dis-allowed smileys

[+asaxist]

No, really, I found it. I searched, found the 'cache, I wrote my name on the log, I notified the cache owner that there were no more spaces to write a name, he/she should replace the log ASAP. Instead, the cache owner chose to punish me by dis-allowing the smiley, citing the fact that I, as a travelling geocacher was somehow responsible for replacing a log. I travelled more than 500 miles to do this cache; in fact it was a geocahing vacation. I had already depleted my store of geo-rescue materials by the time I arrived at the JAMISON CITY cache GCQWMT I hearby warn other hapless geocachers that the owner is NOT geocacher-friendly, and they do not take responsibility for their own 'caches. (I dunno, I have 8 'caches, I still feel it is MY responsibility to make sure the cache is in good order ( properly hidden, legally hidden, safely hidden, log and geoprizes intact to make fun for all, etc.) I am actually a very mellow person, but to be wrongfully indicted of any malfeasance just ruffles my fur, especially if I get no response. This happened in October of 2007 the owners' name is BYJER, I suggest a boycott of BYJER's caches, if he/she is such a stuffy-butt and dedicating their time into making geocaching NOT FUN for all. OK, yes, I am incensed at the attitude of some folks who want to make something that is supposed to be fun, into something that raises ire and bad feelings.

[+coggins]

Was this GCQWMF?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Well, the ALR is not written on the cache page. In fact, is was not added to the log until after you logged your find. Frequently, I do not read logs before I look for a cache.

That being said, the CO is the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes a find.

With his presumed attitude, I would 'Ignore' his cache, if I were you. Don't let it eat at you, though. Say "Oh, well" and continue on.

[+dardevle]

I too believe you should say O-well and move on. But I always thouhgt that It is the owners responsibility

 

to mantain his/her cache. If you cannot mantain it, let someone else adopt it or have it archived.

[WashoeZephyr]

I too believe you should say O-well and move on. But I always thouhgt that It is the owners responsibility

 

to mantain his/her cache. If you cannot mantain it, let someone else adopt it or have it archived.

 

Wow, that's a whole new low, even for Byjer! (yes, I know the person in question)

Agreed! It should be the cache owners responsibility. Byjer, lighten up!

 

I wouldn't let it bother you.

[+Stunod]

Seems a little too "On Topic" for Off Topic. Moving thread.

[+briansnat]

I think it's wrong for owners to delete legit found it logs unless they contain inappropriate material. To delete legit found it logs because the finder is unwilling or unable to perform maintenance on the cache is the height of gall . The cache is the responsibility of the owner, not the finders. Some people just shouldn't be cache owners.

 

Glad this guy isn't a cache owner in my area. If he was, all his caches would go right to my ignore list.

[WashoeZephyr]

I think it's wrong for owners to delete legit found it logs unless they contain inappropriate material. To delete legit found it logs because the finder is unwilling or unable to perform maintenance on the cache is the height of gall . The cache is the responsibility of the owner, not the finders. Some people just shouldn't be cache owners.

 

Glad this guy isn't a cache owner in my area. If he was, all his caches would go right to my ignore list.

He has a ton of caches out here. I've found quite a few, for the most part they are decent hides, BUT, he has had some that are somewhat irresponsible. One of them being under a bridge, across from the mental institute where tons of homeless drug users like to reside. I was a new cacher when we attempted to find this one (I think it was like my 5th or 6th cache attempt). I had my dad, friend and her 5 year old with me. Needles and other homeless paraphanalia were everywhere. It almost turned me off from caching. It would have been fine if we hadn't brought the kid (who was of course fascinated with everything she found on the ground). Of course I will always now know what Hyperbole means, but at the time it was pretty awful. He also has this listed as a 24/7 cache. Which if your local, you know better than to go down there at night. This cache is next to a large hotel/casino where out of towners wouldn't know any better.

[+Ambrosia]

It's a bit confusing after reading the cache (I think I have the correct cache) page. Does he have something against you personally?

 

There were two log entries that mentioned a full logbook, beginning in September, one of which is a Needs Maintenance. So in October, he wrote a note asking for the next finder to replace the logbook. From that post until the end of the year, there are 7 more logs (not including any that may have been deleted, like yours), one of which mentions the full logbook again. Three of those logs were written after he posted that anybody who logs the cache after his note without saying they had replaced the logbook would have their finds deleted.

 

Why did he specifically come after you? You're not the only one who mentioned that the logbook was full. And he hasn't deleted the three logs that came after his ultimatum. Weird.

 

In any case, he's obviously not taking care of his cache. He must live too far away to do maintenance visits, if he hasn't been able to replace his logbook since it was reported in September. He needs to disable the cache and then go out there and replace the logbook himself. If I lived in your area, I'd probably report the cache to the reviewer and say that the cache isn't being taken care of after many maintenance requests over 4 months time.

 

The listing guidelines on maintenance:

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time – normally a few weeks – in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing.

Edited January 13, 2008 by Ambrosia

[+Trucker Lee]

I think it's wrong for owners to delete legit found it logs unless they contain inappropriate material. To delete legit found it logs because the finder is unwilling or unable to perform maintenance on the cache is the height of gall . The cache is the responsibility of the owner, not the finders.

 

Couldn't agree more. Log book is full, and now logs are simply deleted because a cacher didn't have the materials handy to take care of his cache. That's an unmitigated crock!!

 

Let's review for the cache owner's benefit. Log is full. You should have an idea that this was bound to happen soon. You are responsible for the maintenance of the cache. You now delete logs to punish cachers who were unaware, and had the misfortune to not be able to do your maintenance for you. Get real, if you tried to punish me in this fashion, I'ld smack you with a "Needs Maintenance" and if it wasn't corrected quickly, "Needs Archived." Maintain your caches or adopt them out.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I think it's wrong for owners to delete legit found it logs unless they contain inappropriate material. To delete legit found it logs because the finder is unwilling or unable to perform maintenance on the cache is the height of gall . The cache is the responsibility of the owner, not the finders.

 

Couldn't agree more. Log book is full, and now logs are simply deleted because a cacher didn't have the materials handy to take care of his cache. That's an unmitigated crock!!

 

Let's review for the cache owner's benefit. Log is full. You should have an idea that this was bound to happen soon. You are responsible for the maintenance of the cache. You now delete logs to punish cachers who were unaware, and had the misfortune to not be able to do your maintenance for you. Get real, if you tried to punish me in this fashion, I'ld smack you with a "Needs Maintenance" and if it wasn't corrected quickly, "Needs Archived." Maintain your caches or adopt them out.

Well said!!

 

Making the cachers maintain your cache...sad, really truly sad!

[+Rockin Roddy]

I think it's wrong for owners to delete legit found it logs unless they contain inappropriate material. To delete legit found it logs because the finder is unwilling or unable to perform maintenance on the cache is the height of gall . The cache is the responsibility of the owner, not the finders.

 

Couldn't agree more. Log book is full, and now logs are simply deleted because a cacher didn't have the materials handy to take care of his cache. That's an unmitigated crock!!

 

Let's review for the cache owner's benefit. Log is full. You should have an idea that this was bound to happen soon. You are responsible for the maintenance of the cache. You now delete logs to punish cachers who were unaware, and had the misfortune to not be able to do your maintenance for you. Get real, if you tried to punish me in this fashion, I'ld smack you with a "Needs Maintenance" and if it wasn't corrected quickly, "Needs Archived." Maintain your caches or adopt them out.

Well said!!

 

Making the cachers maintain your cache...sad, really truly sad!

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

No, really, I found it. I searched, found the 'cache, I wrote my name on the log, I notified the cache owner that there were no more spaces to write a name, he/she should replace the log ASAP. Instead, the cache owner chose to punish me by dis-allowing the smiley, citing the fact that I, as a travelling geocacher was somehow responsible for replacing a log. I travelled more than 500 miles to do this cache; in fact it was a geocahing vacation. I had already depleted my store of geo-rescue materials by the time I arrived at the JAMISON CITY cache GCQWMT I hearby warn other hapless geocachers that the owner is NOT geocacher-friendly, and they do not take responsibility for their own 'caches. (I dunno, I have 8 'caches, I still feel it is MY responsibility to make sure the cache is in good order ( properly hidden, legally hidden, safely hidden, log and geoprizes intact to make fun for all, etc.) I am actually a very mellow person, but to be wrongfully indicted of any malfeasance just ruffles my fur, especially if I get no response. This happened in October of 2007 the owners' name is BYJER, I suggest a boycott of BYJER's caches, if he/she is such a stuffy-butt and dedicating their time into making geocaching NOT FUN for all. OK, yes, I am incensed at the attitude of some folks who want to make something that is supposed to be fun, into something that raises ire and bad feelings.

As almost all the previous posters in this thread have pointed out already, the OP's actions were and are unexpected, unreasonable, uncivil and unreal. If she or he wishes to list the cache as an ALR cache, where the requirement that the finder must perform cache maintenance normally done by the owner -- including replacing the logbook if the finder notices the logbook is getting full -- is explicitly stated in the Description section on the cache listing page, well, then at least when a seeker goes after the cache, they know in advance about the ALR requirement. However, none of that is/was true in the case which you cite, and the whole situation is more than just a bit weird. Then again, there are a few bad apples to be found in every sport, hobby and venture on the face of the earth, and geoaching is no exception. I suggest that you let go of it and move on and perhaps avoid caches hidden by this person in the problem, now that you know more about some of their behavioral issues. As for your urging others to also boycott caches owned by this owner, I feel that is going way too far and turns into a vendetta or a "shunning" or "shaming" exercise, which is yet one more product of the ancient programming to be found in the limbic/reptilian brain. Why not just let go and move on instead? Why try to turn this into a battle?

 

Incidentally, I found your use of the rather-rarely-employed descriptive term "stuffy-butt" to be somewhat fascinating. The term is not even yet listed on Urban Dictionary nor on its peer listing services, and in fact, an extensive Google search which I conducted today (Sunday, 1/13/2007) found only 26 unique webpages in the world using that term, with a good percentage of them MySpace pages owned by persons under 21 years of age. Thus, you have shown that you are a linguistic pioneer, on the bleeding edge of of the frontiers of the American English language, and you may someday be memorialized for having helped to introduce the term "stuffy-butt" into the English language. I am a bit jealous.

[+TrailGators]

Thus, you have shown that you are a linguistic pioneer, on the bleeding edge of of the frontiers of the American English language, and you may someday be memorialized for having helped to introduce the term "stuffy-butt" into the English language. I am a bit jealous.

I'd ignore all of stuffy-butt's caches if that happened to me. Edited January 13, 2008 by TrailGators

[+Kit Fox]

asaxist,

 

You should log a "Needs archived" log and explain that the owner is incapable of maintaining his caches, and deletes logs of cachers who don't bring supplies. Even if he deletes the needs archived log, the reviewer will still get the log.

[+kf4oox]

asaxist,

 

You should log a "Needs archived" log and explain that the owner is incapable of maintaining his caches, and deletes logs of cachers who don't bring supplies. Even if he deletes the needs archived log, the reviewer will still get the log.

 

I agree with Kit Fox. It is the cache owners responsibility to maintain his cache NOT the finders. It is nice that the finders have paper with them to add to the log if needed or do some other MINOR maintenance to the cache. It is not required of the finders.

 

kf4oox - Paul

[+horsegeeks]

If I didn't stay in touch through these forums I would never know this kind of thing existed. We, fortunately, don't have this kind of thing in our area. I would never think of deleting a log like this guy did because I was lazy.

[+ICHTHYS]

Cache Maintenance

 

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings.

 

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time – normally a few weeks – in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing.

 

I'd quote the cache maintenance agreement he agreed to when he posted the cache in the first place also when you log it as needs maintenance.

[+briansnat]

asaxist,

 

You should log a "Needs archived" log and explain that the owner is incapable of maintaining his caches, and deletes logs of cachers who don't bring supplies. Even if he deletes the needs archived log, the reviewer will still get the log.

 

I agree. If the owner is unwilling to maintain his cache it should be archived or adopted out. A Needs Archived log would be entirely appropriate in this case.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

asaxist,

 

You should log a "Needs archived" log and explain that the owner is incapable of maintaining his caches, and deletes logs of cachers who don't bring supplies. Even if he deletes the needs archived log, the reviewer will still get the log.

 

I agree with Kit Fox. It is the cache owners responsibility to maintain his cache NOT the finders. It is nice that the finders have paper with them to add to the log if needed or do some other MINOR maintenance to the cache. It is not required of the finders.

 

kf4oox - Paul

In addition to what I wrote earlier, I agree with Kit Fox and kf4oox -- great point and great tactic! ...Owner unwilling and unable to maintain cache(s).

[+LostMontanan]

I'm glad we don't have boneheads like that around here.

[+CSpenceFLY]

I would re-log my find everyday till he left it alone.

[+BarbVA]

Makes me wish there was a member rating system, something like e-bay. Something seems terribly wrong if the cache owner can delete any comments he doesn't like on his cache. Constructive criticism helps improve whatever it is you are trying to accomplish. Allowing the owner to decide what is published or not, tends to lead to this kind of situation, and makes one wonder how many other people had the same experience as the OP and simply didn't bring it to the forums..............

[+Shop99er]

asaxist,

 

You should log a "Needs archived" log and explain that the owner is incapable of maintaining his caches, and deletes logs of cachers who don't bring supplies. Even if he deletes the needs archived log, the reviewer will still get the log.

 

I agree with Kit Fox. It is the cache owners responsibility to maintain his cache NOT the finders. It is nice that the finders have paper with them to add to the log if needed or do some other MINOR maintenance to the cache. It is not required of the finders.

 

kf4oox - Paul

In addition to what I wrote earlier, I agree with Kit Fox and kf4oox -- great point and great tactic! ...Owner unwilling and unable to maintain cache(s).

 

This is a great idea. Sic 'em!

[+joranda]

Sorry that that had to happen. If you find it you should get credit for it.

[+TrailGators]

Makes me wish there was a member rating system, something like e-bay. Something seems terribly wrong if the cache owner can delete any comments he doesn't like on his cache. Constructive criticism helps improve whatever it is you are trying to accomplish. Allowing the owner to decide what is published or not, tends to lead to this kind of situation, and makes one wonder how many other people had the same experience as the OP and simply didn't bring it to the forums..............

I like the idea but someone would find a way to abuse it. I've been asking for this idea for people like that. That's my private rating system!

[+PhxChem]

The next person who finds the used (and mostly clean) Glad Lock I threw in the woods while driving by better replace it with a perfectly camoed ammo box fitted with a combination lock!!

 

 

Wow, a thread with no dissenting opinion. That's when you know you messed up!

[+magking1971]

Nature has run its course. GCQWMF

[+NevadaWolf]

To all of you who don't have to put up with Byjer, feel lucky. This is not the first, nor will it be his last.

 

He is the type of cacher who believes the Hide:Find ratio is the most important and is striving to have his somewhere around 50%. Sadly, this means ill-placed, ill-conceived, and ill-chosen caches. And FAR TO MANY caches for him to maintain financially.

 

Granted he does have a few really creative ones, but anytime a cacher mentions that the cache needs maintenence, the usual response (for both locals and non) is that they are to go out and purchase the supplies needed for the repair. And no, it's not due to him living too far away. Most of his caches are immediately around his usual travel area and he is more than capable of maintaining them.

 

I am on his most-hated list as he (wrongly) believes I somehow am the cause of him being cut out of a tv show and most of the caches around the Pyramid Lake Indian Reservation being archived. So he has made my logs a hit-or-miss as far as deletion goes.

 

asaxist - if you want the smiley, here's my tactic in dealing with Byjer.

 

Go to wap.geocaching.com and log there. You'll need to go back into www.geocaching.com to change your log to the appropriate date. WAP, fortunately in your case, does not send an email notify to the owner of the cache nor to anyone watching the cache or area through the insta-notify list.

 

I, for my part, am going to send this to the local cachers. Having a thorn in our side in one thing, when that thorn pricks cachers who are visiting us is entirely different. We hit the caches rapidly - but it is visitors that keeps our caches going beyond the first month.

 

Like anything else, caching relies on visitors and to insult them is a grave mistake.

[+TrailGators]

To all of you who don't have to put up with Byjer, feel lucky. This is not the first, nor will it be his last.

 

He is the type of cacher who believes the Hide:Find ratio is the most important and is striving to have his somewhere around 50%. Sadly, this means ill-placed, ill-conceived, and ill-chosen caches. And FAR TO MANY caches for him to maintain financially.

 

Granted he does have a few really creative ones, but anytime a cacher mentions that the cache needs maintenence, the usual response (for both locals and non) is that they are to go out and purchase the supplies needed for the repair. And no, it's not due to him living too far away. Most of his caches are immediately around his usual travel area and he is more than capable of maintaining them.

 

I am on his most-hated list as he (wrongly) believes I somehow am the cause of him being cut out of a tv show and most of the caches around the Pyramid Lake Indian Reservation being archived. So he has made my logs a hit-or-miss as far as deletion goes.

 

asaxist - if you want the smiley, here's my tactic in dealing with Byjer.

 

Go to wap.geocaching.com and log there. You'll need to go back into www.geocaching.com to change your log to the appropriate date. WAP, fortunately in your case, does not send an email notify to the owner of the cache nor to anyone watching the cache or area through the insta-notify list.

 

I, for my part, am going to send this to the local cachers. Having a thorn in our side in one thing, when that thorn pricks cachers who are visiting us is entirely different. We hit the caches rapidly - but it is visitors that keeps our caches going beyond the first month.

 

Like anything else, caching relies on visitors and to insult them is a grave mistake.

Hi NevadaWolf, it's too bad you all have someone like that up there. I guess we are lucky down here. I would definitely post an NMA log based on what I've heard.

[+Moose Mob]

Looks like things are under control for the moment. The crowd can put away the torches and pitchforks now. Thanks folks.

[+Mopar]

Looks like things are under control for the moment. The crowd can put away the torches and pitchforks now. Thanks folks.

 

 

[+TrailGators]

Looks like things are under control for the moment. The crowd can put away the torches and pitchforks now. Thanks folks.

 

 

[+NevadaWolf]

Looks like things are under control for the moment. The crowd can put away the torches and pitchforks now. Thanks folks.

 

:looks at her flaming torch:

 

Awww, MM, ya never let me have any fun!

 

[+Cardinal Red]

Looks like things are under control for the moment. The crowd can put away the torches and pitchforks now. Thanks folks.

 

I would think under control would include a find log by asaxist. And if the cache owner is still fond of deleting logs, here's one that's still there:

 

October 13, 2007 by byjer (2582 found)

If the next finder can't remember to throw a piece of paper in the cache, don't bother logging it as it will be deleted. LIL HELP FOLKS!! Thank you in advance.

[+Prfctly Mad]

Disabled for maintenance......Wonder if he reads the forums??

[+UncleJimbo]

No, really, I found it. I searched, found the 'cache, I wrote my name on the log, I notified the cache owner that there were no more spaces to write a name, he/she should replace the log ASAP. Instead, the cache owner chose to punish me by dis-allowing the smiley, citing the fact that I, as a travelling geocacher was somehow responsible for replacing a log.

Wow, talk about "shooting the messenger."

 

IMHO, GC.com gives way too much power to cache owners and takes way too little responsibility for their actions. I suppose it all comes down to resources, but disciplinary action should sometimes be taken by TPTB against nut-job owners.

Edited January 14, 2008 by UncleJimbo

[+Bad_CRC]

so, what was the "proper" response in this case?

 

I'd imagine the "correct" thing to do is log a "needs archived", as wouldn't imposing a condition of bringing a new logbook make this a different type of cache than was originally created ?

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

The next person who finds the used (and mostly clean) Glad Lock I threw in the woods while driving by better replace it with a perfectly camoed ammo box fitted with a combination lock!!. . .

Yo, PhxChem! Here is my log entry on your new cache -- like it or lump it!

Found by Vinny & Sue Team on Monday January 14, 2008

Drove by, saw GladLock container near roadside, but could not be bothered to stop car to retrieve it. While still driving at 16 MPH, threw a ready-made film can cache container out car window with the logbook already signed, landed in same general area as original GladLock, within five feet of it, then drove off. Took nothing, left extra cache container (you're welcome!), signed log already in new cache container; drove off. TNX, PhxChem, for the find!

--Vinny of Vinny & Sue Team

[+egami]

Sounds like we need a "Needs Attitude Adjustment" option.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I looked up the hidders profile, he has quite a few caches that are a very long distance from his home area.

GCQWMF in one of them. He has some that are several hours from home. I would have just put a SBA on the cache page.

[+Bad_CRC]

Sounds like we need a "Needs Attitude Adjustment" option.

 

 

seconded

[+Criminal]

The next time you’re out that way, remove the cache container and log the SBA. While you have the container at home, throw another logbook in and re-log your find. You have now complied with all the requirements of the cache owner.

[+Renegade Knight]

...he has had some that are somewhat irresponsible. One of them being under a bridge, across from the mental institute where tons of homeless drug users like to reside....

The cache was fine. I like finding places like that as much as I like seeing another waterfall. The real issue is your own perception. This isn't your kind of cache. That fine, but it should stop there. It's a big world and you will see a lot of things in it. If I'm not having fun I just move on to the next cache. Sometimes I do that before I get out of the car. I don't call it a bad cache. Heck it may just be that I'm not in the mood that day and next week the cache will be fine.

[+Renegade Knight]

so, what was the "proper" response in this case?

 

I'd imagine the "correct" thing to do is log a "needs archived", as wouldn't imposing a condition of bringing a new logbook make this a different type of cache than was originally created ?

 

True, it's now an ALR cache. I'd not do the needs archived since the cache is viable and can be found. Sometimes you have to move an owner to the bozo bin because even if they have great caches the fun factor will always fall short. The bozo bin is the closest thing you have to archiving owners.

[+geomann1]

I keep my own 'personal official count' of finds in a notebook. If someone has a problem with anly of my logged finds, it just doesn't matter. However, I would ignore that person's caches in the future.

[+egami]

I would venture to guess someone would let people log a "replacement" smiley on another cache if keeping your published count up to par was that important.

[WashoeZephyr]

...he has had some that are somewhat irresponsible. One of them being under a bridge, across from the mental institute where tons of homeless drug users like to reside....

The cache was fine. I like finding places like that as much as I like seeing another waterfall. The real issue is your own perception. This isn't your kind of cache. That fine, but it should stop there. It's a big world and you will see a lot of things in it. If I'm not having fun I just move on to the next cache. Sometimes I do that before I get out of the car. I don't call it a bad cache. Heck it may just be that I'm not in the mood that day and next week the cache will be fine.

Oh this one is just nashty!

If I were from out of town staying at the Hilton/Grand Sierra. I would definately go after this cache as it's about 700' from the hotel. Being female, I would not go at night just out of common sense, but there are those that would. This area becomes a very dangerous place at night.

However, if you need casual laborers, this is the cache for you!

Not saying all his caches are bad, he has a puzzle cache on the other side of the same hotel which is fine. It is in a well populated, well lit area.

I was also involved with the filming NevadaWolf mentioned above. He resorted to making direct threats toward her, not only on the forums but also his profile over something that was so out of anybodies but the production company's control.

Anyways back to the topic. He travels all over the area a lot, so it's not uncommon for him to have caches somewhat far from where he lives. Of course now he's working at a nearby large sporting goods outfit that just opened so maybe he doesn't get out as much. Regardless, it's his responsibility for the upkeep, you should get to log the find!

[+Renegade Knight]

... Regardless, it's his responsibility for the upkeep, you should get to log the find!

Agreed.

[+Texsox]

This is why I stopped logging finds for about a year. And I rarely even opened them. Played tag like in salt water fishing. Touched the leader and called it a catch.

 

How much fun are you having after finding that cache?