Problem Solved

[+The Jester]

After spending way to much time on message boards, I have developed a theory of internet arguments. The longer a debate goes on, the further apart the parties become. They get pushed further and further to extremes in defense of their positions while attacking the other person.

 

I think RK posted originally to vent and if he had waited a day or two to post, it would have been a much different post. But then he starts getting attacked from all sides and the debate rages. If I were him, I'd hate to log on and see what was waiting for me in this thread. It is a rare time when additional debate moves people closer in opinion, and then it usually is a couple people who see each other in the "real world".

 

Bottom line, based on his experience, RK is probably entitled to a little more slack because he has proven to be reliable and responsible. RK should have cowboyed up and said he'd get to it ASAP, reasonable, and feasible. Perhaps acknowledged it is part of his life. Made it know it is on his to do list, and he too is concerned. And thanked the reviewer for the extra time.

 

Peace in the New Year!

This happens in most arguements. Everyone is working on "their side" and don't really listen/read what the others are saying.

[+CSpenceFLY]

You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

 

If the cache is also listed on another site, then it isn't geotrash. If he did maintenance on the cache and left it archived on GC, but did NOT archive it on the other site, that would be the same as muggling it.

 

John

 

There has been no mention of the cache being listed on another site.

Have you read all of the thread? Reread RK's 12-30 "closure" post. Two quotes: "The cache is fixed on the time schedule that I said I could do." & "This cache will remain archived on this site." (emphisis mine)

The cache is fixed, but remains archived on GC. Why would he do that (fix, not remove) if it wasn't also listed somewhere else? And, why does he have to state anywhere that the cache is listed elsewhere, that's his business and has nothing to do with these forums.

 

I think you misread what you quoted but in any event IF the cache is fixed and RK has it listed on a site that allows him to maintain it when he feels like it that's great. Problem solved. I for one am happy that this site has reasonable maintanence guidelines

[+Renegade Knight]

...You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

 

I replaced the cache and will list it elsewhere. That should cover your concern.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I for one am happy that this site has reasonable maintanence guidelines

 

This site does not have reasonable maintainence guidelines. They only have wishful thinking in guideline form. A Reasonable guideline would have worked with an active owner who was going to take care of the cache. A reasonable guideline would have suggested that if the owner's time frame was slow that the reviewer would suggest that another cacher could help them out and give them a nudge to find someone to help or adopt. A reasonable guideline would not solve one problem by creating another one. It's not like the reivewer is the person who is going to deal with the cache when they archive it.

 

I once took a class on the Americans With Disabilities Act. It was a good class. One thing they taught in that class was that in our lives most all of us will have a disability even if it's temporary. About then one of my employees broke their ankle. It was interesting to hear her perspetive change as she got around on crutches.

 

Life happens. It happens to us all. Every poster in this thread who stands on the side of a few weeks being perfectly reasonable is going to find themselves with a problem meeting that schedule, if they cache long enough for life to catch up to them. I've outlasted several reviewers. I'll outlast some of my detractors. Some of the detractors will just go MIA and not even bother picking up their caches because they think they will "get to it" and never quite manage to do so.

[+CSpenceFLY]

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

[+Rockin Roddy]

...I for one am happy that this site has reasonable maintanence guidelines

 

This site does not have reasonable maintainence guidelines. They only have wishful thinking in guideline form. A Reasonable guideline would have worked with an active owner who was going to take care of the cache. A reasonable guideline would have suggested that if the owner's time frame was slow that the reviewer would suggest that another cacher could help them out and give them a nudge to find someone to help or adopt. A reasonable guideline would not solve one problem by creating another one. It's not like the reivewer is the person who is going to deal with the cache when they archive it.

 

I once took a class on the Americans With Disabilities Act. It was a good class. One thing they taught in that class was that in our lives most all of us will have a disability even if it's temporary. About then one of my employees broke their ankle. It was interesting to hear her perspetive change as she got around on crutches.

 

Life happens. It happens to us all. Every poster in this thread who stands on the side of a few weeks being perfectly reasonable is going to find themselves with a problem meeting that schedule, if they cache long enough for life to catch up to them. I've outlasted several reviewers. I'll outlast some of my detractors. Some of the detractors will just go MIA and not even bother picking up their caches because they think they will "get to it" and never quite manage to do so.

 

I keep seeing this "few weeks" thing...you were given MUCH more than a few weeks, why do you keep coming back with that?? You had more than 6 months as a matter of fact! You "forgot" for that 6 months as you said. Well, how are the reviewers supposed to KNOW you won't just forget again after you told them you'd get to it "whenever"?

[+baloo&bd]

I keep seeing this "few weeks" thing...you were given MUCH more than a few weeks, why do you keep coming back with that?? You had more than 6 months as a matter of fact! You "forgot" for that 6 months as you said. Well, how are the reviewers supposed to KNOW you won't just forget again after you told them you'd get to it "whenever"?

 

"This spring, possibly sooner". The former meant it would have been almost a year. As it was, it was 6 1/2 months.

 

From the cache page:

 

==========================================

 

December 29, 2007 by Renegade Knight (1029 found)

The time frame I gave the reviewer was "This spring, possibly sooner". The Possibly sooner was a trip I knew I was making, but was unsure if I the trip would work out for taking care of this cache. Turns out it did work out.

 

They say that insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. I could ask for this cache to be re-listed, but eventually something would happen, a reviewer would ask me about it, I'd tell them my time frame to get it taken care of and it would be archived again. Since having my cache, archived on me in spite of my willingness and proven ability to maintain it, is not my idea of fun. I'd be insane to do this all over again.

 

However I like this spot for a cache. Rather than do the same thing again and cross my fingers, I'll list my cache elsewhere and hope that it's enough that I will maintain my cache even if it's on my own schedule.

 

(archived) December 23, 2007 by reviewer (0 found)

Cache owner has plans to replace this cache but non-committal as to exactly when, beyond 'sometime this next Spring'. Since 'in several months' is much more than the usual guideline of a few weeks, I am archiving it at this time. I'll be happy to unarchive this listing when the owner gets a chance to replace the container.

 

reviewer

 

[This entry was edited by reviewer on Monday, December 24, 2007 at 10:30:32 AM.]

 

November 21, 2007 by reviewer (0 found)

Hi!

 

This cache has been under the weather for quite some time now, so I'm posting this note to remind you to replace the container so new cachers can enjoy this area as others have in the past.

 

If conditions are not conducive to a visit in the near future, this would be a good time to begin making preparations. At the very least, please post a note so that folks know what your intentions are regarding this geocache.

 

Thanks!

 

reviewer

volunteer geocaching.com reviewer

 

(not found) June 30, 2007 by xxxxxx (817 found)

Finally decided to try for this one on our trip back home from Preston. Hot afternoon. Hubby searched high and low for about 30 minutes. GPS kept taking him to the same dead juniper tree. He's sure the cache is missing. Enjoyed the view, though, and glad he didn't slip down the hillside. Now I see that the cache has been disabled; sure wish I had a way to know these things while I am on the road. I print out the pages and enter the coords in case we get a chance to stop, and they often come up missing in the meantime. Oh well.

 

(disabled) June 13, 2007 by Renegade Knight (1029 found)

Looks MIA. To be checked on and replaced as time and circumstance permit.

 

======================================================

Edited January 2, 2008 by baloo&bd

[+Renegade Knight]

...I keep seeing this "few weeks" thing...you were given MUCH more than a few weeks, why do you keep coming back with that?? You had more than 6 months as a matter of fact! You "forgot" for that 6 months as you said. Well, how are the reviewers supposed to KNOW you won't just forget again after you told them you'd get to it "whenever"?

 

The few weeks is from the guidelines quoted by the reviewer in the archive note. If I recall I was reminded in Nov and the Cache archived in Dec. The time from reminder to archive was 'a few weeks'. It doesn't change really change anything. From when the cache issue came up to when I was reasonably able to get to it didn't change. I did have a trip planned earlier that fell though. Life happens.

 

How would reviewers KNOW? Reviewers don't KNOW what's going to happen to any cache they list. It's a crap shoot. The best they get is an educated guess based on experience. However since you ask, I recon if they would quit cycling through so many reviewers the reviewer would know my track record. That I'm not zippy, that I may even forget and can use a reminder, but that I will get to it in time. They would know why I don't normally post my maintainence and other things. If they don't know me then they can either spot me because I did respond to their reminder or they can just wait a few weeks over the holiday season, archive anway and follow the letter of the guidelines. If you are going to treat folks like a number it's best to just stick to the guidelines, follow the program, and deflect anything that comes up that might cause deviation.

 

I give you my word that I shall forget something again and forget at a time when I could have done something. Ever have your spouse say "Do you know what today is?" I have. I have also got to use it on her when I'm the one who remembered. Vindication. She is better at it, but not perfect. Now we both laugh and rub it on when we can catch the other. Then we do something nice.

Edited January 2, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Team Cotati]

One man's litter is another man's historical artifact in a museum 200 or a thousand years from now.

 

An ammo can with trinkets and a logbook would be much better to see in a museum than Styrofoam cups from Mc D's.

 

Hard to disagree with the Vulcan logic of that point, eh?

[+egami]

This site does not have reasonable maintainence guidelines.

 

No one is twisting your arm to use the site and agree to the conditions that the majority of people here have no problem with and see as extremely reasonable.

Edited January 2, 2008 by egami

[+Mudfrog]

As I wrote before, this whole "fix your cache within a week of a trouble report or else you are scum" attitude is a key part of why there are so many lame LPC hides. The guidelines (or their implicit enforcement, as evident in this thread) discourage original, hard-to-reach, or otherwise interesting caches.

 

It's really a shame. And it's not even intentional on the part of Groundspeak. It's a simple matter of not thinking things through very carefully.

No one has even remotely suggested that a person is scum if they don't fix their cache within a week. Heck, the OP has had over 6 months to perform the maintenance and i haven't heard anyone describe him as being scum.

 

I see no evidence that having a guideline, which has alot of leeway by the way, is detrimental to people coming up with and putting out hard to reach, interesting, or original caches. In this case, the OP had more than enough time to complete the maintenance task. It's not that he was incapacitated or couldn't take care of the situation. It's that he forgot about at first and then later made the decision himself to put this cache on the back burner. The implicit enforcement, as you call it, wasn't made until after many months of the cache being in potential need of service.

 

Why don't you try looking at this from the otherside of the coin for a moment. It would definitely degrade everyone's caching experience if there wasn't some kind of guideline. Can you imagine how many disabled and worthless cache listings there would be if we didn't have a suggested time frame for performing cache maintenance?

[+sbell111]

You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

A person obtains permission to place a box of trinkets in the woods and for other people to come to the location to find the box. A person who does not own the box removes it.

 

How is that not stealing?

 

The listing on the website has nothing to do with the ownership of the box. This is actually why I disagree with RK's position that teh reviewer should be responsible for the removal of the archived box, although I understand RK's feelings and the reason for that position.

 

To the issue of the archival of the cache, I also blame RK. He screwed up.

 

On June 13th, after a couple of DNFs, he disabled his cache and stated that he would make a maintenance run 'as time and circumstance permit'. Clearly, he should have simply posted a note that said 'look harder, possibly down the hill'.

[+Rockin Roddy]

You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

A person obtains permission to place a box of trinkets in the woods and for other people to come to the location to find the box. A person who does not own the box removes it.

 

How is that not stealing?

 

The listing on the website has nothing to do with the ownership of the box. This is actually why I disagree with RK's position that teh reviewer should be responsible for the removal of the archived box, although I understand RK's feelings and the reason for that position.

 

To the issue of the archival of the cache, I also blame RK. He screwed up.

 

On June 13th, after a couple of DNFs, he disabled his cache and stated that he would make a maintenance run 'as time and circumstance permit'. Clearly, he should have simply posted a note that said 'look harder, possibly down the hill'.

 

Chain that bad puppy down!!

[+CSpenceFLY]

You indicated that you don't intend to do anything with the cache so it's geotrash. I don't see that as stealing a cache.

A person obtains permission to place a box of trinkets in the woods and for other people to come to the location to find the box. A person who does not own the box removes it.

 

How is that not stealing?

 

The listing on the website has nothing to do with the ownership of the box. This is actually why I disagree with RK's position that teh reviewer should be responsible for the removal of the archived box, although I understand RK's feelings and the reason for that position.

 

To the issue of the archival of the cache, I also blame RK. He screwed up.

 

On June 13th, after a couple of DNFs, he disabled his cache and stated that he would make a maintenance run 'as time and circumstance permit'. Clearly, he should have simply posted a note that said 'look harder, possibly down the hill'.

 

I don't consider it stealing because he said earlier in the thread that he had no intention of going to pickup the cache. That makes it trash. It seems now he has changed his mind and replaced the cache. To bad he didn't do that 8 months ago.

[+sbell111]

... To bad he didn't do that 8 months ago.

From your point of view, it's easy to say that someone could have done something differently. It's easy to make statements about what people should have done when you are looking back in time and not living their lives.

[+egami]

From your point of view, it's easy to say that someone could have done something differently. It's easy to make statements about what people should have done when you are looking back in time and not living their lives.

 

I don't have to live someones life to know that deliberately creating geo-litter is the wrong thing to do. If he's fixed the issue as it seems maybe he has, great. Haven't been following the thread closely lately.

Edited January 3, 2008 by egami

[+sbell111]

From your point of view, it's easy to say that someone could have done something differently. It's easy to make statements about what people should have done when you are looking back in time and not living their lives.

I don't have to live someones life to know that deliberately creating geo-litter is the wrong thing to do. If he's fixed the issue as it seems maybe he has, great. Haven't been following the thread closely lately.

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

Many muggles would argue that all this game does is create litter. Others might make the argument that they hide viable caches and that the only person creating litter would be the one who archived those caches against the wishes of the owners.

 

Either way, the idea that you or I could know that someone else could find the time to do any specific thing related to a game, when there are so many things in our lives that are actually important, is a mistake, in my opinion.

 

I really enjoy geocaching, but I don't really get out to do it that often. Countless times over the last six or eight months, I've told myself that I would go geocaching 'next weekend'. Most of those 'next weekends' have seen me attending to matters that are more important than playing a game.

[+The Jester]

From your point of view, it's easy to say that someone could have done something differently. It's easy to make statements about what people should have done when you are looking back in time and not living their lives.

I don't have to live someones life to know that deliberately creating geo-litter is the wrong thing to do. If he's fixed the issue as it seems maybe he has, great. Haven't been following the thread closely lately.

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

Many muggles would argue that all this game does is create litter. Others might make the argument that they hide viable caches and that the only person creating litter would be the one who archived those caches against the wishes of the owners.

 

Either way, the idea that you or I could know that someone else could find the time to do any specific thing related to a game, when there are so many things in our lives that are actually important, is a mistake, in my opinion.

 

I really enjoy geocaching, but I don't really get out to do it that often. Countless times over the last six or eight months, I've told myself that I would go geocaching 'next weekend'. Most of those 'next weekends' have seen me attending to matters that are more important than playing a game.

Thank you for a very good post. I really like the part I bolded. It's only game, people, it falls way down the list of important things to do.

[+Rockin Roddy]

For me, it's the gas! I am unemployed at this time and making almost half of what I make when working...and even then, I could barely afford to cache! I'm glad that MOST of my caches are within 15 miles of my home...

 

I think things heated up when the attitude RK displayed was perceived as uncaring. I'm glad RK found the time to make things right and has what he chooses, a container listed on another site!

[+Renegade Knight]

...Most of those 'next weekends' have seen me attending to matters that are more important than playing a game.

 

True that. This morning I got a call from my wife. This weekend it's a home depot class on how to do tile. While I would rather go caching or even maintain a cache, it won't get my shower finished off so I can start on the next one. Plus while it's a class that just lets my wife and I do a chore, it is also time together. Our lifes are a mosiac of a thousand puzzle pieces to outsiders. Outsiders are alwasy missing most of the pieces. Part of responsiblity is to know the place of things in the big picture. Caches are on the list, but low on it. I don't like chores but, they are higher on the list. Such is life.

 

One of my friends, one who is wiser than most has a saying. "Something will happen". She's right. Something always does. Most of the time though I don't get to chose what happens, only how I react.

[+egami]

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

Many muggles would argue that all this game does is create litter. Others might make the argument that they hide viable caches and that the only person creating litter would be the one who archived those caches against the wishes of the owners.

 

Either way, the idea that you or I could know that someone else could find the time to do any specific thing related to a game, when there are so many things in our lives that are actually important, is a mistake, in my opinion.

 

I really enjoy geocaching, but I don't really get out to do it that often. Countless times over the last six or eight months, I've told myself that I would go geocaching 'next weekend'. Most of those 'next weekends' have seen me attending to matters that are more important than playing a game.

 

If you want to dumb it down that much, then everything is a "matter of opinion" and "subjective". I don't take that road, personally.

 

If someone sees this game that way from the outside, then I can respect that difference.

 

I, however, am not contesting his ability to get to the cache and what real life implications are causing an issue. I am contesting his deliberate intent to allow a cache to become litter when he has no right to force ownership on to the reviewer.

 

Again, if he's since corrected the situation...good decision, imo.

Edited January 3, 2008 by egami

[+Renegade Knight]

...I think things heated up when the attitude RK displayed was perceived as uncaring. ...

 

My OP was a lot of venting and it was exaclty how I felt at the time. It's also exacly how I will feel next time. Having someone step on my toes is a pet peeve. A big one. If it's my cache and I'm responsible then let me deal with it. Period. The Period is mine. People can interject on my pet peeve, but none will be well received. We all have sticking points. That's one of mine. Because I have mine I understand when I hit the ones other people have. There is almost always a way to work around them. Frontal assault isn't usually it. Angry people defending their own are something I understand. They want to be heard, and I will listen. It's why I can work with them fairly well. Because when I bump into someones sticking point I'll stop and listen and understand. Agree is another thing, but once you at least understand people are more forgiving if you don't agree.

[+Rockin Roddy]

...I think things heated up when the attitude RK displayed was perceived as uncaring. ...

 

My OP was a lot of venting and it was exaclty how I felt at the time. It's also exacly how I will feel next time. Having someone step on my toes is a pet peeve. A big one. If it's my cache and I'm responsible then let me deal with it. Period. The Period is mine. People can interject on my pet peeve, but none will be well received. We all have sticking points. That's one of mine. Because I have mine I understand when I hit the ones other people have. There is almost always a way to work around them. Frontal assault isn't usually it. Angry people defending their own are something I understand. They want to be heard, and I will listen. It's why I can work with them fairly well. Because when I bump into someones sticking point I'll stop and listen and understand. Agree is another thing, but once you at least understand people are more forgiving if you don't agree.

 

Agreed!! and understood!

Edited January 3, 2008 by Rockin Roddy

[+sbell111]

...Most of those 'next weekends' have seen me attending to matters that are more important than playing a game.

True that. This morning I got a call from my wife. This weekend it's a home depot class on how to do tile. ...

Let me know how that class goes. My wife and I were thinking about taking it. It's right behind building an outbuilding for all the yard equipment so we can actually get a second car in the garage and allow me to put a honest to goodness woodshop back together (which should lead to a few more of my items in the CCC thread).