CSpenceFLY

Not to be negative but it really does not matter and there is nothing you can do one way or the other. All caches are destin to be filled with junk.

Best advice I could give would be do a search using your zip code and then us the map it button at the top of the page. That will give you an idea of where the caches are.

A person obtains permission to place a box of trinkets in the woods and for other people to come to the location to find the box. A person who does not own the box removes it. How is that not stealing? The listing on the website has nothing to do with the ownership of the box. This is actually why I disagree with RK's position that teh reviewer should be responsible for the removal of the archived box, although I understand RK's feelings and the reason for that position. To the issue of the archival of the cache, I also blame RK. He screwed up. On June 13th, after a couple of DNFs, he disabled his cache and stated that he would make a maintenance run 'as time and circumstance permit'. Clearly, he should have simply posted a note that said 'look harder, possibly down the hill'. I don't consider it stealing because he said earlier in the thread that he had no intention of going to pickup the cache. That makes it trash. It seems now he has changed his mind and replaced the cache. To bad he didn't do that 8 months ago.

Designated FTF gifts are just that, a gift. I would say that no trade is required. If however there is no designated FTF gift then the trade items in the cache are just that, trade items. Etiquette says trades should be somewhat even, but not everybody give a clam's patootie about etiquette and courtesy. I guess you encountered one of those people. There are many rude and thoughtless people in the world and some of them happen to be geocachers. The best thing to do is realize that you're going to run into one of them every now and move on. They aren't worth a moment's thought or angst. That is the understatement of the year and the year is young. If that were not the case we would not have a monopoly on McJunk

From what was posted here I think the reviewer tried to work with you. Your "I'll do it when I feel like it" attitude probably rubbed them the same way it has most everyone here. In any case, you were given time to maintain the cache and failed to do so. I'm glad you found a site that better fits your lifestyle.

If the cache is also listed on another site, then it isn't geotrash. If he did maintenance on the cache and left it archived on GC, but did NOT archive it on the other site, that would be the same as muggling it. John There has been no mention of the cache being listed on another site. Have you read all of the thread? Reread RK's 12-30 "closure" post. Two quotes: "The cache is fixed on the time schedule that I said I could do." & "This cache will remain archived on this site." (emphisis mine) The cache is fixed, but remains archived on GC. Why would he do that (fix, not remove) if it wasn't also listed somewhere else? And, why does he have to state anywhere that the cache is listed elsewhere, that's his business and has nothing to do with these forums. I think you misread what you quoted but in any event IF the cache is fixed and RK has it listed on a site that allows him to maintain it when he feels like it that's great. Problem solved. I for one am happy that this site has reasonable maintanence guidelines

Great post. To tell the truth when I first read this thread I thought RK was just trolling to make a point. Disabled caches are one of my peeves. There are many in my area that have been disabled for months, owned by people that are out caching on a daily basis. How disappointing to find out that there are people that think they should be able to do their cache maintainence when they feel like it or get around to it.

If the cache is also listed on another site, then it isn't geotrash. If he did maintenance on the cache and left it archived on GC, but did NOT archive it on the other site, that would be the same as muggling it. John There has been no mention of the cache being listed on another site.

Actually you were commenting that I was not being honest. When the reivewer sent their "your cache has been under the weather" note I said to myself "oh that's right I forgot about that cache". Doesn't mean that I could have done a dang thing about it before then even if it's all I thought about night and day. Pretty simple when you get right down to it. It's your perogative to find malice and ill intent lurking in the shawows if you like. I'm guilty of being annoyed my cache was archived and I'm guilt of slower maintaince than this site would like. Beyond that you are just seeing what you want to see. You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

It could be a 12 page thread and you still don't decide when the thread is done. To RK, I don't have a problem with you taking time to maintain your cache. I have a problem with the attitude you have toward a reviewer doing their job and the fact that if you have time to place caches in the general area of this cache(this was said earlier in this thread) you could have taken that time to maintain this cache instead of creating a new one. I think someone should go pickup the container for you an get a free cache container.

I've worked in the private sector most of my life. I recently got a public sector job and I've learned something very quickly. If you want something done quickly or if you want it done at ALL, don't ask for input from government beurocrats. I wouldn't ask someone permission to play frisbee. I wouldn't ask someone for permission to walk around a public park. You say the arrogant ones are few, I disagree completely. I dealt with a land manager here in Portland that was actively hunting down and destroying geocaches. They just didn't like them because they viewed them as evil. Do you think I'm going to ask him for permission? NO WAY. I'm not doing anything against the law by using a public park. Placing a geocache may be against the nazi land owners sensibilities, but its not against the law. I anyone that does not believe the beginning of this post try this. Go to a park manager and try to get written permission to do anything that is already allowed in the park. It won't happen.

The spirit of the rule is to keep morons from destroying an area while searching for a cache. Anyone not taking the impact a cache in going to have on an area maybe should not be hiding caches. I would say use some common sense but that does not seem to be thriving in our society these days.

If you are feeling generous just do whatever needs to be done to fix the cache. Otherwise I'm not sure you can adopt a cache without contacting the owner. The only option may be to get your reviewer to archive the cache so you can replace it.

Or to get started you could just print out the cache page and learn to manually enter the cords.

Those are rediculous logs but if someone has the time to sit and write crap like that who am I to delete them.

I would relog it over and over again just to torqe this guy off.

I always have to ask myself when people start saying things like"can they do that legally" , Do they really believe in what they are saying or just saying it to make an arguement. It is my experience that when you have to throw the word legally into your arguement you are probably talking about something that is probably not right.

It's a new revewwer. They were nice, professional, responded exactly as they should when they are in a position to enforce the company line whether or not they agree with it themselves.. They approved my cache submittal without regard to this archival two days later. Exactly who I would hire if I wanted them to do the same job for me. I have no beef with this reviewer. The issue is exactly what I have said in the first post. If I'm responsible, let me be responsbile. Don't cut in and take it away from me. You can call it a pet peeve. We all have them. That's one of mine. Refer to post #96. You can't maintain this cache but you can place a new one?? Now you're just playing games.

I also believe that there is more to this then what has come to light. Either you have other issues with your reviewer or someone else has made a stink about the time frame of your cache maintainance. Politics sucks. Which ever the reviewer has done his job.

You seem to be mixed up. You placed the cache. You are responsible for the geo-litter. If I archive the cache it's normally missing. No geo liter involved. If I'm tired of the cache I'll pull and archive it. No geo litter involved. If someone archives the cache against my wishes as an active owner. They have created the problem. They can solve it. It's enough for me to solve the problems that I create. It should be archived because you are not willing to maintain it in a timely manner.

It's not a reason. I flat out don't think I'm going to have a chance until spring. Snow or no snow. I may have a chance this saturday to slap in a replacment cache but the snow would keep me from confirming the cache may have fallen down the enbakment. Regardless the cache was archived. It's not coming back. The point of my first post was simply to vent. Actions have consequences. Anyone who archives my caches can assume the responsiblity for the geolitter they created when they chose to archive a cache they really don't know much about. When I archive my cache I'll take care of it. When someone else does and has taken the decision from me, they can live with the result of their own decision. I'll cross the cach off my list of maintance responsiblites and worry about my active caches. You are acting like a 5 year old.

Nothing is stopping him from going to maintain the cache and having it un-archived. If there is no incentive now it is because there was none before. We had a similar incident in our area from someone that had moved from the area. Caches needed maintainence, some were proved missing and an owner that promised action but did nothing. I still don't get it. If your cache need maintainence why not disable it and do what you said you were going to do?

I don't get it. If you have a cache with a problem why not set it as un available with a note that you will fix it, instead of leaving it active and having people out there looking for crap or even worst, something that is not even there. It takes maybe two minutes and the problem is solved.

People are never going to just sit home because of the price of gas. Well,some might but I won't.

There are many caches in my area that are disabled and have been for a while. It seems like there are people that treat it like claiming property when they have a cache or even a disabled cache in an area. They refuse to archive a cache to keep others from placing a cache in "their" area. I don't make a big deal about it because the best you can hope for is more micro spew in their place.I find it a bit annoying that people can find time to put out new caches but refuse to maintain the ones they already have.