My Find Log Keeps Getting Deleted!

[+CaptRussell]

HELP!!

 

I need the advice of my fellow cachers!

 

(BTW -- those of you who frequent the Off Topic forum know me as "KBI" – King Bruce the First. And no, this is NOT a sock puppet account – I actually use both cacher names. I’m KBI when caching at home, and CaptRussell when I’m caching "on the road.")

 

Here is my problem:

 

I got a [GEO] email a couple weeks ago saying that one of my "find" logs from last July had just been DELETED. There was no explanation for the delete, and no email at all from the owner.

 

Here's the sequence of emails that has followed (so far).

 

My first email to the owner:

 

[cache owner’s name],

 

Hi!

 

I just got an interesting email from Geocaching.com  It said that my July 7th 'find' log for your cache named "[name of cache]" had just been ... deleted!

 

Here's the text of my deleted log:

 

Great park, good hiding place, but the cache itself is overdue for a little TLC. I poured about a cup of water out of the container. The contents were all soaked, and mostly junk anyway, but the good news is that the logbook is OK.

Took nothing, left a toy ring that changes color in sunlight.

 

What happened? Was there a mistake? Did you delete my log? If so, why -- did I say something wrong? If I said something that offended you, that certainly wasn't my intent.

 

Russell (CaptRussell)

 

 

His response:

 

Russell,

 

I deleted your log as it seemed a little too negative:

 

"...the cache itself is overdue for a little TLC"

 

"The contents were all soaked, and mostly junk anyway"

 

While these may have been true, they do not represent the current condition of the geocache.  The tupperware container that apparently was prone to leak has been replaced by a new ammo box.  My concern was that your negative posting would/have kept people from visting the cache.  You are still the last to vist and those reading the postings from most recent to oldest (the way they appear), would certainly focus on the negative.

 

I had changed my e-mail address and did not update my address with Geocaching.com for a while.  As a result, the cache did go "unobserved" by me, without me even being aware of the postings made.  This is now corrected as is the leaky situation.

 

Sorry if it seemed personal.  This was not my intent.

 

Happy Geocaching!

 

[cache owner’s name]

 

 

So far, so good. I understood the owner's concern, but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction.

 

My next email:

 

[cache owner’s name],

 

Russell,

 

I deleted your log as it seemed a little too negative:

 

"...the cache itself is overdue for a little TLC"

 

"The contents were all soaked, and mostly junk anyway"

 

While these may have been true, they do not represent the current condition of the geocache.  The tupperware container that apparently was prone to leak has been replaced by a new ammo box.  My concern was that your negative posting would/have kept people from visting the cache.  You are still the last to vist and those reading the postings from most recent to oldest (the way they appear), would certainly focus on the negative.

 

I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?

 

I agree that some of my comments sounded negative, but again, no offense was intended. You seem to agree that my description of the cache as I found it was accurate. Do you not value feedback on the condition of your caches? I'd have welcomed such information.

 

Please also note that my log was more positive than negative. I also said: "Great park, good hiding place ..." and later: " ... but the good news is that the logbook is OK."

 

I indicated that I'd removed water from the container. (I assumed you'd be grateful.)

 

I even went on to say: "Took nothing, left a toy ring that changes color in sunlight."

 

Note: Not only did I NOT remove any trade items from the cache - I even added something of value in order to help you restock. I always treat other people's caches the way I'd hope for mine to be treated.

 

[cache owner’s name], if I had been in your shoes, the most I'd have done in that situation would have been to post a note describing the recent maintenance. I see on your cache page that you've done that. Don't you think that's enough to address your concerns about what future seekers might think?

 

Further, if I didn't like the sound of someone's log I'd have simply sent them an email requesting an edit, politely describing what specific changes I'd like them to make to their log. I've actually done this before, always with good results. If I decided, however, that an immediate deletion was in order, I would have at least emailed the finder with an explanation.

 

Sorry if it seemed personal.  This was not my intent.

In that case, would you please reconsider? Will you let me post a revised find log? I'll be happy to leave out the parts you didn't like.

 

I walked over six miles from my hotel that day, just for a couple cache finds! :-)

 

Thanks!

 

CaptRussell

 

 

I sent that email a full week ago. No response ... yet.

 

Today I went back to the cache page and, after modifying the text of my original log to make it "non-negative," I re-logged the find:

 

Great park, good hiding place.

 

I poured about a cup of water out of the container. The contents were pretty damp, but the good news is that the logbook is OK.

 

Took nothing, left a toy ring that changes color in sunlight.

 

A couple hours later I got another automated [GEO] email. The owner had deleted my find AGAIN!!

 

I know, I know -- it's their cache, they can do whatever they like with it. If this had been a lame lamppost micro I probably would have just forgotten about it, but I walked a LONG way to get that find!

 

Any suggestions? Any advice?

 

Has anyone else had this problem?

[+kc8hnz]

Sounds to me like at first the cache owner went a bit too far just for the sake of cache reputation, but to delete it again almost sounds like person vendetta.

[+Renegade Knight]

I had the problem but rather than defend the log I flat out asked the owner what they didn't like about the log. They never said Jack so I logged again only this time instead of a story from high school I told them some details about finding the cache itself.

 

Given you have tried twice, I'd email a simple log and see if it meets with their approval.

 

Something like.

 

Did this cache on a 6 mile hike.

Personally I found it fun.

Mabye someday I'll get back into the area.

 

(or maybe not that wording)

[+Stunod]

Re-log it with a simple "Found it" and move on. I wouldn't put any more effort into trying to make the situation better.

[+KBI]

Sounds to me like at first the cache owner went a bit too far just for the sake of cache reputation, but to delete it again almost sounds like person vendetta.

That occurred to me as well, but as far as I know I've never met the person.

[+KBI]

Sounds to me like at first the cache owner went a bit too far just for the sake of cache reputation, but to delete it again almost sounds like person vendetta. 

That occurred to me as well, but as far as I know I've never met the person.

Oops -- I did a Ringbone!

[+sept1c_tank]

The cache owner is obviously sensitive about the condition of his cache. Why don't you try logging it one more time with TNLNSL and just forget it?

[+CaptRussell]

Re-log it with a simple "Found it" and move on.  I wouldn't put any more effort into trying to make the situation better.

 

The cache owner is obviously sensitive about the condition of his cache.  Why don't you try logging it one more time with TNLNSL and just forget it?   

 

Good suggestions. I might just try something along those lines, along with maybe one more email to the owner.

[+denali7]

interesting how <owner> describes the situation the same way you did on their maintenence log. they agree with you about the condition, but don't want you to write what you found "pre-maintenence." sounds like you'll never win.

this looks like one of those times people add a cachelog to one of their own caches, just to preserve the record of that cache. after that, i'd put it on an ignore list and move on. keep it fun!

 

eta: looks like a log is born, cap'n. congrats and go on with the fun part of the hobby!!

Edited November 19, 2005 by denali7

[+cache_test_dummies]

I would do whatever KBI thinks you should do.

 

 

No, I think Stunod has it right. There's nothing more to be gained here.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Had a similar problem. Pointed out that the coordinates were terrible, and the hides 'needle in a haystack.' Got deleted without even a note of explanation.

What's 170 feet off in a pile of dumped concrete slabs, anyway? Relogged 'Found it", discretion being the better part of valor, and we worked long and hard to find that cache! If the owner doesn't want to face the truth "Found it" usually works.

[+CaptRussell]

Sounds to me like at first the cache owner went a bit too far just for the sake of cache reputation, but to delete it again almost sounds like person vendetta. 

On second thought you may have something there. I just read back over all the other find logs for the cache, and there are several other logs which include mildly negative comments. Obviously none of them have been deleted! Why mine?

[+CaptRussell]

I've just logged it for the THIRD time.

 

The text reads:

Found it. Took nothing, left a color-changing ring.

 

Thanks.

 

We'll see what happens!

[+welch]

... but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction....

 

(and from email)

 

...I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?...

Either its deleted or its not. There is no 'half' or 'partial' delete. Not sure why other sort of delete you might have wanted.

 

I know, I know -- it's their cache, they can do whatever they like with it.  If this had been a lame lamppost micro I probably would have just forgotten about it, but I walked a LONG way to get that find!

I'm glad you realize this.

For whatever reason they don't like something in your log. It would seem to be the implication (well reality I guess) that the cache was soaking wet at some point in the past. If they would respond you, you could likely spent weeks figuring out exacty what wording they would ok with that explains you leave a toy ring and dumped out water standing the in cache.

I would suggest you just relog it with only "TNLN". There shouldn't be anything for them to object to in that.

[+denali7]

eta: aahhhhh, now i get it...

Edited November 19, 2005 by denali7

[+CaptRussell]

... but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction....

 

(and from email)

 

...I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?...

Either its deleted or its not. There is no 'half' or 'partial' delete. Not sure why other sort of delete you might have wanted.

My reference to a "total delete" was as opposed to the owner potentially specifying what portions he or she wanted deleted. Sorry, I thought I'd already made that clear.

 

I know, I know -- it's their cache, they can do whatever they like with it.  If this had been a lame lamppost micro I probably would have just forgotten about it, but I walked a LONG way to get that find!

I'm glad you realize this.

For whatever reason they don't like something in your log. It would seem to be the implication (well reality I guess) that the cache was soaking wet at some point in the past. If they would respond you, you could likely spent weeks figuring out exacty what wording they would ok with that explains you leave a toy ring and dumped out water standing the in cache.

I would suggest you just relog it with only "TNLN". There shouldn't be anything for them to object to in that.

I've essentially done just that. I'll report back if it gets deleted again.

[+Jamie Z]

Perhaps a link to this thread in your Found-it log would help.

 

I'd sure like to hear the side of a cacher who deletes logs because they describe the conditions of the cache.

 

I'd have a hard time not becoming angry at someone who had deleted my log.

 

Jamie

[+welch]

... but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction....

 

(and from email)

 

...I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?...

Either its deleted or its not. There is no 'half' or 'partial' delete. Not sure why other sort of delete you might have wanted.

My reference to a "total delete" was as opposed to the owner potentially specifying what portions he or she wanted deleted. Sorry, I thought I'd already made that clear.

Again, there is no partial delete. If the owner wanted something off the page bad enough they had to delete the whole thing. They can not delete just attached pictures, or edit specific text.

[+denali7]

(it was easy to find it. i did, and i'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.)

Edited November 19, 2005 by denali7

[+Stunod]

Just stating a fact...not dropping a hint or anything:

 

The log that gets sent to the cache owner is what you type in the box on the logging page. Any edits afterwards do not get sent. So if you edit a short, simple log from July into a longer more descriptive account of your visit, the cache owner may never see the revised log.

[+worldtraveler]

Okay, this may only be a game, but it's our game collectively. Assuming the truthfulness of the OP's story is not in dispute, why should a single geocacher be permitted to act as a despot, arbitrarily denying another geocacher credit for a legitimate find while practicing historical revisionism on the cache log? The cache isn't in North Korea, for cryin' out loud!

 

IMO, TPTB should restore the first (accurate) cache log and tell the owner his cache will be archived on the website if he can't play nicely. Let the owner take his box and go home if he wants, but don't permit petty would-be tyrants to get away with such antics.

[+CaptRussell]

... but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction....

 

(and from email)

 

...I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?...

Either its deleted or its not. There is no 'half' or 'partial' delete. Not sure why other sort of delete you might have wanted.

My reference to a "total delete" was as opposed to the owner potentially specifying what portions he or she wanted deleted. Sorry, I thought I'd already made that clear.

Again, there is no partial delete. If the owner wanted something off the page bad enough they had to delete the whole thing. They can not delete just attached pictures, or edit specific text.

No, but he could ask ME, via email, to edit the log, which is what I explained.

[+CaptRussell]

IMO, TPTB should restore the first (accurate) cache log and tell the owner his cache will be archived  on the website if he can't play nicely. Let the owner take his box and go home if he wants, but don't permit petty would-be tyrants to get away with such antics. 

Anybody know if this is possible? Has anything like this been done before?

[+denali7]

Again, there is no partial delete. If the owner wanted something off the page bad enough they had to delete the whole thing. They can not delete just attached pictures, or edit specific text.

 

it's clear he understands that, welch. he is referring to the question as to why <owner> didn't contact him in the beginning of all this, in order to request that he, captrussell, delete some portions of his log with which they disagreed.

[+welch]

Okay, this may only be a game, but it's our game collectively. Assuming the truthfulness of the OP's story is not in dispute, why should a single geocacher be permitted to act as a despot, arbitrarily denying another geocacher credit for a legitimate find while practicing historical revisionism on the cache log? The cache isn't in North Korea, for cryin' out loud!

 

IMO, TPTB should restore the first (accurate) cache log and tell the owner his cache will be archived on the website if he can't play nicely. Let the owner take his box and go home if he wants, but don't permit petty would-be tyrants to get away with such antics.

This seems like another thread in itself.

 

Perhaps if the cache was collectively 'ours' it would have different rules. But in theory it was placed, owned, and maintained by this one person. They in turn are in charge of final decision on what is/isn't a valid log, and have to power delete the bad or invalid ones. Some do abuse this power, should be punished for this?

[+Jamie Z]

Anybody know if this is possible?  Has anything like this been done before?

I wish it were, but my understanding is that that GC.com does not get involved in these types of disputes. This has happened before, and at least one time involving a fairly high-profile geocacher and nothing was done, to my knowledge.

 

Jamie

Edited November 19, 2005 by Jamie Z

[+welch]

... but I still thought an outright delete of a legitimate find was a bit of an overreaction....

 

(and from email)

 

...I understand -- but don't you think a TOTAL delete of my find, without warning, was maybe a little harsh?...

Either its deleted or its not. There is no 'half' or 'partial' delete. Not sure why other sort of delete you might have wanted.

My reference to a "total delete" was as opposed to the owner potentially specifying what portions he or she wanted deleted. Sorry, I thought I'd already made that clear.

Again, there is no partial delete. If the owner wanted something off the page bad enough they had to delete the whole thing. They can not delete just attached pictures, or edit specific text.

No, but he could ask ME, via email, to edit the log, which is what I explained.

I agree it would have been better if he would have requested you remove something before deleting it. But he didn't.

And in the emails you've posted, I don't see where you asked what you could remove that they would accept. You want to know if they value feedback, and say that you'd think they would be happy you drained the cache, and then tell them what you would do in their shoes. That asking thing works both ways .

[+Mopar]

Well, there is a more recent found log on the cache now:

November 8 by xxxxx (xxx found)

Took advantage of free Tuesday at the Arb. to visit this cache which had been lonely for quite a while. Cache dry but log damp. Took 2 TB's. TFTC! BTW: there was a log entry on 7/7/05 that isn't showing up here.

 

Uh oh! They pointed out the fact that the log is damp, and the "missing" entry in the online logs. I bet the cache owner is racing to find the delete button again!

[+mtn-man]

IMO, TPTB should restore the first (accurate) cache log and tell the owner his cache will be archived on the website if he can't play nicely. Let the owner take his box and go home if he wants, but don't permit petty would-be tyrants to get away with such antics.

I can answer this part of your post.

 

TPTB are not the log police. The site will never be the log police except in the cases where profanity or something of that nature are present. We will not restore logs where a dispute between the owner and cacher are the issue. Trust me, I know.

 

I have had one log deleted. It was a guy who had a chip on his shoulder because I would not list one of his locationless caches. He carried the grudge for a couple of years and deleted a find when he realized it was me I guess. I went up the ladder and asked about getting the log restored. I was told exactly what I posted above. It was not even a cache issue, it was a grudge against a reviewer, yet the log was not restored. I could have restored it myself, but was not allowed to. Instead, I turned a note I posted on an event cache into a found it log with an explaination as to why I changed the log with a link to the cache page. I actually could have logged that event five times because of pocket caches, but only logged it twice (once for the event, once for finding the 4 pocket caches). Now I have three found it logs on that cache page.

 

I would be more than happy to offer CaptRussell a page of mine to log in that manner. I've known him for quite a while and know he is a good cacher. CaptRussell, if it comes to that just let me know.

[+worldtraveler]

Perhaps if the cache was collectively 'ours' it would have different rules. But in theory it was placed, owned, and maintained by this one person. They in turn are in charge of final decision on what is/isn't a valid log, and have to power delete the bad or invalid ones. Some do abuse this power, should be punished for this?

I'm not disputing the ownership of the actual cache, but I believe Groundspeak owns the online cache logs. Some may even insist the online logs belong to their authors, but I don't think anyone could persuade me they belong to the cache owner. He is more of a steward, I believe, having some authority and responsibility for the truthfulness and acceptability of the online logs. He should not be permitted to violate that trust with impunity, IMO.

[+CaptRussell]

And in the emails you've posted, I don't see where you asked what you could remove that they would accept.

Sorry if you missed it. Here it is again, verbatim, from my second email to the owner:

 

In that case, would you please reconsider? Will you let me post a revised find log? I'll be happy to leave out the parts you didn't like.

Edited November 19, 2005 by CaptRussell

[+CaptRussell]

I would be more than happy to offer CaptRussell a page of mine to log in that manner ... CaptRussell, if it comes to that just let me know.

You know, I'm ashamed to admit it, but I hadn't even thought of that.

 

That's a generous offer, Mtn-man. I might take you up on it, or I could just as easily use one of my own caches to log my missing smiley -- along with a polite note explaining what the heck I'm doing.

 

First, though, I'll wait and see what becomes of my third attempt to log it in the proper place ...

[+denali7]

ummm, yeah. good idea.

 

this looks like one of those times people add a cachelog to one of their own caches, just to preserve the record of that cache

[CoyoteRed]

Would a bookmark list called "Caches where I've had logs deleted" be considered an abuse of the feature?

[+CaptRussell]

ummm, yeah.  good idea.

 

this looks like one of those times people add a cachelog to one of their own caches, just to preserve the record of that cache

Sorry, Denali. I missed that. Now I understand what you meant.

[+denali7]

[+worldtraveler]

TPTB are not the log police...  We will not restore logs where a dispute between the owner and cacher are the issue.  Trust me, I know...

Thanks for the response and for sharing your own example of an injustice. I'm sorry it happened and even more sorry you had no real recourse.

I'm not asking for TPTB to be the log police; we, as a community, seem to be pretty good at sorting out the wheat from the chaff. What we lack is the power of enforcement, and that rightfully belongs to TPTB. If they are too busy or just lack the desire to involve themselves, they could always delegate that authority. I would be surprised if they lacked a sufficient number of volunteers to mediate disputes and propose solutions to TPTB for action.

 

I think a few well-placed whacks, where deserved, would go a long way towards curbing abusive behavior.

Edited November 19, 2005 by worldtraveler

[+Mopar]

TPTB are not the log police...  We will not restore logs where a dispute between the owner and cacher are the issue.  Trust me, I know...

Thanks for the response and for sharing your own example of an injustice. I'm sorry it happened and even more sorry you had no real recourse.

I'm not asking for TPTB to be the log police; we, as a community, seem to be pretty good at sorting out the wheat from the chaff. What we lack is the power of enforcement, and that rightfully belongs to TPTB. If they are too busy or just lack the desire to involve themselves, they could always delegate that authority. I would be surprised if you lacked a sufficient number of volunteers to mediate disputes and propose solutions to TPTB for action.

 

I think a few well-placed whacks, where deserved, would go a long way towards curbing abusive behavior.

Those whacks are called peer pressure, and it's something we as a community already have, and it usually works pretty good.

[+worldtraveler]

Those whacks are called peer pressure, and it's something we as a community already have, and it usually works pretty good.

I agree peer pressure is one form of whack that is usually effective. I am proposing another kind for those who refuse to do the right thing even after peer pressure is applied.

[+CaptRussell]

Those whacks are called peer pressure, and it's something we as a community already have, and it usually works pretty good.

I agree peer pressure is one form of whack that is usually effective. I am proposing another kind for those who refuse to do the right thing even after peer pressure is applied.

Before we deploy the whackers, let's wait and see what happens with my latest attempt to log the find.

 

And as far as peer pressure goes, I suppose the cache owner may have already received a friendly email or two as a result of this thread.

[+welch]

And in the emails you've posted, I don't see where you asked what you could remove that they would accept.

Sorry if you missed it. Here it is again, verbatim, from my second email to the owner:

 

In that case, would you please reconsider? Will you let me post a revised find log? I'll be happy to leave out the parts you didn't like.

Yea I guess your right, that is close enough to a question.

[nobby.nobbs]

hopefully the third attempt will be ccepted. shame that a compromise couldn't nave been found before deletion.

 

don't you ever suffer from a slight pyschosis kbi? posting using both id's in the same thread!!! you're never alone with schitzophrenia!

[+worldtraveler]

Before we deploy the whackers, let's wait and see what happens with my latest attempt to log the find.

 

And as far as peer pressure goes, I suppose the cache owner may have already received a friendly email or two as a result of this thread.

Sadly, there are no whackers to deploy in the event he doesn't change his mind. It's a pity you've had to revise your log entry twice for no other reason than to try to appease the owner and hope he will not once again falsify the record by deleting your legitimate find.

 

I've added the cache to my watchlist, but I'll refrain from applying any peer pressure at this time because it could just as easily work against you as it could for you.

 

But if he deletes your log a third time, he may find his cache page inundated with factual entries cautioning others about his propensity for deleting accurate logs that he doesn't happen to like.

[+1stimestar]

I had changed my e-mail address and did not update my address with Geocaching.com for a while.  As a result, the cache did go "unobserved" by me, without me even being aware of the postings made.  This is now corrected as is the leaky situation.

 

HERE is the culprit! He doesn' want anyone to know that he was not performing proper cache maintenance and could not be contacted. It's different if he says "hey the cache had some water in it so I fixed it with a new container when I was doing maintenance" then someone else telling him his cache needed maintenance with no reply or response.

[4wheelin_fool]

Would a bookmark list called "Caches where I've had logs deleted" be considered an abuse of the feature?

Hehe. Good observation. If you put that cache on a bookmark list with that title and allowed it to be seen by others, then "Caches where I've had logs deleted" would appear on his page

 

Anyway, all he had to do is post a note after yours to say he performed maintenance on the cache after your visit, rather than delete your find. The whole issue is just silly.

[ATMouse]

I don't get it - you actually did the owner a favor by giving him a heads up on a problem with his cache. Short of LIVING with his cache or having God-like powers and wisdom, knowing the moment to moment conditon of his cache is impossible. I rather a fellow cacher tell me in a log that there is a problem. Shoot, when I get a DNF, I'm so paranoid I tend to run out to check to see if it's there.

 

It's a game; part of the game is being clever and "Naa-naa-naa, ,yes, I hid it good." and equal parts "It's there and in good shape for you to find."

 

It's about respecting other cachers: a good hide in a good place with a container that (please God) is tight and dry.

 

He's just a big ol'....um...don't want to run afoul of the mods...

[+Touchstone]

Would a bookmark list called "Caches where I've had logs deleted" be considered an abuse of the feature?

Hehe. Good observation. If you put that cache on a bookmark list with that title and allowed it to be seen by others, then "Caches where I've had logs deleted" would appear on his page

 

Anyway, all he had to do is post a note after yours to say he performed maintenance on the cache after your visit, rather than delete your find. The whole issue is just silly.

Actually, our local Reviewer does this sort of thing already. I had one cache disabled for a couple of months, got a friendly note from the Reviewer when he/she was approving my most recent cache (i.e. Hey! why don't you fix your disabled caches before putting out new ones.). So I went out, replaced the container, and came back to reenable the cache and noticed "DISABLED CACHES IN CALIFORNIA" on the side of the cache description

 

Felt like kind of a scarlet letter burned into the cache description page

 

I think it's a great idea. Just remember Capt: "don't get mad, get even"

[+worldtraveler]

post deleted by worldtraveler

Edited November 19, 2005 by worldtraveler

[+CaptRussell]

Just remember Capt: "don't get mad, get even"

So far I think this thread has served that purpose. My intent here was not to cause any pain or embarrassment to the cache owner, of course. I just wanted to vent a little, and to ask for suggestions on how to handle the problem. I've gotten some good ones already!

 

The first email I received from the owner led me to believe him (or her) to be a fairly reasonable person, hence my appeal to reason in my next email.

 

When I didn’t receive ANY response for a week, however, AND my second attempt at logging the find got deleted as well – I began to question the owner’s reasonableness. Of course there’s always the chance that he or she somehow never received the "appeal" email, but on the other hand my FIRST email obviously got through ...

 

If my latest (third) attempt gets deleted as well, I think I'll just use one of my own cache pages to log the smiley. If I do so, of course, I'll include a detailed description of the story, complete with a link to this thread.

 

If you're reading this, [cache owner], the choice is up to you!

[+SeventhSon]

I think it's a great idea. Just remember Capt: "don't get mad, get even"

Don't get even ... get ahead