Jump to content

Unique Cache or Bad for the Game?


Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Thank you tozainamboku, you illustrated my thoughts exactly. Also, I am not attacking TotemLake. I am just attacking this line of reasoning. In fact, after checking his profile I see he is my kind of person. TotemLake actually uses his digital camera when caching. I am amazed at caches that have 80+ logs and not a single picture taken. I try to take a picture at every cache I visit. Thank you TotemLake.

:D It's all good. I was a little quick on the draw the last time. I've made an error or two in my posts and have come to realize a long time ago the only way to maintain a good discussion is to keep it polite in spite of my desire to really post the thrice edited original. :) In fact, I intentionally put in this post to illustrate that very point.

 

My advise is try to keep these forums in perspective though. They do not represent the game. The do represent a fairly motley group of people. :) Remember that and your enjoyment of the game will thrive.

 

I hope to meet you on the trail someday.

 

Cheers!

TL

Link to comment
Everyday I come to these forums it slowly sucks the enjoyment out of geocaching.

And yet, you keep coming back... :)

 

I'm reminded of some taggers my agency caught covering the side of a house with their filth. When the arresting officer described their activities as defacing property, they, in complete sincerity, exclaimed that what they do is art, and therefore, can never be seen as vandalism. In that particular case, my sympathies were with the homeowner. If someone puts something on a piece of property that doesn't belong to them, regardless of that item's value, and the owner of said property doesn't want it there, that property has been defaced. Whether it's a customized set of initials deep inside the fender well of a car, or a perfectly rendered Mona Lisa on the side of a barn is irrelevant. The owner of the property should be the only one dictating if the vandalism is OK. If this is such a minor matter, as some have opined, perhaps a phone call could straighten it out? A simple note from the owner of the phone, saying it's OK to write on my phone book should do it. In fact, I'm kind of surprised that the cache owner hadn't done that when this first came to a head. After all, if "everybody" knows it's OK to damage phone books, then the owners shouldn't have a problem with it. :)

Link to comment

Let's be honest with ourselves.

 

I suspect that the OP's endgame WAS to have this cache archived. WHile he did not name the cache in question, he gave so much information that it was easily identified. The discussion was never about the issue, it was always about the specific cache.

 

It is so wonderfully refreshing and unusual in these forums that the non-accusatory (is that a word?) word "suspect" was chosen. Usually a person would have seen the phrase "I know" or "It is obvious."

 

One nice thing about the typed language: It can't drip with sarcasm; the reader has to draw it out based on context, their own opinions, and their own frame of referance. :rolleyes:

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the last statement! The cache was unique in my geocaching finds so I had to discuss the specific cache. That cache is one of the only ones that I have seen that made me a bit uncomfortable about the how the game is portrayed. Won't mention the other cache because I would hate to set off another firestorm and besides someone just placed a needs maintenance note on it so the reviewer will probably take care of it soon.

Link to comment

I drive a route truck and travel about 800 miles each week... i'm in a different area every day but every week my days I'm in the same area (monday hurlock, tuesday easton, wednesday ocean city, thursday chestertown, friday harbeson). Soooo for ME maintaining a cache in those areas would be EASY for ME.

 

As for defacing the phone book... around HERE>.... most phone books have been removed or destroyed for whatever reason... it is POSSIBLE.... the cache owner SUPPLIED the phone book.

 

My wife and I are foster parents... and there is a paralell to foster parenting and geocaching.... each child's case is different and specific to that child... in caching... each cache is specific to the cacher and the area...

Link to comment

Let's be honest with ourselves.

 

I suspect that the OP's endgame WAS to have this cache archived. WHile he did not name the cache in question, he gave so much information that it was easily identified. The discussion was never about the issue, it was always about the specific cache.

 

It is so wonderfully refreshing and unusual in these forums that the non-accusatory (is that a word?) word "suspect" was chosen. Usually a person would have seen the phrase "I know" or "It is obvious."

 

One nice thing about the typed language: It can't drip with sarcasm; the reader has to draw it out based on context, their own opinions, and their own frame of referance. :blink:

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the last statement! The cache was unique in my geocaching finds so I had to discuss the specific cache. That cache is one of the only ones that I have seen that made me a bit uncomfortable about the how the game is portrayed. Won't mention the other cache because I would hate to set off another firestorm and besides someone just placed a needs maintenance note on it so the reviewer will probably take care of it soon.

So if I am reading your post correctly you are saying that your original purpose for starting this thread was to have the cache in question archived. Why didn't you have the good manners and intestinal fortitude to simply post an SBA on the cache and be done with it?

Link to comment

Let's be honest with ourselves.

 

I suspect that the OP's endgame WAS to have this cache archived. WHile he did not name the cache in question, he gave so much information that it was easily identified. The discussion was never about the issue, it was always about the specific cache.

 

It is so wonderfully refreshing and unusual in these forums that the non-accusatory (is that a word?) word "suspect" was chosen. Usually a person would have seen the phrase "I know" or "It is obvious."

 

One nice thing about the typed language: It can't drip with sarcasm; the reader has to draw it out based on context, their own opinions, and their own frame of referance. :blink:

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the last statement! The cache was unique in my geocaching finds so I had to discuss the specific cache. That cache is one of the only ones that I have seen that made me a bit uncomfortable about the how the game is portrayed. Won't mention the other cache because I would hate to set off another firestorm and besides someone just placed a needs maintenance note on it so the reviewer will probably take care of it soon.

So if I am reading your post correctly you are saying that your original purpose for starting this thread was to have the cache in question archived. Why didn't you have the good manners and intestinal fortitude to simply post an SBA on the cache and be done with it?

 

What I meant to say was:

 

I am glad sbell111, stopped short of directly accusing me by saying "I suspect that the OP's endgame WAS to have this cache archived." By saying "suspect" sbell111 is saying that based on HIS/HER interpretation of my statements and the situation that I must have wanted the cache archived.

 

So I will say again in plain English: "I was quite suprised to find the cache archived about four hours after the OP. I honestly wasn't intending that, but I guess I would have to say I agree with the decision."

 

In fact, I sent a PM to the reviewer in order to find out how he found out so fast. He quickly answered and know I will be more careful about what I say in the forums. Turns out Groundspeak must have hired some of the unemployed KGB. (This last sentance is meant as a joke.) :D

Link to comment

Bad!

Vary bad!!

Very very bad!!!

 

Talk about maintaining your own cache, (even though I don't have any yet)

I think this would be the wrong way to place a cache, do to the fact persons creating these types of caches would have to check on them almost daily.

 

Who replaces theses caches of they get ripped out or the whole book comes up missing?

Link to comment

We found a cache in our area recently and I would like to get some input from others in the forums.

 

The cache was placed in a phone book at a gas station. The hint was something like " 'X' marks the spot." The second part of the hint gave a large number. As soon as we pulled up to the phone booth, I spotted a fairly large X marked on the bottom of the phone book hanging in the phone booth. Sure enough, the large number given in the hint corresponded to the page number in the telephone book. Glued onto a certain page was the log clearly marked as a Geocache log.

 

At first I was impressed by the "unique" hide. After contemplating, I am not sure that this is a hide that would fit the guidelines. The cache appears to be placed about a 5 hour drive from the majority of the owners other hides.

 

Any other thoughts on this or will this type now become "the rage" after being posted here.

 

Hi Everyone, I didn't know that my phone book cache would cause such a stir. To set the story straight.

 

I did not provide my own phone book.

There is no booth.

There are two phones back2back.

They both have a phone book each.

That's why one was marked on it's edge with an X.

Not the cover.

Log 3/4inch by 9inch long.

Not covering any phone number or advertisement.

 

I visit Yosemite 2-3 times a year, and I did get

approval by geocaching first to place a cache so far

away from home. I had asked another cacher in the

area of the cache if they could maintain it for me.

They did accept. And that's why it was published.

 

The only reason I placed this type of cache is because

I've noticed other caches that were unique, that I liked.

Other caches with logs that said, great cache, great idea,

I'm going to put out a cache like this back home.

Other caches that had a log only, where they were pasted,

or scotch taped onto a sign you had to turn around or pull

out of it's holder.

 

I once received an award for the most LPHides. Every cache

I put out, you already knew it was going to be an LPH. Boy, did

everyone laugh at that event. But I got a great award. An ammo

box packed with alot of great stuff. My feelings were not hurt.

I have alot of 35mm containers. I'm gonna look for some

empty LPosts. LOL

 

Please accept my apologies for any wrong doings.

 

I like geocaching, And I don't want to be looked at as a defacer

of public or personal property. That's not me.

 

biggrin.gif Sincerely, Bigmouth/John bigmouthcacher@gmail.com

 

GC19VEK

Cache is LOG only. No room for swag.

 

HINT: X marks the spot. Take a quarter away from $3.00. What do you have left? 275 --- Look for 275. You'll find the log there. Are you standing at the phone? You should be. smile.gif

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...0c-7c3d14d22d15

Link to comment

It is hard to find a pay phone with a phone book and

the person that placed the cache damaged the phone book.

 

 

Around these parts phone books are stuffed in leaky plastic bags and "delivered" into driveways. More often than not they're a soggy mess by that time I've found it. What's to say that the cache owner didn't provide the phone book him/herself?

Link to comment

It is hard to find a pay phone with a phone book and

the person that placed the cache damaged the phone book.

Around these parts phone books are stuffed in leaky plastic bags and "delivered" into driveways. More often than not they're a soggy mess by that time I've found it. What's to say that the cache owner didn't provide the phone book him/herself?

No offense... but did you even bother to read the thread, much less the post immediately prior to your's (from the cache owner)?

 

Again, as the point has been made several times, even if the cache owner provided their own materials, it's the perception of a concerned cacher or any unsuspecting outsider who might use the phone booth and finds the "vandalized" phone book... it just doesn't reflect well on the sport of geocaching if someone decides to connect seemingly "sanctioned vandalism" to the activity, be it true or not...

Link to comment

It is hard to find a pay phone with a phone book and

the person that placed the cache damaged the phone book.

Around these parts phone books are stuffed in leaky plastic bags and "delivered" into driveways. More often than not they're a soggy mess by that time I've found it. What's to say that the cache owner didn't provide the phone book him/herself?

No offense... but did you even bother to read the thread, much less the post immediately prior to your's (from the cache owner)?

 

Again, as the point has been made several times, even if the cache owner provided their own materials, it's the perception of a concerned cacher or any unsuspecting outsider who might use the phone booth and finds the "vandalized" phone book... it just doesn't reflect well on the sport of geocaching if someone decides to connect seemingly "sanctioned vandalism" to the activity, be it true or not...

The 'perception' has nothing to do with whether a cache meets the guidelines.
Link to comment

Again, as the point has been made several times, even if the cache owner provided their own materials, it's the perception of a concerned cacher or any unsuspecting outsider who might use the phone booth and finds the "vandalized" phone book... it just doesn't reflect well on the sport of geocaching if someone decides to connect seemingly "sanctioned vandalism" to the activity, be it true or not...

The 'perception' has nothing to do with whether a cache meets the guidelines.

Except, in this case, the perception was that the cache didn't meet guidelines and was therefore archived... B)

Link to comment

I think this topic has run the distance. The owner has has fallen on his sword several times by posting the same explanation. Any chance we can let this one die? Or is that just wishful musings?

 

The remainder of this conversation can be opened up as a self-sustaining separate thread.

Edited by TotemLake
Link to comment

Again, as the point has been made several times, even if the cache owner provided their own materials, it's the perception of a concerned cacher or any unsuspecting outsider who might use the phone booth and finds the "vandalized" phone book... it just doesn't reflect well on the sport of geocaching if someone decides to connect seemingly "sanctioned vandalism" to the activity, be it true or not...

The 'perception' has nothing to do with whether a cache meets the guidelines.

Except, in this case, the perception was that the cache didn't meet guidelines and was therefore archived... B)

The cache was not archived for the reason that you've cited.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...