Carnildo

I just discovered a trackable that's not in the website inventory of the cache I found it in. How do I (a) log a find on it, and ( indicate that it's present in the cache?

Bother. It's on the wrong side of the state for me.

I think I'd rather stick with the volume-based definitions in the Help Center article Containers Explained (and elsewhere): Just because a baseball doesn't fit in a particular 1.5L container doesn't make that container a "small" (for example). The problem with the current definition is that it doesn't give any indication of the shape. A pencil case may be "small" by volume, but it's the wrong shape to hold anything but the logbook.

If the log's wet, it's a sign that there's something else wrong with the cache, such as a poor choice of container, or a cache that's been moved from a sheltered location. Replacing the log won't fix it, and adding a dry page will simply make things worse. Maintenance I'll do is things like drying out a logbook that's "hour in the sun"-level damp, adding a pencil to a cache that's missing one (if I've got one with me), or packing up the pieces of a muggled cache. Anything more significant gets an NM log.

Ordinary members can see PMO caches on the website maps, they just can't see the cache details.

This is something that surprised me as well. There are actually alot of cachers in my area, myself included, who are obese. Some are much bigger than me and you'd be surprised at the thousands of finds they have. I think there's an inverse correlation here. My biggest weekend was three finds (plus one DNF and one aborted search due to high winds), and involved a nine-mile hike with an overnight pack. In contrast, the easiest way to get thousands of finds involves rarely going more than a few yards from the car.

With a quarter of the caches I've found, a "needs maintenance" log means a half-day or more of effort from the cache owner to follow up on it. I'm not going to ask that level of effort from someone on a "might". I'll only log an NM on one of those when I'm certain there's something wrong with it. So ... who's asking you to do anything different than just that? Why on earth would you log a NM if you didn't think there was a problem that needed attention? Are you in the habit of posting frivolous NM logs on roadside caches? I don't think likely, so your statement just supports what I said. Post a NM when there's something wrong with a cache, wherever it is! There's a difference between "might be an issue" and "is an issue". To give two examples where I didn't log an NM: 1) The cache is hidden in a location that I think will flood come spring, and the container doesn't look waterproof enough to survive submersion. However, it's apparently gone ten years with no trouble, so maybe the cache owner knows something I don't. 2) The cache is currently hanging from a tree, but the loop it's hanging from is nearly worn through. It's likely the cache will convert itself into a perfectly good ground hide over the winter, with no real change in difficulty (and without invalidating the description).

With a quarter of the caches I've found, a "needs maintenance" log means a half-day or more of effort from the cache owner to follow up on it. I'm not going to ask that level of effort from someone on a "might". I'll only log an NM on one of those when I'm certain there's something wrong with it.