DELETING CACHE ENTRIES

[+kewfriend]

I posted this entry for a cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...bc-c3ad8ae5795c on this cache http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7c-fb8edad99742.

 

I didnt consider this offensive - the cache was deleted with this comment:

 

re: its good to talk 20

 

if you dont think it was that good why claim it??

 

My own view is that a cache owner is entitled to delete any log he/she so wishes but if he/she does so capriciously, as I think may have happened here, then TPTB need to step in.

 

What do you think?

 

I subsequently posted another log entry simply mentioning it was my 500th with no further comment. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...e9-e61ef8fcfceb

[+chizu]

Congratulations on your 500th by the way!

[+TMM-Sarah]

Ok...I'm muddled!

[+Mr'D]

Ian your original log seems to have reappeared on the cache page

Jon

 

ah... now I see you new entry?

 

ah... I can't keep up with this

Edited July 18, 2007 by Mr.Dewdrop

[+TMM-Sarah]

Looks like both cache logs are there just on different caches??

[+Mr'D]

Looks like both cache logs are there just on different caches??

Good point. Is it (20) or (23) for your 500th Ian?... this is getting confusing

Jon

[+Windsocker]

I had the same thing happen to me not so long ago when i deleted a "Note" that said "I don't do winsocker caches but this is what your looking for etc etc" he gave away what the cache was it was part of a series so after removing the log he repotsed with maps and photos and sent me a long winded email.

 

I removed the second note so in return he childishly removed my finds from 3 years previously from his caches.

 

So it takes all sorts to make the world go round I now amend my stats adding the finds manually

 

I was told to delete the 20 finds on my caches that he dosn't do but why bother lifes to short and there plenty more caches out there

 

congrats on the 500

 

 

Edited July 18, 2007 by The Windsockers

[+Sensei TSKC]

Is there not a 'guideline' that states that a cache setter, when placing a new cache, should seek that cache to have some permanancy - a minimum of 3 months or so?

 

I see he will be archivng it on 22 July 2 months after setting it. hmmm.

[The Royles]

Is there not a 'guideline' that states that a cache setter, when placing a new cache, should seek that cache to have some permanancy - a minimum of 3 months or so?

 

I see he will be archivng it on 22 July 2 months after setting it. hmmm.

 

Could be that the cache he is making way for was in place, but the web page was being worked on. Meanwhile he inadvertantly put a cache close to it, and he is now "doing the right thing" and giving way to a previous placing. If so he needs praising, not slating.

 

As for the rest, I dont understand yet, but congrats on both of your 500th finds Kewfriend

[nobby.nobbs]

the rest is not worth the effort to type.. just well done on the 500th find

[+Renegade Knight]

...What do you think?...

 

I think a less than nice log, should expect the occasional less than nice responce.

You got, what you gave, though I'd say they were a tad nicer in the exchange.

 

Remember a diplomat can tell someone to go to hell in a way that makes them look forward to the trip.

[+The Golem]

For what it's worth, we visited a few of this series as we headed north for the St Kilda event. There are only so many places you can hide a micro in and around a phone box and the standard of hides grew steadily worse the more we found. My logs reflected what I thought of the caches - I could have said a lot more...

The strange thing is there were some lovely viewpoints a mile or two up the road from each one which would have made much more worthwhile hides in my opinion

[+Flyfishermanbob]

Hang on ... does the cache sheet say 5* 5* . a milestone cache ..

 

.. or does it say:-

 

Difficulty: Terrain:

 

"A quick drive by cache.

 

The title should be a give away for this cache location.

 

Twentieth in the series.

 

Parking available close by.

 

Please tuck this one back in carefully out of sight due to the location.

 

The cache is a micro."

 

Easy to see how anyone could be misled and pick this for a milestone ...... and you are perfectly entitled to slag it off for not delivering the goods.... !

 

 

Isn't it wonderful that we have such an opinionated and informed vociferous minority including representatives of GAGB, none of whom have been close to the cache....

 

 

Isn't it strange that 24 of the 25 cache finders all found the location to be scenically pleasing ... which may corroborate with the legions of coach loads of tourists who constantly visit the area.

 

 

Isn't it sad that anyone would use this to draw attention to their otherwise unacknowledged milestone.

 

 

ps Well done on your 500th Kwefriend

 

 

Slainge Bob

 

 

sp edit

Edited July 18, 2007 by Flyfishermanbob

[+Jaz666]

Isn't it strange that 24 of the 25 cache finders all found the location to be scenically pleasing

 

You must be looking at a different set of cache logs????

 

I'm sure the area is a lovely place to visit, but the online logs for a cache are sometimes the only way to pre-judge a cache, and there are very few positive logs for that one, indeed there is one simple "TFTC" in one log.

 

Perhaps in this case Kewfriend didn't read up in advance.

Edited July 18, 2007 by Jaz666

[+mongoose39uk]

 

including representatives of GCGB, none of whom have been close to the cache....

 

 

snip

 

I am sure Nobby is quite able to defend himself both individually and as a representative of the GAGB.

 

Sorry he didn't call the cache he just said "the rest is not worth the effort to type." you chose to interpret that as slagging the cache of.

 

That may or may not have been on his mind, assuming it is, is conjecture.

 

By the way Congrats on the 500 Kewfriend.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Well done on the 500 - I hope to emulate the feat soon in your favourite part of the world (S France).

 

As to the log deletion - looked unwarranted to me. The log wasn't any worse than most of the others.

[+Big Rab]

1) I DIDN'T DELETE YOUR LOG ENTRY.

 

2) I MERELY POINTED OUT THAT I FELT YOUR ENTRY WAS UNFAIR AND DEROGATORY.

 

3) WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM "A QUICK DRIVE BY CACHE".

 

NOT THAT I NEED TO EXPLAIN MYSELF TO SOMEONE SO FULL OF SELF IMPORTANCE...BUT:

 

4) THIS CACHE WAS PLACED FOR THE WEST COAST CACHE BASH. AT THE TIME MUTIPLE CACHES WHERE BEING PLACED BY LOCAL CACHERS FOR THE CACHE BASH. AS IT HAPPENS ANOTHER CACHE WAS PLACED (AS MENTIONED IN MY LOG) TOO CLOSE AND I NOW FEEL IT ONLY FAIR THAT 'J33P KN' HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIST HIS CACHE. IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME ASK DECEANGI AS HE DID NOT PUBLISH J33P KN'S CACHE DUE TO CACHE SATURATION.

 

5) YOUR REPLY TO MY EMAIL THAT MY CACHE WAS NOT "WORTHY" WAS ALSO DEROGATORY IN MY OPINION.

 

GET OVER IT

 

THIS HAS BACKFIRED ON YOU A BIT MATE..... HASN'T IT????

 

SUITABILY EMBARASSED ...... YOU SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

AS I SAID GET OVER IT

 

OH BY THE WAY HOW MANY 500th CACHES CAN YOU CLAIM????? NOW WHO'S GETTING PETTY????

 

DO I NEED TO GO ON

 

[+mongoose39uk]

1) I DIDN'T DELETE YOUR LOG ENTRY.

 

2) I MERELY POINTED OUT THAT I FELT YOUR ENTRY WAS UNFAIR AND DEROGATORY.

 

3) WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM "A QUICK DRIVE BY CACHE".

 

NOT THAT I NEED TO EXPLAIN MYSELF TO SOMEONE SO FULL OF SELF IMPORTANCE...BUT:

 

4) THIS CACHE WAS PLACED FOR THE WEST COAST CACHE BASH. AT THE TIME MUTIPLE CACHES WHERE BEING PLACED BY LOCAL CACHERS FOR THE CACHE BASH. AS IT HAPPENS ANOTHER CACHE WAS PLACED (AS MENTIONED IN MY LOG) TOO CLOSE AND I NOW FEEL IT ONLY FAIR THAT 'J33P KN' HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIST HIS CACHE. IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME ASK DECEANGI AS HE DID NOT PUBLISH J33P KN'S CACHE DUE TO CACHE SATURATION.

 

5) YOUR REPLY TO MY EMAIL THAT MY CACHE WAS NOT "WORTHY" WAS ALSO DEROGATORY IN MY OPINION.

 

GET OVER IT

 

THIS HAS BACKFIRED ON YOU A BIT MATE..... HASN'T IT????

 

SUITABILY EMBARASSED ...... YOU SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

AS I SAID GET OVER IT

 

OH BY THE WAY HOW MANY 500th CACHES CAN YOU CLAIM????? NOW WHO'S GETTING PETTY????

 

DO I NEED TO GO ON

 

 

I would suggest editing this as using Capitals is regarded as shouting.

 

I think everyone should move on as no one is coming out of this looking good, I am pretty much an expert at making an ar8e of myself in here and its not helpful to the person or the forum.

 

We all get strong feelings and yes this is a place to express them. Though there is a time to reflect and say "enough is enough"

[+Big Rab]

I'm Gonna get into trouble for this, but I could never refuse a big carrot dangling in front on me!!

 

The storm clouds have now cleared and dawn is approaching.

 

Looks as though Mr Kewfriend has indeed made an a$%e of things. He logged his inital 500th find at It's Good to Talk 20 (and made his comments), he then went back and looked at another Good to Talk that being no.23 and saw no entry and assumed I had deleted his entry victorious 500th entry. With regard to his email reply to me who is he to say my cache is not worthy??

 

Seeing red he then came on here bleeting that I had deleted his log which is in fact not the case. It was an error on his behalf for looking at the WRONG cache. DOH!!! (apolgies accepted)

 

So are we to assume that Kewfriend is claiming finds on caches he has not even visited???? So is he really at that magical 500 that us newbies aspire to??

 

As for The Golem's comments re that there was maybe a spot further down the road that was more pleasing to the eye, that would infact detract from the series It's Good to Talk, Which are infact located at telephone exchanges. I'm sure BT would be more than happy in the future to locate telephone exchanges at beauty spots. NOT.

 

I think people need to remember this game that we all take part in needs people to go out and place caches of varying terrain and difficulty ratings for this game to suceed and to allow people of varying abilities enjoy Geocaching. The cache in question is a 1/1 which indicates disabled access, so surely if a more challenging cache was required it would have been plain to see on reading the cache page that perhaps this was not the one for a milestone.

 

As for the comment on cache permanence I have previously indicated that another cacher located a cache within 161 metres of this cache. As he has left it in situ and went to the trouble of placing a cache in the first place I am of the opinion that he should have the opportunity to have his cache listed.

 

Nuff said????

[nobby.nobbs]

ok i'll explain my comment for those who misinterpretted it somehow.

 

congrats to kewfriend for the 500.

 

the rest of the discussion is not worth typing anything about.

 

trust me, should i decide to slag someone off in the forums i am quite eloquent enough to do so, but i'm fairly sure that most here will testify that i don't.

 

life is too dadgum short for pettyness in any form. the only reason i'm typing more here is to clarify my lack of comment that was misread.

[+Happy Humphrey]

the rest of the discussion is not worth typing anything about.

In defence of those who commented when asked - it was a rather confusing situation, although Kewfriend's error is pretty obvious now it's been pointed out. As the title was "DELETING CACHE ENTRIES" I assumed that a log HAD been deleted. Sorry I didn't realise (late night posting).

 

A little sheepish retraction and apology would seem to be in order...but at least it was a memorable 500th!

[Lactodorum]

Ladies and Gentlemen, a few reminders.

 

Firstly the Forum Guidelines prohibit personal attacks and I feel some posts in this thread have perhaps overstepped the mark as far as that is concerned. Any more breaches and those involved will be given an official warning and an enforced break from forum posting privileges.

 

Secondly does it really help to air your squabbles about cache logs here? Remember that the review team are not the log police and that cache owners are responsible for "maintaining" the logs on their caches. If anyone has a problem with this they should report the incident to a reviewer who will immediately report it to Groundspeak.

 

Also if a cache appears to breach a guideline, the permanence one for example, please report it with details to a reviewer and he will investigate.

 

So can we please return to the normal civilised discussion we usually enjoy in this forum?

[+The Golem]

 

As for The Golem's comments re that there was maybe a spot further down the road that was more pleasing to the eye, that would infact detract from the series It's Good to Talk, Which are infact located at telephone exchanges. I'm sure BT would be more than happy in the future to locate telephone exchanges at beauty spots. NOT.

 

 

Yes, I noticed the caches were hidden in telephone boxes. My point was that the series "It's good to talk" weren't all that good to find. I would have perhaps overlooked the phone boxes, (the one near the Green Welly Shop being particularly memorable) and hidden a better cache up the road near the Commando statue...

[+kewfriend]

Firstly I do owe the cache setter an apology.

 

I'm using an unfamiliar PC on Mull (hotel) and without my normal PC reading glasses. I did indeed assume that No23 was No20 and of course saw no log.

 

My back would not have arched a little had I not received the email quoted AND been as blind as a bat.

 

I hope that the cache setter can accept a genuine mistake was made.

 

So chill chill chill and let us go out and enjoy ourseles.

[+Mr'D]

I forgot to congratulate Kewfriend on his 500th cache. Very well done Ian

 

oh... and here's a handy link for you mate

 

Jon

[+Sensei TSKC]

oh... and here's a handy link for you mate

 

Jon

 

Somehow Jon, I knew exactly where that link was going to end up before clicking!

 

[+Big Rab]

Apology accepted Kewfriend.

 

email also sent to you.

 

I hope you enjoy the rest of your stay in Scotland and possibly enjoy some of my other caches.

 

Best wishes

 

Big Rab

[+Mr'D]

Somehow Jon, I knew exactly where that link was going to end up before clicking!

LMAO!

 

So now everybody is happy, Yay

[+Big Rab]

 

As for The Golem's comments re that there was maybe a spot further down the road that was more pleasing to the eye, that would infact detract from the series It's Good to Talk, Which are infact located at telephone exchanges. I'm sure BT would be more than happy in the future to locate telephone exchanges at beauty spots. NOT.

 

 

Yes, I noticed the caches were hidden in telephone boxes. My point was that the series "It's good to talk" weren't all that good to find. I would have perhaps overlooked the phone boxes, (the one near the Green Welly Shop being particularly memorable) and hidden a better cache up the road near the Commando statue...

 

Well Golem if I had been doing a series of caches on commando statues that would have been a good location, but this is a series of caches called 'It's Good to Talk' located at telephone exchanges, so a commando statue would have been no use in this instance. I am disappointed that you did not enjoy my cache although it did clearly state 'it is a quick drive by cache', what more do people want from driveby's? At least you will know to steer clear of them in future.

 

Best wishes & happy caching

 

Big Rab

 

think it is maybe time this thread was put to bed

[+Alibags]

<snip>

 

I removed the second note so in return he childishly removed my finds from 3 years previously from his caches.

 

So it takes all sorts to make the world go round I now amend my stats adding the finds manually

 

<snip>

 

Windsockers... if you get bored with adjusting your finds manually, feel free to post three found it logs on any of my caches (probably less confusing to chose archived ones) just to get your stats back to where they should be.

[Deceangi]

The cache permanence issue has been resolved, and it will remain active for the required 90 days. After which the cache owner will be free to archive it, allowing the publishing of the cache he wishes to step down for.

 

Sometimes by trying to do the right thing, you end up doing the wrong thing.

[+Windsocker]

<snip>

 

I removed the second note so in return he childishly removed my finds from 3 years previously from his caches.

 

So it takes all sorts to make the world go round I now amend my stats adding the finds manually

 

<snip>

 

Windsockers... if you get bored with adjusting your finds manually, feel free to post three found it logs on any of my caches (probably less confusing to chose archived ones) just to get your stats back to where they should be.

That would be great thanks a bunch

[Lactodorum]

think it is maybe time this thread was put to bed

Will do, but before I do I'd like to thank all involved for sorting out their differences in an adult and civilised manner. My faith in UK cachers has been restored