Regards "Reviewer". Slightly confusing but agree with previous post that a reviewer should have the ability to transfer ownership. But as for the OP I would do as you suggest, maintain your friends caches on a pick and choose basis and the rest .... well they will have to dwindle I suppose. I just maintain whatever I come across because I think that is the community spirit. I have always had an email to say thanks, well almost always. Its what I would like for my one and only cache should anyone find it, so I do the same for others.

Hmmm seems I am going to buck the trend here so sorry in advance. Reading the OP which you say you logged it looks superior, mocking, and dismissive. Mocking - Not really a D4 is it..... Superior - spotted this from about 5 yards away Dismissive - If CO wishes me to give a full description of where cache is, to prove find, I'm more than happy to oblige! Now whether you intended that tone or not, I would suggest that was how it was taken. Lacking tone of voice or detailed info all the CO has is your log. And I would have taken that log as ungrateful and bolshy. Add to that tone, the fact that you did not actually sign the log, would mean technically you cant log the cache. I would have taken a phot of the cache to send to the CO if they disputed my find or left a scrap of paper in the cache. However I usually replace the log for the CO and have done on many occasions. Not suggesting you should have, but we are all in this together eh. As for D4 that is experience based, meaning it depends on what caches you have found so far. I may have done lots of D4 caches and so I might think it was a D2. Others may find it more D4. Its a guide after all. If I was to look at your log I would think that you seem to think its your job to police caches lol. Frustrated reviewer? lol. Dont take offence to either me or the CO. Just be grateful on logs for ANY effort a CO has gone to to put it out there for you to find. Its not your place to review a cache nor lecture the CO on their efforts on the main cache page. If you feel strongly enough, write a nice review and then email them to let them know of your experience. That way everyone stays friends. The CO isnt embarrassed or shown up by their mistake and you get to have your say. Well, you asked, I hope you take the comments as they are meant to be. Helpful and informative not attacking. Best Wishes and glad you got your log in there in the end.

ohhhhhhhhhh god that took a while to trawl through all that. Well thats my patch. The Canal series. Oh its not my series, but I grew up there. I lived and died on every stretch of that canal. Its a wonderful place. Sooooo following a death in the OH family we went back. I went caching and the OH went to the funeral. I did that series as it holds so many memories for me. And all I can say is whoever moaned about it is pathetic. So there its said an done, you are, and need a good slap. I grew up on that canal and in no way has that series ruined it. The series is literally miles of caches and the tubes are sink overflow pipe. So about 1.5 inches across. About 5 inches long 2 inches of which has been pushed into the ground at the base of trees mainly, and a piece (in most cases when I did them),of wood laid on top of the tube to hide the pipe. Into the pipe is placed the film pot. Now the pipe section is not level with the ground. The pipe is only pushed in to stop it rolling away. The pipe is above ground to the height of the film pot, if that makes sense. As for those poor little trees that have had the ground disturbed near them, well they were stumps. Huge great willow tees they were from memory. Some still remain. Now sadly chainsawed to death to literally ground level. It is at the base of these stumps (and there is miles of them) that most of these tubes are placed. In fact when I went there, at Paper Mill Lock, there was a very dodgy bunch of workmen, thrashing a tank tracked vehicle around and the ground was not so much "broken* but more literally obliterated. As were the sapling trees that got in their way. In fact I had to wait to pass because huge trees they had obliterated with their chainsaws, were gently blazing with flames 40 foot high cutting a scar of black acrid smoke across the area. At one point they were beaten back themselves and had to retreat to a safe distance. Which was 30 feet away. So I would like to thank the CO's of that series for bringing me back to a favourite area of mine in the world. I would like to thank them for placing those caches in the most sensible way. I am soooooo glad that they HAVE broken ground. Its a good job that most of the caches I find here dont break ground but are placed in holes in walls or hedgerows instead. Much better ..... Anyway I think that this whole thing will lead to one of two conclusions. Either Reviewers will band together and turn a blind eye to this overly ambiguous tosh or I am afraid I agree with Dr Dick (a phrase I never thought I would write), that people will begin to drift away to other sites. I've seen it time and time again. Clench too tight and you force it out faster you know I see the tip toe posts where we pre state "I think the reviewers do a wonderful job" and it makes me roar with laughter. Its like the old statement that says "With the greatest of respect" which usually precedes some insult. If the reviewers are being over zealous they should be told and reprimanded. I see post after post and comment after comment "Yes but we are volunteers". AND? .... no one asked you to volunteer. If you place yourself in a role, you accept all that role entails. Dont bleat. Don't go all Jeremy Kyle on us, just do your best and use common sense and policy to guide you. Please dont quote your interpretation of the policy to defend what is obviously a moronic decision. And then stamp your foot and confuse reviewer with moderator. You are not in charge, you are a reviewer. I will tell you who is in charge ...... US. We pay, we are in charge. The tail does not wag the dog and if this organisation becomes unfit for purpose i.e. it no longer satisfies a need, it will be replaced. And in this age of fast moving technology someone will have a site up and running in days. Please do not assume this a rant. Its just common sense. I avoided geocaching because I heard about all these crushing rules. So although I knew about it in 2006 I did not do it until this year. I've been a letterboxer ( since 1996) for years and I recoiled at tales of how regulated and pedantic this "geocaching" was. But thankfully I gave it a go. But literally in the last few weeks it seems that heavy handed, fire fighting type policy is getting out of hand and the essence of the idea is being smothered. What you are seeing here on this thread is the people who pay for this service, squirming with discomfort at being forced into a position they do not like. Its a warning in fact. It should be seen as that and not as a rowdy few who need stamping on. And as for "A reviewers forum, where we discuss reviewery stuff" lol. Oh dear. Platinum club is it? And you need that inner sanctum because ...? Sorry but its awfully elitist. Well I paid for membership can I play grown ups Well thats my twopeneth and a few quid as well. Let battle commence I spose

There is another way as already stated above, If you make the cache a premium member only cache something happens. At the top of the cache page when you the CO, look at it, just below the terrain/difficulty rating you get a blue link. The link says "Read Audit Log". It shows you who has looked at your cache and how many times they have. Excellent for Mystery caches. We used it for ours a lot. Which helped us see that someone had looked at the puzzle once and then emailed us to death for clues. Others had looked at it nearly a hundred times. It wont register a visit though if they view it through Gsac though. So even though it is not a PMO cache you can make it one.

Also do not try and activate your TB on your smart phone or similar device. Do it via a PC if you can. I have never been able to activate or log a coin/TB/ etc vai my mobile device. It always comes back that the TB is not in the system. I have no idea why but it does. Also if it says it is "not in the system" ensure you are trying to activate it and not log it. If you try and log an un activated TB it will throw that message back. Good luck.

I am a TB addict and cant wait for mine to put out. I would rather get mileage than not so fine by me...