Jump to content

My Dnf Was Deleted


Recommended Posts

Someone just informed me my Inspiration Point Cache is being discussed here. So I want to set the record straight.

 

First, not only did CYBret not tell me he started this thread, BEFORE he started this thread I emailed him he could log a DNF as long as he dates it a year or two ago and not disclose the actual date. So I was rather surprised while he included some of our discussions, he choose not to include this message from me :

 

Well, when someone is stealing them you can’t play as normal. Yes he is getting to me. Would not it get to you if some nut case (he thinks we are watching his house and talks to the sheriff about geocaches on a regular basis) kept stealing your and everyone else’s caches over and over again? He is not a rational person. He is a thief. What can we do other than make it harder for him or just not have any caches? If he had his way you would not have been able to even do a DNF as there would be no caches. I have shut down several of my caches down there as I could not keep up with him stealing them over and over again.

 

If he is watching the cache page, he has already seen your log. I hope he is not. So if you want, go ahead and log a DNF but date it a year or two ago. But don’t have anything in it to indicate the actual date.

*** end of my message***

 

Even when people suggested other ways to get his log up there - wait a while etc, he still did not point out what I had offered to do.

 

Not only that, after I got home after spending $50 for gas and lunch replacing the cache yesterday (3 days after I found out it was gone), I found out that his DNF had reappeared and was locked. The reviewer told me a geocaching.com employee did it without even talking to me. You would think they would at least talk to me before helping the thief out.

 

I would also point out that CYBret never offered to go down and replace the cache if it gets stolen due to him helping out the thief.

 

I realize if the thief is watching the cache page, it is a moot point. That is why I am trying to stop anything that will tell the thief the status of the cache posted. Here is the CURRENT standard language I have on all my caches in Southern IL:

 

There is a problem with a cache thief in Southern IL who keeps stealing all the caches over and over again. We are pretty sure who it is. If you do not find the cache, do NOT post a did not find or anything in your log to indicate it is not there. Email me and let me know it is gone so I can get it replaced without alerting the thief. If you do something like take a picture of yourself or your GPS in the correct place or tell me about the spot, I won't object to logging it as a find. I have also placed more than one container at some of the caches, so if you find more than one container, do NOT say anything about it in your log. While this won't stop the thief, this will make things much more difficult for the thief.

 

Here is the situation:

 

For 2 or 3 years a thief has been stealing most of the caches in Southern IL over and over again. I have achieved most of my caches down there because I could not keep up with him stealing them all. We are pretty sure we know who it is. He has three user names and is a nut case. The Administrator has been helpful but nothing we have tried has stopped the thief. Some have asked if it is just mine being stolen. No he steals them all and will steal them again and again. We have tried members only since it has the logs and that is why we think we know who it is. The Administrator has let us know the 3 suspects are the same person. The guy complains to the Sheriff regularly about caches. He contends they are causing environmental problems (if one of mine was causing an environmental problem, I would take it down in a heartbeat). He says we don’t have permission and I have told him many times we do and who gave it to us. We have tried reasoning with him, but it is hard to reason with a nut. He thinks we are watching his house.

 

I have made countless trips to replace the caches and spent hundreds of dollars just in gas. So have other cache owners. We have tried and tried to get it stopped.

 

What I am trying to do is not have anything on the cache page that indicates the status of the cache. I am trying to prevent DNFs being posted. While these tactics will not stop him, they certainly will make it much harder and time consuming for him. At the very least it will slow him down and maybe it will be enough to make him think it is not worth it. I am trying to put up a smoke screen. If I can prevent him from knowing when the cache has been replaced, he may go out on a wild goose chase thinking it is there which will waste his time and hopefully frustrate him. These things are spread out over a large area so it could take him an hour or two to drive to the cache. If he sees a find with the note on the cache page he will not know if the cache is there and needs to be stolen again. It is much easier to steal something when you know it is there. It is much more problematic to steal something if you cannot easily tell if it is there. That’s all I am trying to accomplish.

 

I have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours setting up very high quality caches. There have been 4,101 finds of my caches and people regularly tell me one of my caches is their all time favorite. We have a very bad situation. I am just trying the best I can to deal with the situation so people can continue to enjoy caches in the area. We have tried everything we can think of. Nothing works. If someone has a solution other than assaulting the suspect, I would love to hear suggestions. It sure would be easy for us to give up and let the thief win. One would think cachers would be more understanding and appreciative of all we are going through to give them high quality caches.

 

I hate the situation too. I had quite an adventure yesterday with trees falling on the road, high water, and wading in a creek up to my waste. I would have loved to post my adventure on my cache page but I do not want to tell him it is ready to be stolen again.

Link to comment

In my previous post I stated,

 

"Not only that, after I got home after spending $50 for gas and lunch replacing the cache yesterday (3 days after I found out it was gone), I found out that his DNF had reappeared and was locked. The reviewer told me a geocaching.com employee did it without even talking to me. You would think they would at least talk to me before helping the thief out. "

 

The IL Reviewer told me he was wrong, it was not an employee who did it but rather another reviewer.

 

So the situation was I had been regularly communicating with the IL Reviewer about this cache and the thief generally. Even before it turned up missing we had been talking about the cache and I indicated to the best of my knowledge it was still there. After I got the DNF, I told him about the report it was gone and when I planned to get it replaced.

 

When I am dealing with the IL Reviewer about the situation in good faith, I do not understand why another reviewer would secretly come in and do something like that without even talking to me.

 

Remember the thief is the problem. I am simply trying my best to provide high quality cache experiences in a very difficult situation.

Link to comment

What I am trying to do is not have anything on the cache page that indicates the status of the cache. I am trying to prevent DNFs being posted. While these tactics will not stop him, they certainly will make it much harder and time consuming for him. At the very least it will slow him down and maybe it will be enough to make him think it is not worth it. I am trying to put up a smoke screen. If I can prevent him from knowing when the cache has been replaced, he may go out on a wild goose chase thinking it is there which will waste his time and hopefully frustrate him. These things are spread out over a large area so it could take him an hour or two to drive to the cache. If he sees a find with the note on the cache page he will not know if the cache is there and needs to be stolen again. It is much easier to steal something when you know it is there. It is much more problematic to steal something if you cannot easily tell if it is there. That’s all I am trying to accomplish.

A classic example of Howe's Law.

Edited by Prime Suspect
Link to comment

I would also point out that CYBret never offered to go down and replace the cache if it gets stolen due to him helping out the thief.

 

First, let me start by saying I am very sorry that you are having this trouble in your area.

 

HOW ever...this one statement just jumped out at me as being so incredibly wrong it made my skin crawl.

 

You are accusing Bret of co-conspiring with a cache thief because he hunted your cache, did not find it, and posted an accurate rendition of what did occur for him.

 

This is wrong on so many levels that I cannot find the words to articlate it, and still have them appear in a family friendly forum. :o

Link to comment

In my previous post I stated,

 

"Not only that, after I got home after spending $50 for gas and lunch replacing the cache yesterday (3 days after I found out it was gone), I found out that his DNF had reappeared and was locked. The reviewer told me a geocaching.com employee did it without even talking to me. You would think they would at least talk to me before helping the thief out. "

 

The IL Reviewer told me he was wrong, it was not an employee who did it but rather another reviewer.

 

So the situation was I had been regularly communicating with the IL Reviewer about this cache and the thief generally. Even before it turned up missing we had been talking about the cache and I indicated to the best of my knowledge it was still there. After I got the DNF, I told him about the report it was gone and when I planned to get it replaced.

 

When I am dealing with the IL Reviewer about the situation in good faith, I do not understand why another reviewer would secretly come in and do something like that without even talking to me.

 

Remember the thief is the problem. I am simply trying my best to provide high quality cache experiences in a very difficult situation.

 

By locked do you mean you can't delete the DNF log?

Link to comment

This past weekend I went caching in an undisclosed location...

 

Bret, I just noticed this undisclosed location mention in your first post to this thread. . . Are you sure you do not hang out with Dick Cheney?

 

Hmmmm....not sure I'd go cache HUNTING with him. :D

 

Bret

:D:D:o

 

how about....... You not post the coords on the web site for that particular cache? If someone wants to locate that cache, they contact you for the coords.. Did someone already suggest this? I did not read all the posts as there were too many for me to read and too many multiple syllable'd words... It's really a shame it has to be this way but there is always one in the crowd. If you can't post a cache without coords.. put bogus coords up there just to fill the spot, then request anyone going caching for this cache contact you by email for coords.. that way you can track who is going up there! ???

 

bummer....

Edited by frogwash
Link to comment

Let me address a few of these posts.

 

First, I deleted the DNF and emailed him to explain why. I also told him he could post a DNF if he dated it a year or two ago. Then the DNF log reappeared. I tried to delete it and it said I could not delete it. So I asked the IL Adm why I could not delete it. What he thought happened was not the case. After I posted my first post he gave me better information and I emailed the person who has done something to stop me from deleting it. They responded but did not answer why and I still cannot delete it.

 

As to, "HOW ever...this one statement just jumped out at me as being so incredibly wrong it made my skin crawl. You are accusing Bret of co-conspiring with a cache thief because he hunted your cache, did not find it, and posted an accurate rendition of what did occur for him." I think a reasonable person would have assumed when a DNF log appears on your cache page the person whose log it is is responsible for it appearing. As I explain in the previous paragraph, this may not be the case as this may have been the work of a reviewer without his involvement. Until after my post, I did not know a reviewer could make it appear without his involvement. If that is the case, I apologize for the remark. Like I said and he omitted from his post, I was still willing to try to address his concerns. It certainly would have been nice if for him it was more than about him being able to post his DNF and more concern for the problems we are facing with the thief and the consequences to others.

 

Yes we thought about not posting the correct coordinates and having them email us. Two problems, the thief already has three accounts, how would we know if he got a fourth one? Another problem is many people like me do not read the cache page until I get to the cache (and sometimes only if I don't find the cache right away). So it could be very problematic at best.

 

While we are almost certian who it is, we are told geocaching.com cannot do anything since we do not know for 100% certian he is the thief. Also remember some of the caches he has stolen take several hours to just get to the cache. Most of these caches are in remote areas so it is not exactly easy to catch him in the act.

 

To the person who says they have ways to deal with this, please email them to me too. As I said, I just want to provide people high quality caching experiences and I am doing the best I can to deal with the situaiton. I would love to find a better way to deal with it, but no one has told me one and we have been asking for years.

Link to comment

Yes we thought about not posting the correct coordinates and having them email us. Two problems, the thief already has three accounts, how would we know if he got a fourth one? Another problem is many people like me do not read the cache page until I get to the cache (and sometimes only if I don't find the cache right away). So it could be very problematic at best.

 

IMHO this seems like the best option. If this has been going on as long as you say it has (though 2-3 years seems a pretty big gap to not be able to narrow down!) it would seem logical that the reviewers/approvers in your area would be aware of this problem. I am sure they would be more than willing to allow you to put false coords on the page with a BOLD note explaining that they were not the actual coords, and why exactly you are doing it this way. Yes, there may occasionally be a cacher who comes along who hasn't looked at the page first, but I think they would be able to chuckle off their own mistake a lot easier than they could when they found out you are leaving a cache page up for a cache that doesn't exist, only to try to "trick" a thief.

And...as far as the thief already having 3 accounts...well, good...you know of at least 3 accounts not to email the correct coords to. It would take a lot less work to look up the account of someone asking for them, than it would to replace your cache every few weeks. If you see that the person asking for them has only been a member for a few days...don't give them the coords, and explain to them why you are not! Maybe even require a certain number of finds before you will give them the coords for this one. If by chance you do give out the coords, and the cache comes up missing after that person goes out...then you know for sure who they are...as there are ways of tracking them down. Again, this all sounds like work, but not near as much work as your current plan is bringing you.

Yes, I am sure this would irritate some people...but I assure you it wouldn't irritate near as many as your current policy will....and as far as not wanting to "feed the thief"...I think you did when you replied to this topic...especially when you stated IN HERE that you went out and replaced the cache!

 

edited because someone LOVES to point out my misspellings!

Edited by The Herd
Link to comment

I just got back in from having dinner with my wife. My favorite cajun restaurant is out of business. I really wanted gumbo tonight. I didn't get it. I had to eat steak instead. That ain't America! :o

 

Anywho....I just got in and saw that this thread had received some new information. I just want to draw on a few things for the sake of clarity of purpose.

Someone just informed me my Inspiration Point Cache is being discussed here. So I want to set the record straight.

I hope you note that I took care to not name the cache in question nor the cache owner. I'm sure it wouldn't have taken a rocket surgeon to have gone through my logs and figured out exactly which cache I was talking about, but no one seemed to bother to do that (one local knew, and kept the name to himself). I was glad to see that the cache remained NAME WITHHELD.

First, not only did CYBret not tell me he started this thread, BEFORE he started this thread I emailed him he could log a DNF as long as he dates it a year or two ago and not disclose the actual date. So I was rather surprised while he included some of our discussions, he choose not to include this message from me :

My apologies if I should have asked you first about posting the content of your email with your name withheld. Since my intention was to keep this all as anonymous as possible (which it had remained until 4:11 pm today) I didn't really see it as necessary. Again, I apologize.

 

As for continuing and posting your next email, I didn't see the point. My issue was with the accuracy of my own caching history. I could no sooner post a DNF on a bogus date than post a bogus find instead of a DNF like you offered at first. Look at all my logs. I post the time (IlliNOISE time) for every log I write. Do you honestly think someone as anal as me would take your offer and post on an inaccurate date? :ph34r:

 

My goal in posting this thread was to find some workable solution to maintaining my caching history (failures and all). I honestly was wanting to drum up more discussion about this blogging idea or "adventure log" as some people have called it. I stated that I believe that a cache owner should retain control of his/her page and I still do. I want some way to own my experiences the same way that a cache owner owns the cache.

 

I'd also like some gumbo.

 

As for a solution to the Southern Illinois problem...I don't know. Perhaps this is one of those extreme cases where bogus coordinates could be published and correct ones sent by email. I know you've already pointed out the fallacy of doing this, but it would provide you with a little more control. All I know is that what you're trying now isn't working and it doesn't take a brain scientist to see that trying the same thing harder isn't going to work either.

 

Bret

Link to comment

If by chance you do give out the coords, and the cache comes up missing after that person goes out...then you know for sure who they are

 

I sure hope no one takes this to heart.

 

The only way to know for sure who takes a cache is to catch them with cache in hand. I would certainly hope no one would conclude ipso facto that the last person to visit a cache took it if it comes up missing!

 

I have never taken anyone's cache, but have been "last to find" on a few. I would be really upset for someone to accuse me of stealing just because I was the last known visitor.

 

Caches get "innocently" muggled all the time. Absent specific evidence of theft by a particular person, the "innocence" of the disappearance must be assumed.

 

(definition: "innocent", the person or persons who took the cache did not understand the purpose of the cache or the rules of the game and found and moved/removed the cache without bad intent. -see "muggle")

Link to comment

CYBret,

 

Maybe I am crazy, but it would seem to be common courtesy that you tell someone you are going to start a thread about how someone is dealing with a cache and quote private messages sent to you when as you say it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out what cache you are talking about.

 

I thought I bent over backwards to try to address your concerns when you were coming off to me as the only thing that mattered was you. I would have continued to work with you to try to address your concerns. I would not have not objected to correcting the date after some more logs were made on the cache. When you say stuff like how important your the 100% accuracy of your precious caching history is, it comes off as it is all about you and the heck with what kind of problems you cause for others.

 

It also seems to me someone offering you a reasonable solution is a relevant factor particularly when you have not let me know you started this thread so I could defend myself if I wanted. Give me a break, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out how to use the mouse and change the year of the cache log.

 

How would you like it if someone was stealing your caches over and over again? I bet you would have more understanding for those who have spent hundreds of hours to provide quality caching experience and conclude having a 100% accurate record is not the most important thing in the world and maybe you should be more considerate of those trying to provide quality caches under very difficult circumstances.

 

You state, "All I know is that what you're trying now isn't working and it doesn't take a brain scientist to see that trying the same thing harder isn't going to work either." How do you know it is not working? How do you know when the cache was stolen? It could have easily been stolen before I tried these tactics a short time ago. Why should not I be able to try the best thing I can think of to provide others great caching experiences? You never bothered to even ask about what else is going on or tried to provide any productive suggestions. There is other stuff happening that I am not going to post on this list. I think it will work or at least help the situation. I think I should be able to try it. It is a game. There is a thief. Under these circumstance there should be understanding, support, and flexibility.

 

You stated, "I stated that I believe that a cache owner should retain control of his/her page and I still do." Well thanks to you starting this without letting me know so I could defend myself, I don't have control of my cache page anymore. As I have pointed out, a reviewer from another state went and put your DNF log up and made it so I cannot delete it without discussing it with me or even telling me he did it. Since you know I do not want it there, if you think I should control my cache page, why don't you delete it or change the date like I suggested? The reviewer who did it refuses to undo it or tell me why he did it or poit to what rule says I cannot delete a DNF. He says I should just let the thief win and steal all the caches. So it is OK to steal caches, but not OK to delete a DNF on my own cache page?

 

I am heading up your way in the morning and will be doing some caching. Maybe I will visit some of yours (NOT a threat to show you what it is like to deal with stolen caches).

 

The Herd,

 

I appreciate your suggestion. Maybe it will come to that. I know how I am with reading cache pages and many times 24 point bold on my cache pages does not get people reading it. I am heading to Champaign IL tommorow and have not looked at the cache page for a single cache. I rarely read a cache page before I get to a cache. So I am not ready for that. I'd like to be able to try out my new tactic of trying to confuse him to see how it works. I just recently started doing it. Maybe it will work, at the very least it will make it harder for him to steal the caches.

 

And I would like to hear more suggestions on what to do.

Link to comment

Yes we thought about not posting the correct coordinates and having them email us. Two problems, the thief already has three accounts, how would we know if he got a fourth one? Another problem is many people like me do not read the cache page until I get to the cache (and sometimes only if I don't find the cache right away). So it could be very problematic at best.

 

IMHO this seems like the best option. ...

 

I did that with one cache. It's a Pain in the butt. Each new person could be another sock puppet and you can't just trust them until they have some history that proves to you that they are legit. Plus each single find on the cache takes work. It's not much work but it's not sustainable beyond a certain number of caches because it takes time. Time multiplied by the finds on each cache. It adds up. It flat out takes the fun out of having placed the cache.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

I found it interesting that another reviewer undeleted your log.

 

I had a DNF deleted recently on an archived cache. I asked the owner why, and he said he thought he needed to delete all the logs in order to archive the cache. I emailed the reviewer who had archived the cache asking for log reinstatement, and the reviewer said that he could only reinstate my log if I had the cache owner email him asking for reinstatement. (I decided that would just be too confusing and resubmitted my log. The owner left it the second time. Now it takes up twice as much storage on GC.com servers.)

Edited by kablooey
Link to comment

Possible solutions?

 

Maybe try some puzzle caches. Perhaps the thief will avoid those if he can't figure out the location easily.

 

Key locks or combo locks?

 

Maybe there's some way to get local law enforcement involved? That's probably trickier, but maybe somebody here has some knowledge in that area?

Link to comment
What I am trying to do is not have anything on the cache page that indicates the status of the cache. I am trying to prevent DNFs being posted. While these tactics will not stop him, they certainly will make it much harder and time consuming for him. At the very least it will slow him down and maybe it will be enough to make him think it is not worth it. I am trying to put up a smoke screen. If I can prevent him from knowing when the cache has been replaced, he may go out on a wild goose chase thinking it is there which will waste his time and hopefully frustrate him.

 

Are you also deleting found it logs? I think these would give him a better sense of whether or not a cache is there than a DNF does. If he sees a DNF he can sit back, satisfied that the cache is gone. If he sees a found it, then he knows its time to go out there again and do his deed.

 

I think if you really wanted to frustrate him, you should create a few sock accounts and log found its on caches you know aren't there. Unfortunately that may also frustrate many local cachers, unless they are in on it.

Link to comment

A quick response before heading out of town.

 

Very interesting ideal about a few sock accounts. Thanks. That could help.

 

How would he know the cache is there from a found log? I am indicating on the cache page if it is not there and they can show me they were there, I will not object to to them logging it as a find as long as they do not indicate in the log it is not there. That is a key point of the smoke screen. That is also the part of the smoke screen I am having the trouble with. It seems to me there should be understanding and flexibility when you are dealing with a thief, not contentions I am trying to turn the cache into a virtual which is not allowed. It seems to me the reviewers should have the flexibilty to waive or bend rules when you are fighting a thief. So I am not sure if I am even going to be allowed to keep this key part of the best thing I can thing of to provide a high quality caching experience under these difficult circumstances.

 

What I am trying to do is not have anything on the cache page that indicates the status of the cache. I am trying to prevent DNFs being posted. While these tactics will not stop him, they certainly will make it much harder and time consuming for him. At the very least it will slow him down and maybe it will be enough to make him think it is not worth it. I am trying to put up a smoke screen. If I can prevent him from knowing when the cache has been replaced, he may go out on a wild goose chase thinking it is there which will waste his time and hopefully frustrate him.

 

Are you also deleting found it logs? I think these would give him a better sense of whether or not a cache is there than a DNF does. If he sees a DNF he can sit back, satisfied that the cache is gone. If he sees a found it, then he knows its time to go out there again and do his deed.

 

I think if you really wanted to frustrate him, you should create a few sock accounts and log found its on caches you know aren't there. Unfortunately that may also frustrate many local cachers, unless they are in on it.

Link to comment
Maybe I am crazy, but it would seem to be common courtesy that you tell someone you are going to start a thread about how someone is dealing with a cache and quote private messages sent to you when as you say it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out what cache you are talking about.

 

Once again, I apologize. My own thought is that one: the communication belonged to me as much as it belonged to you. Two: There was nothing damning in the email that would have caused you trouble and three: until you announced yourself here the communication had remained anonymous to everyone except those with personal knowledge of the cache.

 

Also, you didn't make your suggestion that I log my DNF on a bogus date until about two hours after I started this thread. You never said anything about changing the date back later.

 

When you say stuff like how important your the 100% accuracy of your precious caching history is, it comes off as it is all about you and the heck with what kind of problems you cause for others.

 

If only more people could figure out that it's all about me! Life would be so much easier! :ph34r:

 

No, it's not about me, it's about accuracy. It's about finding a solution that goes beyond just one cache thief in one area. It's about retaining everyone's experiences and allowing them to share them with the rest of the community.

 

You state, "All I know is that what you're trying now isn't working and it doesn't take a brain scientist to see that trying the same thing harder isn't going to work either." How do you know it is not working?

 

I guess I don't. Please, carry on.

 

Or, maybe you could try something different. The Herd's idea isn't a bad one, although it would take some work and some special dispensation from Groundspeak. I'm sure they're interested in keeping your caches from being stolen as well and probably also interested in allowing cachers to write accurate logs.

 

ILReviewer is great to work with. I'm sure between the two of you it will be possible to come up with a reasonable solution. Here's my suggestion (obviously not from a rocket surgeon or a brain scientist):

 

1. Take the herd's idea...require an email from the cacher if they want the actual coordinates for the cache. According to the guidelines you'll need special permission for that. List it as a mystery/puzzle cache. Even people like me who don't read whole cache pages notice things like big question marks at the top of the page.

 

But move beyond just doing that.

 

2. Since this cache is special (it really is) make it a "Milestone cache." In other words tell people, "You're only allowed to log this cache after you've logged 100 finds."....or 300, 500, whatever. Sure, that's going to frustrate some, but I really doubt that your cache thief is going to go out and fake 500 finds just to steal your one cache.

 

3. Monitor everything. Require the emails be sent through the Groundspeak server, share every email with your reviewer. Keep an eye on the cache. You talk about how far of a trip it is for you to go to the cache, but you also say that other cachers are having the same problem. I would think that you're ready to work together to see this problem go away. Is there someone closer who would help you maintain the cache and make occasional visits to insure the container is still there?

 

And once again, Myotis, I have to thank you for bringing me and my friends to the area. We came back to Central Illinois overwhelmed by the beauty of the area we took in. A big part of that was at your cache. There are DNF's that I have been disappointed in, but this was not one of them. I'd love to come back some day and log it as a find.

 

And enjoy your trip to my area today. There are absolutely no mountains, hills or rocks to get in the way of you enjoying the view.

 

Bret

Link to comment

A quick response before heading out of town.

 

Very interesting ideal about a few sock accounts. Thanks. That could help.

 

How would he know the cache is there from a found log? I am indicating on the cache page if it is not there and they can show me they were there, I will not object to to them logging it as a find as long as they do not indicate in the log it is not there. That is a key point of the smoke screen. That is also the part of the smoke screen I am having the trouble with. It seems to me there should be understanding and flexibility when you are dealing with a thief, not contentions I am trying to turn the cache into a virtual which is not allowed. It seems to me the reviewers should have the flexibilty to waive or bend rules when you are fighting a thief. So I am not sure if I am even going to be allowed to keep this key part of the best thing I can thing of to provide a high quality caching experience under these difficult circumstances.

 

Yes, I hear you! At the risk of repeating what I and others have already iterated in our earlier posts in this thread, you are clearly and repeatedly and insistently saying that -- due to the thefts -- it is perfectly fine for the cache owner (i.e., yourself) to mislead cache hunters about whether the cache is truly in place and whether there have have been any finds or DNFs on it recently. What fascinates me is that you seem to indicate that this problem has been extant for years, and yet you insist upon using very primitive, futile, clumsy and very insulting and confusing (to your fellow cachers) methods (such as these which we have been discussing) to try to deal with it, rather than simple sane effective solutions. I suspect that -- like many people -- you may on some level like all the drama, and thus you may be accidentally or intentionally prolonging the drama, by neglecting to implement obvious and simple and effective safeguards (many of which have been discussed here already*.) Either way, your choice, and God bless you either way! I am not here to tell you how to live your geo life, but if you are going to continue to complain on this forum thread, then I feel qutie free to point out to you your fascinating behavioral pattern.

 

*note: I would also recommend modest-difficulty puzzles and prequalifying criteria (such as a minimum number of finds and hides, as well as minimum number of finds of your other caches) in order for a seeker to qualify to receive the actual waypoint coordinates. When we do this with some of our extreme caches, we do set the cache type as "Puzzle/Unknown" rather than "Traditional", in order to alert folks to the fact that some extra work and steps are required to get the final waypoint coordinates.

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

At this time I have not heard or read anything that has not already been done or tried. The person who suggested they have ways to deal with them has not emailed or posted here.

 

All in all, since I am in the same shoes as myotis I know what he's dealing with. The question isn't one log, it's about a larger problem that can effectivly ruin caching in an area. That there was even a cache to try and find so that the OP could start this thread is proof that caching has gone on while the locals try to solve the maggot problem.

 

While I would not have deleted the DNF, it's a perfectly valid experiment in coping with the problem.

 

Lastly the email idea works, but it's not worth the time, results in less finds and takes away from the cache and if you screw up on a single sock puppet it's gone just the same.

 

The question of integrity came up. What an interesting concept. Rather than compromise on a solution that would both allow the cache owner to keep up whith what they are trying to acomplish and allow the OP to retain their own personal interegity a thread is born that dragged a cacher through the mud and harmed their reputation in the geocaching community and played into the hands of person who is the true problem.

Link to comment

At this time I have not heard or read anything that has not already been done or tried. The person who suggested they have ways to deal with them has not emailed or posted here.

 

All in all, since I am in the same shoes as myotis I know what he's dealing with. The question isn't one log, it's about a larger problem that can effectivly ruin caching in an area. That there was even a cache to try and find so that the OP could start this thread is proof that caching has gone on while the locals try to solve the maggot problem.

 

While I would not have deleted the DNF, it's a perfectly valid experiment in coping with the problem.

 

Lastly the email idea works, but it's not worth the time, results in less finds and takes away from the cache and if you screw up on a single sock puppet it's gone just the same.

 

The question of integrity came up. What an interesting concept. Rather than compromise on a solution that would both allow the cache owner to keep up whith what they are trying to acomplish and allow the OP to retain their own personal interegity a thread is born that dragged a cacher through the mud and harmed their reputation in the geocaching community and played into the hands of person who is the true problem.

 

I peonally like the idea of Premium-member only status plus controlled access to the cache waypoint coords, but you are right in that it does make for a bit more work for the owner, and it does limit access to the cache, in that a casual geotourist might be deprived of the chance to find the cache. This is not important to me, but it may be of importance to some. And I respect that this may be just too much hassle for and for the cache owner under discussion... We all choose to play this game and sport differently, and there is room for all...! :ph34r:

Link to comment

Lastly the email idea works, but it's not worth the time, results in less finds and takes away from the cache and if you screw up on a single sock puppet it's gone just the same.

As opposed to the current idea that has resulted in no finds, other than the ones that people have been encouraged to fake.

 

Bret

Link to comment

I also feel that this is an issue to get law enforcement involved in. Permission was given for these caches to be placed, therefore they are placed legally. The thief has been complaining to the sheriff. How has the sheriff responded? I'm not sure if "restraining order" is the right word for it, but perhaps something could be issued that would result in a fine if he does this again.

Link to comment
What I am trying to do is not have anything on the cache page that indicates the status of the cache. I am trying to prevent DNFs being posted. While these tactics will not stop him, they certainly will make it much harder and time consuming for him. At the very least it will slow him down and maybe it will be enough to make him think it is not worth it. I am trying to put up a smoke screen. If I can prevent him from knowing when the cache has been replaced, he may go out on a wild goose chase thinking it is there which will waste his time and hopefully frustrate him.

 

Are you also deleting found it logs? I think these would give him a better sense of whether or not a cache is there than a DNF does. If he sees a DNF he can sit back, satisfied that the cache is gone. If he sees a found it, then he knows its time to go out there again and do his deed.

Exactly! Finally, a voice of reason! :mad:

Link to comment

Yes, the email would take a little more work...like...clicking a link at the bottom that says "view user profile"...and actually LOOKING at how long they have been a member....and then...having to click another spot that says "reply!" Add to that having to type in some coords on the reply screen...and...whew...that tuckered me out just typing it! I just think that this would be SO much easier than making the drive all the way to the cache, walking even further...just to replace something that is destined to get stolen again. Yes, you may goof once and give the actual coords to a sock puppet...but again...you would only have to replace it once if that happened. Yes, a few people may miss out on a chance to visit a great location...but...they wont really know what they are missing will they? If that is the concern...make it a WAYMARK.

As far as the cache placer's reputation being drug through the mud...I really don't think it was...until he responded. Before that, the OP and the ONE other person who knew who it was did VERY well at keeping his name, and any identifying remarks anonymous. Again...it is everyone else who just loves a good dose of drama who kept this going, and made this topic about everything except what the OP was trying to accomplish. I think he was simply trying to get suggestions on what is ethical, and get input on a way to make it so that cachers had a place to "blog" about their experiences on the Groundspeak site.

Link to comment

Some aspects of this thread trouble me. First, I diagree with those who claim that the identity of the cache owner was protected. Which means that I agree with RK that the cache owner has been ill-treated. Most importantly, I am very concerned about the log being replaced and locked.

 

First, the cache location was obvious to anyone with a mouse from the first post. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where he was talking about, CyBret provided all the needed info:

He said when he had been caching, and that he had found others in the area, and even included this line from the deleted log "had a great time getting up to Inspiration Point"

So, you go to CyBret's profile, look at his recent caches, pick one and click "see nearest caches" and look for one that says something about "inspiration point" (I chose Devil's Backbone and Inspiration Point was two caches away from there). We all know that the average forum reader will take that quick click trip to find out which cache is being discussed.

 

Now, I have met CyBret at an event, and he seems like a really nice guy. I know he has done a lot for the geocaching community. I have also met the cache owner, myotis, at another event, and I looked up his profile to see what his stats looked like...Hmmmm, also a charter member, has many caches to his credit both found and hidden. Looks like both of them know what they are doing and it really is just a difference of opinion.

 

I was just mildly interested in how it would all play out. Usually when something like this comes up, someone jumps in to say "their cache, their call" and lots of others chime in to agree. CyBret even suggested that in his first post...but this time, all the later posters act like the cache owner is a raw newbie or an idiot or both. Now I happen to agree that deleting DNFs doesn't make sense, for all the reasons that others have said. Does that mean that I know better than the cache owner? Do I really know the whole story? Should I be able to dictate what can and can't be in his cache logs?

 

The one thing that really concerns me about this chain of events is the outcome of the cache page. The reason I am jumping in this late in the thread is because no one else seems the least bit put off by it....

 

Surely I am not the only person is concerned that "someone" put CyBret's post back on the owner cache page and locked it there.

 

What if the situation had been reversed, and the cache owner felt for some reason that a found log was inappropriate. Would we be so complacent if "someone" put a disputed found log back up and locked it? We have all heard tales of cache owners deleting logs that are unflattering (although very true). Should they be replaced by "someone" and locked? I like my logs to accurately reflect what I have done, also, but not at that cost!

 

CyBret says the cache owner didn't offer the op to correctly repost his log at a later date until after he started the thread. OK, fair enough. Was the cache owner asked if he would do that? Should the person who locked the post onto the cache page at least attempt to communicate with the cache owner before taking that step? Could there be even more to the story that hasn't come out? (How often have we seen that here in the forums!)

Edited by Team Neos
Link to comment

At this time I have not heard or read anything that has not already been done or tried. The person who suggested they have ways to deal with them has not emailed or posted here.

 

All in all, since I am in the same shoes as myotis I know what he's dealing with. The question isn't one log, it's about a larger problem that can effectivly ruin caching in an area. That there was even a cache to try and find so that the OP could start this thread is proof that caching has gone on while the locals try to solve the maggot problem.

 

While I would not have deleted the DNF, it's a perfectly valid experiment in coping with the problem.

 

Lastly the email idea works, but it's not worth the time, results in less finds and takes away from the cache and if you screw up on a single sock puppet it's gone just the same.

 

The question of integrity came up. What an interesting concept. Rather than compromise on a solution that would both allow the cache owner to keep up whith what they are trying to acomplish and allow the OP to retain their own personal interegity a thread is born that dragged a cacher through the mud and harmed their reputation in the geocaching community and played into the hands of person who is the true problem.

 

I peonally like the idea of Premium-member only status plus controlled access to the cache waypoint coords, but you are right in that it does make for a bit more work for the owner, and it does limit access to the cache, in that a casual geotourist might be deprived of the chance to find the cache. This is not important to me, but it may be of importance to some. And I respect that this may be just too much hassle for and for the cache owner under discussion... We all choose to play this game and sport differently, and there is room for all...! :D

 

How would controlling the actual coordinates and requiring a cacher to email for them work to solve this problem? The thief already knows the coordinates where the cache is hidden and is obviously looking at the logs for clues as to if has been replaced by the owner. This is this information that somehow needs to be controlled.

Link to comment

At this time I have not heard or read anything that has not already been done or tried. The person who suggested they have ways to deal with them has not emailed or posted here.

 

All in all, since I am in the same shoes as myotis I know what he's dealing with. The question isn't one log, it's about a larger problem that can effectivly ruin caching in an area. That there was even a cache to try and find so that the OP could start this thread is proof that caching has gone on while the locals try to solve the maggot problem.

 

While I would not have deleted the DNF, it's a perfectly valid experiment in coping with the problem.

 

Lastly the email idea works, but it's not worth the time, results in less finds and takes away from the cache and if you screw up on a single sock puppet it's gone just the same.

 

The question of integrity came up. What an interesting concept. Rather than compromise on a solution that would both allow the cache owner to keep up whith what they are trying to acomplish and allow the OP to retain their own personal interegity a thread is born that dragged a cacher through the mud and harmed their reputation in the geocaching community and played into the hands of person who is the true problem.

 

I personally like the idea of Premium-member only status plus controlled access to the cache waypoint coords, but you are right in that it does make for a bit more work for the owner, and it does limit access to the cache, in that a casual geotourist might be deprived of the chance to find the cache. This is not important to me, but it may be of importance to some. And I respect that this may be just too much hassle for and for the cache owner under discussion... We all choose to play this game and sport differently, and there is room for all...! :D

 

How would controlling the actual coordinates and requiring a cacher to email for them work to solve this problem? The thief already knows the coordinates where the cache is hidden and is obviously looking at the logs for clues as to if has been replaced by the owner. This is this information that somehow needs to be controlled.

In my post which you quoted, my assumption -- as had been the assumption of the other posters who have made similar suggestions in this thread -- was that if the cache were an existing cache, then the cache hider would need to relocate the cache (which had been subject to theft) just far enough from its original hide spot so that a pirate could not find it without the aid of the new waypoint coordinates and a GPSr (yes, this would entail a one-time change of the waypoint coordinates registered with geocaching.com, and would entail dsiplaying some neutral coordinates, perhaps parking coordinates, as the primary listed waypoint on the cache listing page!) Obviously, for any new caches, the relocation step outlined above would not be needed.

 

In fact, we (and other hiders of extreme caches as well) use similar very techniques -- including pre-requisite finds and/or owner screening -- to those suggested by ourselves and others in this thread, for some of our extreme geocaches. And, in this case, we enact these measures not to prevent pirates and thieves from stealing the cache, but to ensure that only highly qualified seekers have access to the waypoint coordinates, and to ensure that any seekers MUST read the cache listing page, including all its warnings and caveats (i.e., about dangers, avoiding trespassing, equipment needed, etc.), prior to seeking the cache. Does this limit the pool of potential seekers? Darn right it does, and that was our intention from the start!

Link to comment

Vinny & Sue Team,

 

Don't you have the intelligence to be able to read and understand a simple note on the cache page? If you cannot figure out what is happening with the cache by reading the note on the cache page telling you, how do you find any cache?

 

How is telling people what is going on with the cache misleading them on what is happening with the cache?

 

When a cache is being stolen on a regular basis, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there. It could easily be stolen again. Likewise, a note that the cache has been replaced does not mean it is there as it could be stolen again.

 

It seems to me the most honest thing to do is put a note on the cache page letting people know what is happening and doing things to make it more likely the cache will be there when they go look for it.

 

You say, "What fascinates me is that you seem to indicate that this problem has been extant for years, and yet you insist upon using very primitive, futile, clumsy and very insulting and confusing (to your fellow cachers) methods (such as these which we have been discussing) to try to deal with it, rather than simple sane effective solutions."

 

How do you know what all we have and are doing? I guess asking someone what they are doing before insulting them and assuming you know everything is your way of life. Someone with intelligence would know what they are talking about before making an accusation like this.

 

You say there are "simple sane effective solutions." I don't see you pointing them out. And once again how do you know we have not already tried them?

 

How will a puzzle stop a thief?

 

Here is another one of your intelligent solutions, "as minimum number of finds of your other caches." So in order to find one of my caches you have to have found some of my caches before. Is not this an idiotic catch-22? What about someone who only has one cache hid?

 

What stops the thief from faking finds and hides? And I bet as soon as I did that, I bet you would start attacking me for limiting people. And how do you propose to convenience geocaching.com to let me do something like that?

 

 

A quick response before heading out of town.

 

Very interesting ideal about a few sock accounts. Thanks. That could help.

 

How would he know the cache is there from a found log? I am indicating on the cache page if it is not there and they can show me they were there, I will not object to to them logging it as a find as long as they do not indicate in the log it is not there. That is a key point of the smoke screen. That is also the part of the smoke screen I am having the trouble with. It seems to me there should be understanding and flexibility when you are dealing with a thief, not contentions I am trying to turn the cache into a virtual which is not allowed. It seems to me the reviewers should have the flexibilty to waive or bend rules when you are fighting a thief. So I am not sure if I am even going to be allowed to keep this key part of the best thing I can thing of to provide a high quality caching experience under these difficult circumstances.

 

Yes, I hear you! At the risk of repeating what I and others have already iterated in our earlier posts in this thread, you are clearly and repeatedly and insistently saying that -- due to the thefts -- it is perfectly fine for the cache owner (i.e., yourself) to mislead cache hunters about whether the cache is truly in place and whether there have have been any finds or DNFs on it recently. What fascinates me is that you seem to indicate that this problem has been extant for years, and yet you insist upon using very primitive, futile, clumsy and very insulting and confusing (to your fellow cachers) methods (such as these which we have been discussing) to try to deal with it, rather than simple sane effective solutions. I suspect that -- like many people -- you may on some level like all the drama, and thus you may be accidentally or intentionally prolonging the drama, by neglecting to implement obvious and simple and effective safeguards (many of which have been discussed here already*.) Either way, your choice, and God bless you either way! I am not here to tell you how to live your geo life, but if you are going to continue to complain on this forum thread, then I feel qutie free to point out to you your fascinating behavioral pattern.

 

*note: I would also recommend modest-difficulty puzzles and prequalifying criteria (such as a minimum number of finds and hides, as well as minimum number of finds of your other caches) in order for a seeker to qualify to receive the actual waypoint coordinates. When we do this with some of our extreme caches, we do set the cache type as "Puzzle/Unknown" rather than "Traditional", in order to alert folks to the fact that some extra work and steps are required to get the final waypoint coordinates.

Link to comment

First a few points of clarification. To those of you who act like I am some idiot to think the thief may not be watching the caches, maybe he does not know we have not been able to find out who is watching our caches and is concerned if he is watching all the stolen caches he might stand out as a suspect. If I was going to steal caches, I would not watch them. And by the way, can you explain how so many caches with no one watching them have been stolen?????? I sure hope the thief is not reading this thread as I am sure he would appreciate your helping him steal more caches.

 

Also for the record, as I have said this is something new. CYBret and someone with him who posted the note saying it was gone are the only ones I did this too. Before CYBret started his attack on me, no one had contacted me to use the log a find when it is stolen method.

 

Neos 1 & Neos2 (I’ve done one of your caches off I-64) thanks for words of reason.

 

I will point out I have been maintaining the Inspiration Point cache and all my other caches in Southern IL for about 5 years. When I started placing caches down there, there was one other cache. I regularly went down there and knew where many neat places were. So I set out to get caching established in the area. I would go to an area and set up several caches to give more motivation for people to come down to the area. I set out to have really nice location or real nice hikes. It was slow but people started coming and others started placing caches. For a long time, I had more hides than anyone in the world. There have been over 4000 finds of my caches. I did this because I wanted to provide people with high quality caches and I still do. It sure would be easier to just let the thief win and not have any caches down there.

 

I just tried to delete the DNF again and could not. Not only have I asked CYBret to either delete it or change the date as I offered, I’ve also asked the reviewer from the other state who did it (I would say who it is except who knows what the reviewer from another state would then do to pay me back) why he did it and to undo what he has done. But he won’t even tell me why he did it and I have asked him several times.

 

CYBret, you stated, “Also, you didn't make your suggestion that I log my DNF on a bogus date until about two hours after I started this thread. You never said anything about changing the date back later.”

 

Here is the message again:

 

Well, when someone is stealing them you can't play as normal. Yes he is getting to me. Would not it get to you if some nut case (he thinks we are watching his house and talks to the sheriff about geocaches on a regular basis) kept stealing your and everyone else's caches over and over again? He is not a rational person. He is a thief. What can we do other than make it harder for him or just not have any caches? If he had his way you would not have been able to even do a DNF as there would be no caches. I have shut down several of my caches down there as I could not keep up with him stealing them over and over again.

 

If he is watching the cache page, he has already seen your log. I hope he is not. So if you want, go ahead and log a DNF but date it a year or two ago. But don't have anything in it to indicate the actual date. *** end of my message***

 

First, you are right I never made the suggestion of changing the date back to a latter date. I did not think of it. The point is while you were coming across to me as unappreciative of what cache hiders in Southern IL have been going through and self centered, I was bending over backwards to try to find away to make you happy. You never responded to my suggestion. The way the posts are timestamped is not clear to me, so maybe you are right about my message coming two hours after you started this thread. I will accept that as true.

 

You, however, never disclosed this or did anything to let people know how promptly I was responding to you and trying to find a solution to satisfy you. In fact, three hours after you say the message was sent, post 19 was made by you and you stated:

 

“I can't post anything on there that indicates that I didn't find the cache. In fact, I look back over the last few finds and I have to wonder, when was the last time anyone actually found the physical cache?”

 

Why did you do that after I told you that you could post a DNF? Your statement is clearly not true and I would argue it is also libelous. Your false and misleading statements have and continue to cause me trouble. You admit it was not very hard to figure out which cache you were talking about. The way I found out about this thread is someone figured out they were talking about me and told me I was getting “trashed” on the forum and “looking quite bad.” As I also mentioned a reviewer form another state has reposted you DNF and locked it. He told me he is reading this forum. I have also had to take all this time and effort to defend myself and my reputation has been harmed. None of this would have happened, if you would have accurately and honestly reported what has happened or simply continued to work with me to try to find a solution

Link to comment

Vinny & Sue Team,

 

Don't you have the intelligence to be able to read and understand a simple note on the cache page? If you cannot figure out what is happening with the cache by reading the note on the cache page telling you, how do you find any cache?

 

How is telling people what is going on with the cache misleading them on what is happening with the cache?

 

When a cache is being stolen on a regular basis, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there. It could easily be stolen again. Likewise, a note that the cache has been replaced does not mean it is there as it could be stolen again.

 

It seems to me the most honest thing to do is put a note on the cache page letting people know what is happening and doing things to make it more likely the cache will be there when they go look for it.

 

You say, "What fascinates me is that you seem to indicate that this problem has been extant for years, and yet you insist upon using very primitive, futile, clumsy and very insulting and confusing (to your fellow cachers) methods (such as these which we have been discussing) to try to deal with it, rather than simple sane effective solutions."

 

How do you know what all we have and are doing? I guess asking someone what they are doing before insulting them and assuming you know everything is your way of life. Someone with intelligence would know what they are talking about before making an accusation like this.

 

You say there are "simple sane effective solutions." I don't see you pointing them out. And once again how do you know we have not already tried them?

 

How will a puzzle stop a thief?

 

Here is another one of your intelligent solutions, "as minimum number of finds of your other caches." So in order to find one of my caches you have to have found some of my caches before. Is not this an idiotic catch-22? What about someone who only has one cache hid?

 

What stops the thief from faking finds and hides? And I bet as soon as I did that, I bet you would start attacking me for limiting people. And how do you propose to convenience geocaching.com to let me do something like that?

 

I have read your letter above two or three times, diligently. I must honestly report that I have almost no idea of what you were trying to say. Your words above are very confusing to me, with but a very few exceptions; that lack or cpmprehension may well be due to severe limitations in my intelliigence and "street smarts." So be it; I can accept that. Responding to what little of your letter I CAN comprehend: Allow me to remind you that the simple, sane and effective solutions were proposed in this thread a multitude of times, and you have rejected them outright. That is your choice, and I accept it. My guess is that you like the drama inherent in not really fixing the problem. Alternatively, you may be addicted to anger, since I saw a lot of anger in your initial posts, and also see a lot of your anger surface again in your post above. You are welcome to exercise that option to hold onto your problem with stolen caches, but in that case, this letter will be my last addressed to you in this thread, as I do not ever argue with people nor try to "convert" people whose minds are set. Bless you, and I sincerely wish you, from my heart, the very best with geocaching and with placing caches.

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

Patron Saint of lost causes

 

stjudeurope.jpg

 

No jokes. Just my formal position.

Briefly breaking my vow of future silence on this thread, and thus showing how inconsistent I am :lol: , I must note that I agree muchly with this icon and note. Thanks for the smile and the insight! :D

And, somehow, Padre Pio of Pietrelcina (now known, I guess, as Blessed Pio since the Roman Catholic Church made him a saint in 1999) comes to mind here as well, because he was a miracle worker and a remote healer; each ability may be of use here. (I even named one of our Psycho Urban caches after Padre Pio! I still want to name another after the Indian saint Ramana Maharshi!) :lol::lol:

Link to comment

myotis, I don't think that Cybret is 'attacking' you. He just wanted to be able to tell of what a wonderful time he had while not finding your cache. Since his DNF log was deleted this is a viable way for him to tell others of his experience.

 

I am sorry that you have a problem with someone stealing caches down in your part of the state and I understand how it could be frustrating. But perhaps, in this case, you are taking it out in a way that is counter productive. It sounds like the person stealing the caches is very determined if it is ongoing and is even done on harder caches. I seriously doubt that a DNF log will do any harm. I would think they would figure that they do not need to bother with that cache since they may have already taken it. It may give them a thrill knowing they may have caused it, but it provides no other information that I can see.

 

As for whether the log should stand, it's a hard one, that's for sure. In the end I'd have to come down on the side of the cache owner. I've seen a few times where legit finds have been deleted and TPTB have said they will not get involved in log disputes. Just recently Jeremy was paraphrased by CO Admin: "We are not the log police.". Yet that is what was done here.

 

It is quite disturbing that someone outside of myotis, Cybret and IL Admin decided to unilatterally restore and lock the debated log without, apparently, contacting any one of them. That would have just been common courtesy.

Link to comment

The volume knob needs to be turned down on this discussion or the topic will be closed. Under our forum guidelines, I do not view the early posts as personal attacks. Some of the more recent posts have crossed that line, however.

 

Please keep the following in mind, from our Forum Guidelines:

 

Some things to keep in mind when posting:

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Link to comment

Vinny & Sue Team,

 

........You say there are "simple sane effective solutions." I don't see you pointing them out. And once again how do you know we have not already tried them?

 

How will a puzzle stop a thief?......

 

 

Make the puzzle so difficult that someone would have to study the "criminal justice" field in some way to get the answer, and hope that if they do still intend to steal it, that somehow they may lose interest..

Link to comment

 

When a cache is being stolen on a regular basis, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there. It could easily be stolen again. Likewise, a note that the cache has been replaced does not mean it is there as it could be stolen again.

 

It is just me. or is this the weirdest logic I have ever read??

 

A find on the cache page OF COURSE means it there...someone just logged that they found it!...duh.

 

A note on the cache page that the cache has been replaced OF COURSE means it's there...you are saying you just replaced it!...duh.

 

Deleting DNF is a diservice to future cachers. If I read Cybret's DNF, I would not have looked for the cache the next day. If the log is deleted though, I have no way of knowing it ISN"T there, and I could look for hours not knowing. I would be pissed if I spent time looking for a cache that is confirmed missing, but the owner deleted the DNF logs.

 

The whole idea of deleting logs is lame and serves no real purpose. There is no way to stop a determinded cache thief by messing with the cache page logs.

 

Ed

Link to comment
CYBret,

 

I thought I bent over backwards to try to address your concerns when you were coming off to me as the only thing that mattered was you. I would have continued to work with you to try to address your concerns. I would not have not objected to correcting the date after some more logs were made on the cache.

 

If that is an offer to allow a completely accurate DNF after another log is made to the cache, I'd take that.

Truth delayed is better than truth denied?

 

(Forgive me if he already has...I'm partway throught this thread and saw this offer...and didn't want to lose my place...)

Link to comment

Ed,

 

I agree there is no way to stop a determined thief. We know who he is and geocaching.com/reviewers won't do anything other than hassle me for trying to provide cachers quality caches under very difficult circumstances. Since we have not been able to stop him, I am simply trying to do everything I can to make it more likely there will be a cache there when someone goes to look for it. My strategy is to conceal from the thief the status of the cache. Many of these caches are long drives for the thief. So if he does not know if there is a cache there that needs to be stolen, it will be more difficult for him to continue to steal the caches. He could go on wild goose chases. It is much harder to steal something if you do not know if it is there.

 

If someone logs a DNF, as you point out you are not going to go look for it until it is replaced. So if there is a DNF, there is a need for me to indicate it has been replaced. As soon as I do that the thief knows to go steal it again. So you could see that I replaced it and then go and look for it and it would not be there.

 

So doing things the way you suggest results in the thief knowing when he needs to steal it and users not knowing the status of the cache.

 

If I went and spent hours looking for a cache that was stolen, I would be upset too. That is why I have no problem with someone logging a find when they find the spot but the cache is stolen. The cache police in goecaching.com have a problem with it, but I don't.

 

I would also point out the first thing on all my caches down there is a note in bold telling people about the thief and how I am addressing things with the cache. So if you knew the situation, why would you look for hours for it? I am warning people about the situation. So they know what the situation is like and if they choose to do the caches, they know the situation.

 

I've been working on the wording for the caches. Here is what I have on it now:

 

<B> There is a problem with a cache thief in Southern IL who keeps stealing all the caches over and over again. We are pretty sure who it is. If you do not find the cache, do NOT post a did not find or anything in your log to indicate it is not there. Email me and let me know it is gone so I can get it replaced without alerting the thief. If you do something like take a picture of yourself or your GPS in the correct place or tell me about the spot, I won’t object to logging it as a find. I have also placed more than one container at some of the caches, so if you find more than one container, do NOT say anything about it in your log. While this won’t stop the thief, this will make things much more difficult for the thief.</b><p>

 

Here is what I am now thinking of changing it to:

 

<B> There is a problem with a cache thief in Southern IL who keeps stealing all the caches over and over again. We are pretty sure who it is. If you do not find the cache, do NOT post a did not find (DNF) or anything in your log to indicate it is not there. Email me and let me know it is gone so I can get it replaced without alerting the thief. I would appreciate people carrying a replacement container and log in case the thief has stolen the cache. If you replace it for me, sign the log, log a find and do NOT mention in the log you replaced the container, and email me that you replaced it. If you don’t have a container and are not pleased with not being able to log a find due to the thief, geocaching.com says you are not supposed to be able to log a find. But if you do something like take a picture of yourself or your GPS in the correct place or tell me about the spot, I am not the cache police and logging it as a find will help confuse the thief on the status of the cache. I have also placed more than one container at some of the caches, so if you find more than one container, do NOT say anything about it in your log. While this won't stop the thief, this will make things much more difficult for the thief.</b><p>

 

Bottom line is the problem is the thief not me. If the thief was not stealing the caches over and over again, there would not be a problem. I have spent hundreds of dollars in gas and hundreds of hours replacing these caches over and over again so people can have a quality caching experience.

 

I know it is not a perfect solution. But it is the best I can think of. While people claim there are simple solutions to stop the thief, they have not pointed one out. It sure seems like you and others think all the burden of dealing with the thief should go to the cache owner and the cache hunters who enjoy the work of cache owners should not have to share in any of the burden of dealing with the cache thief. Should not the cache hunter be appreciate of the efforts to provide caches in spite of the thief and have understanding that things cannot be perfect for them?

 

IMHO, people should also be complaining to geocahing.com that they are not doing a better job helping cache owners dealing with cache thieves.

 

 

When a cache is being stolen on a regular basis, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there. It could easily be stolen again. Likewise, a note that the cache has been replaced does not mean it is there as it could be stolen again.

 

It is just me. or is this the weirdest logic I have ever read??

 

A find on the cache page OF COURSE means it there...someone just logged that they found it!...duh.

 

A note on the cache page that the cache has been replaced OF COURSE means it's there...you are saying you just replaced it!...duh.

 

Deleting DNF is a diservice to future cachers. If I read Cybret's DNF, I would not have looked for the cache the next day. If the log is deleted though, I have no way of knowing it ISN"T there, and I could look for hours not knowing. I would be pissed if I spent time looking for a cache that is confirmed missing, but the owner deleted the DNF logs.

 

The whole idea of deleting logs is lame and serves no real purpose. There is no way to stop a determinded cache thief by messing with the cache page logs.

 

Ed

Edited by myotis
Link to comment

 

I would also point out the first thing on all my caches down there is a note in bold telling people about the thief and how I am addressing things with the cache. So if you knew the situation, why would you look for hours for it? I am warning people about the situation. So they know what the situation is like and if they choose to do the caches, they know the situation.

 

I've been working on the wording for the caches. Here is what I have on it now:

 

<B> There is a problem with a cache thief in Southern IL who keeps stealing all the caches over and over again. We are pretty sure who it is. If you do not find the cache, do NOT post a did not find or anything in your log to indicate it is not there. Email me and let me know it is gone so I can get it replaced without alerting the thief. If you do something like take a picture of yourself or your GPS in the correct place or tell me about the spot, I won’t object to logging it as a find. I have also placed more than one container at some of the caches, so if you find more than one container, do NOT say anything about it in your log. While this won’t stop the thief, this will make things much more difficult for the thief.</b><p>

 

Here is what I am now thinking of changing it to:

 

<B> There is a problem with a cache thief in Southern IL who keeps stealing all the caches over and over again. We are pretty sure who it is. If you do not find the cache, do NOT post a did not find (DNF) or anything in your log to indicate it is not there. Email me and let me know it is gone so I can get it replaced without alerting the thief. I would appreciate people carrying a replacement container and log in case the thief has stolen the cache. If you replace it for me, sign the log, log a find and do NOT mention in the log you replaced the container, and email me that you replaced it. If you don’t have a container and are not pleased with not being able to log a find due to the thief, geocaching.com says you are not supposed to be able to log a find. But if you do something like take a picture of yourself or your GPS in the correct place or tell me about the spot, I am not the cache police and logging it as a find will help confuse the thief on the status of the cache. I have also placed more than one container at some of the caches, so if you find more than one container, do NOT say anything about it in your log. While this won't stop the thief, this will make things much more difficult for the thief.</b><p>

 

 

I'm sorry, I couldn't help but notice that...when people suggested you post a note on the cache page offering for people to email you for the correct coords...your biggest complaint with the idea was that MANY people do not read the cache pages, therefore wouldn't see the note posted....kinda defeats your purpose with the "note" above being on your cache page, doesn't it???

Link to comment

 

When a cache is being stolen on a regular basis, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there. It could easily be stolen again. Likewise, a note that the cache has been replaced does not mean it is there as it could be stolen again.

 

It is just me. or is this the weirdest logic I have ever read??

 

 

Ed

 

Well Ed to tell you the truth the statement made perfect sense to me, however, I have also been dealing with this thief as well.

 

We have gone through months where time after time the thief took newly placed and recently replaced caches before anyone had the chance to find them. When I started caching I was unlucky enough to be last to find on 8 of Myotis's caches. I had posted a found log, the thief stole the cache and the next cacher had no cache to find. Therefore, a find on the cache page does not mean the cache is there.

 

Every time I check on a cache I expect it to be missing and I tell everyone that hunts the caches in the area to enjoy the area, expect the cache is missing and if you find the cache that will just be an added bonus.

 

To put this in perspective, there have been over 60 caches stolen in the past 3 years. We try to get the caches replaced as soon as we can after we know they have been taken. My goal is to have my caches available to as many cachers as possible so I tried to leave them open to everyone and just try to out place the cache thief but that got costly and time consuming. Unfortunately we had to make them Members only and moved them to new locations, in an attempt to protect them. This worked for several months but this winter the members only caches started disappearing as well.

 

I like the idea of requiring cachers to contact me to get the coordinates to my caches - I know this was suggested over a year ago and I liked it then, I will have to search some old emails to see if I can determine why that was not done.

 

As Myotis has mentioned many things have been tried, the note he has placed on his caches is just the most recent and has only been in use for a very short time. When I first saw it posted I laughed at the thought of the thief making wasted trips back out to spots that he has recently stolen caches :ph34r::wub::wub: I see the possible effectiveness in keeping the thief guessing and frustrating the thief by him wasting gas and time. I do not know if it will frustrate him enough to make him stop but I feel a small bit of joy knowing he will be frustrated from this.

 

The reward for searching any of the caches in Shawnee National Forest is the location that we are trying to share with the caching community. The locations are so much better than any box we put in the woods. There is no guarantee that the cache box will be there with the method that Myotis is attempting But what is most important for all of you to know it that there is no guarantee that any cache in Shawnee National Forest is going to be there when you go hunt it. At least with Myotis's most recent method you will still get a smiley for attempting the cache and you will still have the pleasure of the location. I hope with Myotis's method more people will come and visit the locations despite the fact the cache may or may not be there. This is just one method of dealing with the problem until something better comes along. I am open for any and all suggestions that will open the Shawnee National Forest caches up to the most people while protecting the cache, and limiting our expense, time, worry and frustration over this situation.

 

We have discovered that we can not monitor pocket queries so the cache thief is free to look at the caches at will. We have been informed that all we have is speculation on who the cache thief is so official actions can not be taken based on speculation. We just want to find the best situation for the cache owners and cache seekers that still protects the caches. I would like to engage in conversations with the cache thief in an attempt to understand each other and come to a solution where everyone involved would be happy but I need the person that is taking the caches to contact me so that I can better understand the reasons behind the thefts.

I hope it all works out in the end.

 

GEO.JOE

Edited by GEO.JOE
Link to comment

 

It is just me. or is this the weirdest logic I have ever read??

 

A find on the cache page OF COURSE means it there...someone just logged that they found it!...duh.

 

A note on the cache page that the cache has been replaced OF COURSE means it's there...you are saying you just replaced it!...duh.

 

Deleting DNF is a diservice to future cachers. If I read Cybret's DNF, I would not have looked for the cache the next day. If the log is deleted though, I have no way of knowing it ISN"T there, and I could look for hours not knowing. I would be pissed if I spent time looking for a cache that is confirmed missing, but the owner deleted the DNF logs.

 

The whole idea of deleting logs is lame and serves no real purpose. There is no way to stop a determinded cache thief by messing with the cache page logs.

 

Ed

 

The logic makes sense to me.

 

To wit: A find a cache page means that the cache WAS there when that cacher found it. The thief could steal it in the mean time and when you go it would not be there.

 

Likewise if a note is used to indicate that the cache has been replaced means that the cache WAS there when the cache owner left the cache. The thief could steal it in the mean time and when you go it would not be there.

 

(note: there seems to be something wrong with the quote function.)

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...