Jump to content

Angst Filled Flame Fest!


Snoogans

Recommended Posts

I've long stated (at least at events) that if I found a cache that had been both moved AND totally replaced AFTER I had previously found it, that I would log another find on it.

 

I did that today on this cache.

 

The issue had just never come up for me before today.

 

I first found the cache on March 19, 2003 and revisited it many times to trade bugs and to do cache maintenance for my friend Babslover, who lives over 100 miles away. It was a 30 Cal ammo can AT the posted coords.

 

On June 23, 2004, I discovered the cache had been muggled, but the log book and swag had just been dumped by the person wanting the ammo can or so it seemed.

 

It was reactivated by some nice cachers who meant well on January 22, 2005 and has been running in that mode for over 1 year.

 

I went back today for a TB that I couldn't pass up.

 

I enjoyed the hunt. The container was cool (great camo job) and in a much safer spot than the previous TB hotel had been. I couldn't see a reason to put it back where the previous cache had been, especially sice it didn't fit where the old 30 cal can had been hidden.

 

I'm keeping the find and not asking permission at all. In my opinion it's a NEW cache even though it shares an old cache page. Read the cache history to understand my reasoning.

 

NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past.

 

Please read the cache history before you respond.

Link to comment

I did it just the other day. I don't feel bad because the coords were changed and everything the name was the only thing the same. The old cache was a hollow hinged log that was muggled when its location was presumably cleaned up. (Muggle CITO). The new container is a fake 2x4 magnetically affixed to a fence some distance away. Two caches in my mind.

 

Z

Link to comment

Honestly? I'd have either requested that the cache be archived after it was obviously missing for 6 months and there was no effort on the hider to fix/replace it or I would have tried to adopt it. As that did not happen I would have just logged it as a note as was done previously. 1 cache listing /1 find. I don't particularly think it's proper when a cacher throws down a replacement cache- especially when they have never found it before.

Edited by Corp Of Discovery
Link to comment
NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past.

 

I would have logged a note the second visit. Although its essentially a different cache, its the same listing. The original should have been archived and a new cache listed, but since that wasn't done, its a note in my eyes.

Link to comment

According to GeoCalc, the coords are 53.328 ft apart. I've found traditionals further off than that--I think most of us have.

 

Here's what I would have done:

I would have emailed the owner the details and logged a note.

 

Here's what I think about logging such a find:

Pretty cheap. The movement was not significant enough to warrant a second smilie. In fact, part of maintenance is moving a cache when social trails or other location-based problems develop. The site has built-in mechanism to facilitate that. But if the little yellow face is so important to you... Just don't try it on one of my caches.

 

What I think of vacation caches:

Should be banned. If you can find someone to look after a cache, they can own it as well. They're already doing the hard work of maintaining the cache and if they're not then it is no different than an abandoned cache anyway.

Link to comment

I would have logged the second find also, since it is essentially a new cache (new container and new location, placed by someone other than the original owner). I have logged a second find on caches that change containers and placement when the owner posts "This is a new hide. If you logged it before in the old location in the other container, please feel free to log it again"

 

But I would also encourage my good friend, the original owner, to transfer ownership to someone else--perhaps the people who replaced the cache, or someone who is maintaining the cache? The original owner isn't in the area and apparently hasn't been caching in almost a year. They have logged onto the site recently, so they will probably respond to an email.

It really would be best for someone in the area to get the emails about the cache.

Link to comment
Am I missing something?

 

Yes, but by the time you came into the hobby a smilie had become meaningless. Folks toss them around like candy. It no longer solely means you found a cache. Folks give them out for all manner of things; take and post a picture of yourself dressed as a clown, pull a bag of CITO out with you, etc.

 

No one is on the same page when it comes to what to log and what not to log. The same person who might log the above mentioned cache might rail against logging event caches. To me, a find on an event cache has more merit than one on a cache than moved a little bit and is in a new container.

 

Additionally, when folks are so free with handing out smilies people get used to it. Then, when they come across a cache like ours they might bitch and complain that I won't allow a find because they didn't sign the log. "But, I saw the cache hanging in the tree and I logged CacherX's cache frozen to the ground and he accepted it. Why won't you let me claim a smilie on your cache?"

 

The fact is, I have seen the hobby deteriorate in many aspects. TPTB keep trying to bring it back on track, but folks will try every loophole and every angle, and argue everything down to the most finite little detail.

 

The hobby is supposed to be about using a GPS (or grid coordinates, actually) to find a box of trinkets in the wild. Why so many folks want to pull the hobby away from that I have no idea. Somebody want to clue me in?

Link to comment

:lol: I agree with Briansnat. If a cache has the same ID number and I have a log on it, then I don't believe in additional find logs.

 

This issue has risen it's ugly head in my home area. The organizer of one of the state events stated a policy that if the location of the monthly meeting (an event with a GC ID) is in a different location, then it can be logged as a find. My personal opinion is that it is the same event, so I only log a note.

 

Your mileage may differ.

Link to comment

The puritans believe "tis the devil that maketh man claim multiple smileys on a single GC code". Others say "hey, its a game, have fun".

 

Perhaps a reviewer can archive the orginal cache and if they agree, the people who put out the replacement cache can create a new cache at the new coordinates. Then everybody who found it at the new coordinates could delete their finds from the old cache and log the the new cache. And Snoogans can get credit for both finds. :lol:

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

I find it hard to believe people are actually this up tight about whether you log it or not....who cares really?? Am I missing something?

 

You're not missing anything, except that the forums have been pretty dull of late. (At least for me.)

 

This is a real issue and I felt like discussing it. I appreciate all of the replies. Nothing has been posted that would change my opinion and it's going about as I expected.

 

To reply to CR:

 

The cache wasn't a vacation cache. Babs was quite an active cacher in Houston until she got a more demanding job. She just doesn't have time to cache right now. She has given so much to the southeast Texas caching community, it's no trouble to maintain her caches while she is absent.

Link to comment

I find it hard to believe people are actually this up tight about whether you log it or not....who cares really??

 

I'm not sure what you're referring to about being "up tight". The OP asked a question and people are answering.

 

Am I missing something?

Apparently you did. You missed the part where the OP asked "NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past"..

 

I love the people who post here to put down those of use who choose to join a debate and prove how above it all they are.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Unless the owner invited folks to log the cache again in the new location (which I would never do, unless it had been moved much more than 53'), I would post a note that it had moved and then forget about it.

 

I have one such multi-cache that had to have the final stage moved about a half a mile because of a change in land issues. I posted a note on the cache page that second "find" logs for the new final would be accepted. Without such an invitation, I wouldn't claim a smiley.

 

...The hobby is supposed to be about using a GPS (or grid coordinates, actually) to find a box of trinkets in the wild.

 

Wow! Lookit those worms fly! :laughing:

Link to comment

I say log the second find, but I'm one of those non-purists that say it's okay to dress up in funny clothes to get an extra smiley on a cache. The numbers mean absolutely nothing to me.

 

I would think the strict party line of the purists would be that the second find should be a note, since it's the same listing. Doesn't matter if the cache has moved or is in a different container.

Link to comment

If you felt like it was the right thing then go for it. I don't know that I would log a second find myself but I wasn't there and don't know all the circumstances either. I certainly don't think you cheated yourself or anyone else in any way. I probably wouldn't have thought twice about it had you not brought it up in the forum.

Link to comment

I have not personally encountered a situation like this. I suppose if either the coordinates or the container were the same as the originally placed cache, I would have logged with a note. With both the coordinates and the container changed, it becomes a judgment call; the location carries a little more weight than the container.

 

If the location had changed by 35 feet would you have still called it a find? Would it warrant a smilie if the location had changed by 25 ft., or 15 ft.? Some caches naturally migrate that much.

 

In this case, given that the change of location was significant and the container was different, I would be tempted to log it as another find (even though I definitely don't care about the numbers). It is a different cache in a new location; arguing that logging a find would be acceptable only if the name, identification number or owner was different is petty, and those who would use that argument are the real number hunters (in the sense that they are attempting to protect the integrity of their own numbers).

 

If there is any valid issue here, it lies in the fact that the real location of the cache does not coincide with the coordinates posted on the cache page. If any contact is made with the owner (and this should happen, in my opinion) it should be not to ask permission to log it as a find, but to convince said owner to change the coordinates posted at the top of the cache page. :laughing::laughing:

Edited by sept1c_tank
Link to comment

Wow...Briansnat.....uh cornflakes and pee??? My post was an honest addition...I don't get the obsession with find numbers. I still can't see the part where I put anyone down. If a post that doesn't directly answer the question of the OP then I guess yours needs to be slammed as well

 

Just to keep on topic so I dont p anyone else off....Same cache .... 1 find

Edited by canningclan
Link to comment

I have never double logged a cache or an event. We have a local monthly Meet & Greet event that will move form place to place. The event is still using the same cache listing and just gets updated with the new details every month and although I have attended 4/6 meeting I have only logged an attended oncem I have posted a note the other three time.

Using the I found it a second time 50 feet from the caches original location I would get to log one of my own caches. Apparently a new cacher thought that my cache was too easy to find so they decided it needed a better hiding place, without logging the new coordinates or giving any idea he had hid it. I went to do a maint. run on the cache and couldn't find it so I disabled the cache. I later went back to look one more time and found the cache about 50' away from where I had originally hid the cache.

Link to comment

Well I've logged the same cache twice, twice.. but both times they were moved clear across a park.. each one about a half mile from the original spot. My opinion is that they should have been archived and new files opened under a new name.. but that's not my call. Both owners accepted my second visit and those of a bunch of other folks that did the same thing. The moving monthly meeting spot question to me is more of a grey area. Technically each new spot is a new find and could be logged, but certainly calling a regular meeting at the same spot a new cache each time is a bit excessive. I guess if someone starts handing out $100 bills for each smilie I might pay more attention to how folks pump up their counts.

Edited by edscott
Link to comment
The fact is, I have seen the hobby deteriorate in many aspects. TPTB keep trying to bring it back on track, but folks will try every loophole and every angle, and argue everything down to the most finite little detail.

 

The hobby is supposed to be about using a GPS (or grid coordinates, actually) to find a box of trinkets in the wild. Why so many folks want to pull the hobby away from that I have no idea. Somebody want to clue me in?

Wow. I never thought I'd agree with something CR said :P:(

 

However I did log a cache twice once. It had been moved about 60 feet. I was passing by with family about a year after my first find, and I generally remembered a cache hidden at a rest area we stopped at. I had no info with me, but my granddaughter and I went to see if we could find it. It wasn't where I remembered it, but we expanded the search and found it 15 minutes later. I worked for that 2nd find so I logged it again.

Link to comment

I SBA'd a cache and it was adopted. The new owner said new find logs were OK for all, as it was in a different container in a slightly different place.

 

I chose to just put a note when I found the new arrangement. I like my 'finds' to be representative of the unique seeking each cache entailed. A slightly different place/container doesn't really make that for me. That's just me. They are my numbers, and they mean something only to me.

 

Now, if it were my CACHE under those situations, I would certainly allow someone to log a find twice after a change in cache location/type. No big deal to me.

Link to comment

I have faced this in the past. Old cache muggled. New cache in a new spot but used the old cache page. They allowed a second find due to the new hunt for those few of us who found it the first time.

 

While I think they should have created a new cache page for the new cache they didn't so I logged my find.

 

Your cache sounds similar. Had that permssion to log again due to the new circumstancs not been there I would not have logged a 'second' find on that cache page.

Link to comment

I probably would have posted a note in this case. If the listing was archived and a new waypoint listed, I would have logged a find.

 

I have logged a find twice on a cache - there were two containers, and I went to look for the allegedly missing one to rescue a TB, so I found both (signed both log sheets, too). Other "multiple finds" I have are LCs and the "temporary event cache" which I've done only once. :(

Link to comment

Snoog, you got brass buddy! ;) First you ask us to read a long convoluted OP. Then before we can reply we should read a three year history on a cache page, with horribly sappy music and no off switch, except my own mute button! :P

 

Personally I really don't give a flying fig which way you play it; I'll think the same of you as I did before this thread. :( But it's been fun seeing others care so deeply. It's just one cache and one (or two smileys). The important thing is it sounds like you had FUN!!!!!!!!! :P

Link to comment

I've not logged a second find for a moved cache, but I did claim a second FTF on this cache. It was a new container with a new log book, hidden in a completely different location in a completely different way at completely new coordinates and an updated cache page. The only thing that stayed the same between the first FTF and my second FTF was the name and GC code.

Link to comment

Snoog, you got brass buddy! :D First you ask us to read a long convoluted OP. Then before we can reply we should read a three year history on a cache page, with horribly sappy music and no off switch, except my own mute button! :cute:

 

Personally I really don't give a flying fig which way you play it; I'll think the same of you as I did before this thread. :lol: But it's been fun seeing others care so deeply. It's just one cache and one (or two smileys). The important thing is it sounds like you had FUN!!!!!!!!! :cute:

What!!! Someone actually had fun while geocaching? Evidence of that would be hard to find in these forums, at times ... :D

Link to comment

This is a little bit different. There is a cache near us that the owner physically removes for about a week every year because of an annual celebration that takes place in the immediate area. He usually disables the thing but he messed up and ended up archiving it about three years ago. Im sure he could have gotten with the reviewer and had it reinstated but he submitted the cache as a new listing instead. Same cache, same hiding place.

 

For me it just doesnt seem right to log it again even though the GC number has changed. It bugged me to see that thing show up on my unfound cache listings those first few months but all is well now since the "ignore" button came along! :cute:

 

Snoogans, the scenario that you have going with that cache is kinda in the open i think. It would be a note for me but i dont see any problem with logging another find since the cache container and the hiding spot has been changed. :D

Link to comment
NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past.

 

I would have logged it as a find, as it is, as you said, a different cache than the one you first found.

 

Jamie

Edited by NFA
Link to comment
NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past.

 

I would have logged a note the second visit. Although its essentially a different cache, its the same listing. The original should have been archived and a new cache listed, but since that wasn't done, its a note in my eyes.

 

I agree with briansnat.

Link to comment

I have logged one cache listing 11 times, and at some point plan on logging it about 30 more times!

 

SR2 – Prime GCE408

 

The Prime cache is located at the Gate to the Scout Ranch and is available to anyone to find. However on the grounds of the camp are 40 additional caches which the coords can only be gotten from the camp ranger/director. I spent an afternoon caching while my Scout Troop was participating in an Orienteering Meet. I allotted my self the same time limit as the “O” meet and found 10 out of 13 that I searched for.

 

It was funny to log those caches that day, as when I was done and looked at my details page it looked some thing like this:

 

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 – Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 – Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 – Prime

 

Well, did I or did I not find it! LOL

Link to comment

NOW, what I really want to know is what YOU would have done in a similar situation, or what you HAVE done if you had faced this in the past.

 

Likely I would log the second find (if it is substantially different from the first placement) and not bother to email for permission.

 

I might have done this once but can't remember (I think fizzymagic's program says I did it once). I know people who have done this once or twice in 3000 finds. I doubt OP has done this more than once or he would not have posted this topic.

 

My point is that this is a RARE event. To log one or two or even six double finds when the cache location has substantailly change does not devaluate the almighty FIND in any respect. The world of geocaching as we once knew it is not comming to an end because of OP's action.

Link to comment

The OP was asking what we would do if we faced a similar situation, either inthe past or presently - I think to address his angst over logging the cache in question.

 

With this idea, if correct, in mind, I believe he is want to overcome his angst at what he has done, the choice he has made. I may be wrong, here - but let's go on.

 

There is a scripture that applies here very well . . . (James 4:17), if you feel something is wrong and do it anyway, it is a sin for YOU (not for others). What others believe is not relevant and will not relieve the OP of his angst, it is HIS feelings that matter.

 

Log the find, if it is good for you . . . or not, if it makes you uncomfortable. It is only a game & there is no prize or reward for sacrificing what, in your own eyes, is right.

 

Just be happy and suffer no angst!!! :D

Link to comment
Am I missing something?

 

Yes, but by the time you came into the hobby a smilie had become meaningless. Folks toss them around like candy. It no longer solely means you found a cache. Folks give them out for all manner of things; take and post a picture of yourself dressed as a clown, pull a bag of CITO out with you, etc.

 

(OP says that the forums have been a bit too calm recently so is that permission to stray? O.k., I'll bite.)

 

A smilie is meaningless? Awarded by the dozens to any and all, like so many snowflakes upon the great mountain ranges in winter? Heck you can even get one for pulling down your pants! Why even bother with placing a container?

 

Now back to the real world. It would be interesting to see the results of fizzymagic's program that ferrets out multiple finds, if it could be run for all cachers with greater than 100 finds. What would it show?

 

Some make it sound like there would be multitudes of cachers with multitudes of multiple finds. I suspect it would show most people (95% or greater) have logged precious few multiple finds. Especially after discarding reviewer approved locationless and regular caches that were allowed to allow multiple finds. And you would probably have to ignore the multiple finds at events because people get carried away during uncontrolled feeding frenzies without adult supervision.

 

I don't doubt that there are a few individuals who have abused the one-cache/one-find foundation this sport was built on and depends upon. And you can no doubt dig up hundreds or thousands of questionable finds as examples among the millions of total logged finds. But to extrapolate that into "a smilie has become meaningless" is a bit overly dramatic.

 

I believe the smilie is actually quite alive and in good health.

Link to comment
I believe the smilie is actually quite alive and in good health.

 

You are quite right.

 

To some, a smilie is the only reward they seek. If a smilie is not involved--heck, if a smilie doesn't come quick enough--they will look for it somewhere else. So, yes, a smilie have value, but still the meaning of a smilie is different for some.

 

Yes, there are relatively few multiple finds and smilies for something other than actually finding a cache. The reason is because many folks will not accept smilies for something other than finding a cache. If there were no visible support for this position and only visible support for multiple smilies then the situation would be different. Folks who believe in one smilie, one cache would feel that couldn't effective enforce that on their own caches. I'm doing my part in not supporting multiple finds and highlighting how a smilie doesn't have the meaning to some that it should have--which is, BTW, that they found a cache.

Link to comment

I have logged one cache listing 11 times, and at some point plan on logging it about 30 more times!

 

SR2 – Prime GCE408

 

The Prime cache is located at the Gate to the Scout Ranch and is available to anyone to find. However on the grounds of the camp are 40 additional caches which the coords can only be gotten from the camp ranger/director. I spent an afternoon caching while my Scout Troop was participating in an Orienteering Meet. I allotted my self the same time limit as the “O” meet and found 10 out of 13 that I searched for.

 

It was funny to log those caches that day, as when I was done and looked at my details page it looked some thing like this:

 

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 – Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 – Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Found SR2 - Prime

10/15/2005 You Couldn’t Find SR2 – Prime

 

Well, did I or did I not find it! LOL

 

Quite cheesy. You gonna log finds for Navicache and Terracaches on this site too?

Link to comment
I believe the smilie is actually quite alive and in good health.

 

You are quite right.

 

To some, a smilie is the only reward they seek. If a smilie is not involved--heck, if a smilie doesn't come quick enough--they will look for it somewhere else. So, yes, a smilie have value, but still the meaning of a smilie is different for some.

 

Yes, there are relatively few multiple finds and smilies for something other than actually finding a cache. The reason is because many folks will not accept smilies for something other than finding a cache. If there were no visible support for this position and only visible support for multiple smilies then the situation would be different. Folks who believe in one smilie, one cache would feel that couldn't effective enforce that on their own caches. I'm doing my part in not supporting multiple finds and highlighting how a smilie doesn't have the meaning to some that it should have--which is, BTW, that they found a cache.

 

The problem is that you care what my smilie means. Your smilie may mean you found a cache and you signed the log. Someone else's smilie may mean they found a temporary cache at an event, or the the pen was missing and they forgot to bring one, or the they stood on their head to collect a bonus. I have no problem living with the fact that comparing two cachers by the number of smilies they have is meaningless. As for those that say logging smilies that they don't think should be counted "cheapens" the value of smilie - I ask "How much can I get for selling my smilies on e-bay?" If everyone would stop worrying about other peoples smilies and just worry about their own we would all be having more fun.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...