M 5

Hope you find geocaches better than statements on the forums. As someone who seldom hides "normal" caches, I can understand many of the container choices. Although some of them might not be the best ideas, new/unique ideas are hard to come by these days and I appreciate the effort. I have found several of the CO's caches and have looked at many more, and may get to some of them someday. In that area, there is a nice sized group that I have noticed from afar likes to create difficult hides to stump their friends. There are many in the springfield/branson up to columbia area that have VERY few finds. Those are the ones I target in my travels. I've enjoyed all the CO's caches, but to be honest, I haven't found, or looked for any of the examples shown. One of the key points to note, is that if you use containers that have a greater than normal chance to get muggled or ruined, they can be fine if they get more attention (i.e. maint) from the owner. I haven't looked to see if the CO in the examples does, but I do know that knowschad was correct with his statement that the CO is well respected. He is also a charter member and still active and answered every private email about his caches that I have sent (and no, I don't know or have ever met him, just an area I travel to from time to time)

Seems to me that the OP was more upset that there wasn't an outpouring of agreement and somehow thinks that they can publicly comment on an event and noone should have an opposing comment on their log. They implied that they just didn't think the online log was a forum to comment on others logs, but somehow I seriously doubt they would have started a thread on these forums, if there was agreement instead of opposing opinions on the event online log. I have no issue with constructive critisism, but you need to understand what your opening yourself up for. Sometimes tact is the better solution if your not prepared for the backlash.

Wait a minute!!!! Are you saying that we can't make fun of guys with comb-overs?

If I know the CO and where they live, I post an extremely quick (and possibly a derogatory statement on the ease in which I solved it) found it log, then stake out their house. I follow them when they go check on their cache, because they cannot believe I found it so fast (and are mad at me). I now know where it is.

Twice! One was the old style that you had to blow up yourself, the other was one of these new fangled ones with some sort stay blown up by itself technology. I liked the old one and didn't much care for the new one. Call me a puritan I guess!!! ps. yes, I'm talking about the cusion, not the other blow up whoopee item.

Here is the 1st in a series of caches our local group sponsored called Geoskills. There are 8 caches on a loop trail system that show of variety of hide styles and each is designed to teach a lesson/skill for use in geocaching. I think the write ups are very well done. GC250JF

Maybe it was a test. If you couldn't figure out what the question was, your opinion wasn't worth much. For the record it took me a good 3 seconds to figure out the question, but in my defense, my internet connection was pretty slow.

Looks like a great challenge

How would you know if a NM log is bogus unless you *do* check on it? I just found three caches about 9400 miles from home. I wasn't traveling specifically to find these caches, but since trip will likely be my only opportunity ever to find a cache in Malaysia I did a bit of research on all of the caches in the area (only 10 within 100 miles) to see which ones seemed to be viable as I would have a limited amount of time do go caching while I'm here. Only four of the 10 were caches that were a reasonable distance from where I'm staying and the CO on one of them just did a "check the cache" maintenance run and I sent them a PM thanking him for checking on it as I'll be coming to the area. We've exchanged several email messages since and he told me that one of the nearby caches was definitely missing (there is a reviewer note on it as well asking it for it to be checked by the CO or it will be archived) and one of the others caches (not owned by the same CO) was *probably* missing and that many of the recent "found it" logs may be bogus (not an infrequent occurrence for a cache in place that is not often visited). As it turned out, I *did* find that cache, the one that the CO recently did maintenance on, and got FTF on one that he placed a few days ago. It's unfortunate that the person that posted the NM from 2500 miles assumed that the CO would not respond to email. I've frequently initiated email exchanges with local cache owners prior to traveling and have "met" (in some cases, face to face) some nice geocachers that way. It is bogus, because they didn't visit the site. Maybe they would get lucky and be right, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. Either way I'm not running around checking on my caches for unsubstantiated NM logs. When I feel one is legit, I'll check, or else its just on my normal checking schedule. As someone else pointed out earlier, I'm not a puppet. I liked that line, and its approprate.

The old stage one had issues. I like finding caches others DNF, and one group DNFing isn't very conclusive. Also, i was strictly referring to the NM from a non cache visitor. DNF's and NM from cachers that visit the cache site would hold more weight.

Why would a CO check on a cache with a bogus NM log? I wouldn't.

Why disable it????? Just up the difficulty!

you can use it to cure it too. The wife cancelled a DR. appointment after I talked her into using it.

Just use "oral ivy" problem solved

I've never said make it mandatory, it is a concept to me, that if you are going to use the resources, then you should contribute. I've already stated that I think there are other ways to contribute, but doubt many strictly do them. Contrary to all the crappy hides out there, hiding caches isn't that difficult. I don't like the enabling attitude of giving people a pass to not contribute, because they won't hide quality caches. To use another silly analogy that won't quite fit (like the writing a book one used earlier). It's like not expecting your kids to do chores around the house, because they won't don't them well. Like I said, it is a concept, not a reality or call for a mandatory rule.

It's a good idea that nobody is forced to hide a cache. While it might be true that a majority of people can toss out a film can or GladWare container with a log, it's not clear how many people will maintain them. Cache ownership is a long term commitment. It involves selecting a place to hide a cache, getting permission if necessary, getting good coordinates, writing up a web page, monitoring logs, maintaining the cache, archiving and removing the cache when it is no longer viable. Lets examine each of these and decide if the people who don't hid are the real leaches. 1. Selecting a place: aside from the many complaints already in the forums because someone hides a cache in a location someone else doesn't approve of, we also no that sometimes just find a location that isn't in violation of some guideline is difficult. Many people give up when they try to hide caches and they get rejected because they are too close to some unknown cache or stage of a multi. 2. Getting permission: Base on some of the horror stories I read here, this is hard enough for people who are placing caches now. I suspect a substantial numbers of people who haven't hidden caches either have given up trying to get permission to place their hide, or who find asking permission too difficult an obstacle to over come. In either case, compare these "leaches" to the many hides who simply decide that their cache doesn't need permission. 3. Getting good coordinates: Finding caches is pretty easy, download the coordinates to your GPS and go. I suspect there are a few geocachers who have no idea how to mark coordinates with their GPS or why it's a good idea to average. My guess is for smartphone users, the percent that know how to get good coordinates is even lower. 4. Writing up a cache page. Some people are just not writers. Sure you don't have to say much on the cache page, but you still need to put something. You have to figure out more of the guideline well, in order to know what you can or can't say. While someone who has found a lot of cache should have some idea what the difficult and terrain ratings are, people often have trouble with their own caches (since they know where they hid them). 5. Monitoring logs. You don't have delete logs just because some said they didn't sign the log, but you should be monitoring the logs to see if there is a problem with the cache. You are also responsible to delete logs that are not family friendly or otherwise violate the TOUs for the website. Every so often there is a cache owner who ask how to stop the email notification they get when their cache is logged. Surprisingly a lot of cache owners think you should hide a cache an forget it. 6. Maintaining the physical cache. A lot of cache owners seem to have no intention of maintaining their caches. They expect others to replace logs and missing containers for them. Again, I suspect that a substantial number of those that don't hide know that they aren't going to maintain their hides. Some may in fact travel, move around due to their job, or have seasonal residences. Others may simply have too busy a lifestyle. While they can hunt caches when they have free time, having to deal with maintenance issues in a reasonabe time frame be out of the questiong. Or they may simply want to use that time to fimd other caches. 7. Archiving and removing the cache when it is no longer viable. I find it amusing that two of the most popular complaints are 1) people who have many finds but no hides and 2) people who have only a few finds but many hides. Often when people complain about caches that have been abandoned and are missing with no owners to take care of them they blame on the people who start hiding caches before they have found enough to show commitment to the game. But I have found that abandoned caches are just as often left by people with high find counts. Even long time geocachers leave the game for one reason or another - health, family crisis, or just moving to a new town - leaving many caches that aren't always adopted out. I often see caches left unmaintained even by active high numbers cachers that end up being archived by a reviewer. A high numbers cacher who admits they don't want to spend time doing maintenance is not contributing to the problem of abandoned caches. (And while there may be some disagreement about it, these cachers are often the ones helping others by doing maintenance for them). All really good excuses for being lazy and not contributing to the community. Bravo!!!

If someone has no intrinsic desire to own/maintain a cache, and hides a cache only due to pressure to "give back to the community" or to "stop being a leech" or whatever, then do you really expect them to hide a quality, well-maintained cache? Nonsense. An obvious counterexample is someone who travels a lot, who can find caches during their travels, but who is not in one place enough to maintain a cache. Remember, "Geocaches are placed for the long term." There is not a good excuse for them not to be capable of quality, well-maintained cache. Will everyone? probably not, but that is because they are taking and not giving back, leech-like. As for the counterexample, here and on many topics in these forums, I'm not concerned with the tiny percentage of people someone can come up with for an excuse. I'm talking about the vast majority.

It is interesting to me to see that so many support "leeches" in the geocaching community, and even give them a laughable excuse that they will hide bad and/or poorly maintained caches. If you are capable of finding them, then you are capable of hiding and maintaining them. I agree that there are other ways to contribute, but I seriously doubt very many non hiders are actively participating in those.

I self filter caches and am always on the brink of using all my faves. If you go do a bunch of PnGs, then you will have too many favorites. It depends on how you cache.

Why not find one, then you will know.

The silliest thing is talking out of one side of the mouth to let people cache how they want and whining incessantly out of the other in numerous long winded diatribes for years and years about ALRs

Although this is a serious subject, I can't help but laugh at the place I'm suspecting the OP got lost.

Here is a good one for #300 GC1Z4Y5

Toz will never convince me, or me him. I'm not going to risk getting carpal toz syndrome to prove it.

If you're upset about "Lax rules (guidelines, whatever) and lax finder and hiders" then I suggest you take it up with groundspeek. They are the ones that created guidelines instead of rules. They are the ones that have intentionally left things loose rather than creating a lot of strict rules. This is supposed to be a fun pasttime. It is NOT a regulation sport. Most geocachers do just fine enjoying the game as it was meant to be played. Most of the angst comes from visiting the forums. bad suggestion. no thanks. I know that many rules that would make the hobby better are unrealistic, both in enforcing and business growth. Doesn't mean I have to like it, and can't whine on a public forum. "meant to be played" is where a lot of the difference of opinion comes in, but I believe my definition of "meant to be played" is probably a lot closer to the original concept than most on here. I get angsty over situations that happen while participating in the hobby, both to my caches and the ones I hunt and the others that I belieive effect my enjoyment for various reasons.