A couple of etiquette questions

[+PlantAKiss]

1) I see caches that are archived on both my found list and when I do searches. It's not uncommon to see comments that sound like the cache owner intends to reactivate the cache...but the archive note is many months old (3-4 months).

 

Some archive notes are very clear that the cache is finished. But if a cache owner mentions the possibility of reactivating it at some time in the future, how long does one wait before its alright to consider the space up for grabs? I certainly wouldn't dash right out and grab a spot but it doesn't seem right if someone holds a spot indefinitely saying that they MIGHT put it back at some time in the future. (And I'm not talking about a "down for maintenance" note).

 

2) Recently I've seen some caches placed by people that appear to be new to caching and the containers used are obviously not water nor weather resistant (i.e. plastic candy container) and were placed where water will be a problem. In one case, the hider had no finds at all. In this case, I did politely email the hider and gently suggested trying a different container. All her logs mention wet contents and I thought it a kindness to let her know she needed a water-tight container. (She was receptive to my comments.) What is the etiquette when it comes to newbie cachers using containers that are obviously poor choices. Is it better to MYOB and just make a log mentioning cache condition (wet)...or is it good education to personally and privately let someone know why the container isn't a good choice and make suggestions for better options?

 

If it were me, I'd appreciate someone letting me know there was a better way to do things. Then again, some people might be offended.

[+infiniteMPG]

how long does one wait before its alright to consider the space up for grabs? I certainly wouldn't dash right out and grab a spot but it doesn't seem right if someone holds a spot indefinitely saying that they MIGHT put it back at some time in the future. (And I'm not talking about a "down for maintenance" note).

Legally as soon as it's archived it's toast and the spot is open but ethically and morally you grant the owner the first dibbs. IMHO if I own a cache and have the spot and was going to archive it and replace it, I'd only deactivate the cache, hide the new one, and then archive the old one at the same sitting when I post the new one. That way you don't have to worry about vultures circling over your hiding spot. And I am sure there are vultures out there.

 

What is the etiquette when it comes to newbie cachers using containers that are obviously poor choices. Is it better to MYOB and just make a log mentioning cache condition (wet)...or is it good education to personally and privately let someone know why the container isn't a good choice and make suggestions for better options? If it were me, I'd appreciate someone letting me know there was a better way to do things. Then again, some people might be offended.

Some people will take offense but still better to give them the benifit of a doubt and try to help. Here in west central Florida, this time of year is when the weather worthiness gets tested. I have seen people plop a 35mm film canister at the bottom of a tree just laying on the ground between the roots and only covered with pine needles. The first 4" gully washer day we have that thing is going to be in a new zip code. But all you can do is offer advice. If they don't take it we can't take offense as some people just need to learn the hard way. But feel good you're considerate enough to try to help.

[+wimseyguy]

1. Archived cache means there is no saturation issue. If it is a good spot take it. If the cache owner wanted to maintain their cache at that location, they would have done so.

 

2. It is perfectly all right to send a polite well worded email to another player with a suggestion on how to improve their hide; especially if they are new at the sport.

[+PlantAKiss]

ethically and morally you grant the owner the first dibbs.

 

I would agree but...for how long? 2 months? 5 months? I don't know what is considered "polite." Recently a multi I loved sadly was archived but it did open up space for something I wanted to do. In this case, I do know the archive is permanent. But in other cases...I can't tell.

 

And I am sure there are vultures out there.

 

What's considered a vulture? Someone who immediately takes the open space?

[+J-Way]

1. If you want to be polite you can shoot the owner an email asking if you can place a cache there. This could save ruffled feathers, and in some parts of the country, retaliatory cache thefts. But ultimately if it's archived it's gone and the spot is open. The original owner can't re-list the original cache without going through the same approval process as a new cache placement.

 

2. You can sent an "advice" email if you want, and it might be welcomed. Unfortunately, I've never had that experience; owners have NOT welcomed the criticism (maybe I'm not as adept with polite wording as you are). I just tend to put that owner on a mental "avoid" list, and don't bother to hunt other caches placed by him/her. The worst container I've ever seen was a small ziplock back with a small magnet tossed inside and stuck to the underside of a guard rail. Almost as waterproof as a sieve. This owner later started putting out higher quality caches by wrapping the ziplock baggie in duct tape first. He could care less about longevity; when the cache went missing, he archived it.

[+Renegade Knight]

... if a cache owner mentions the possibility of reactivating it at some time in the future, how long does one wait before its alright to consider the space up for grabs? ...

 

If it were me, I'd appreciate someone letting me know there was a better way to do things. Then again, some people might be offended.

 

Both answers are "It depends".

 

Case in point. I had a cache that needed checked on. My time for getting out has been limited. Much to my chagrin it remains limited. Too much work not enough play. That aside this cache needed checked on. I had a trip planned but wasn't sure if I would have the opportuntiy to check on it. I told the reviewer the time frame for the trip, but made no promises, and did say that if not on that trip, next spring. They said next spring was too late and archived the cache on me. Wow I'm telling them I'll maintain the cache and they archive it. They also chose to ignore the trip in making their decision. Turns out I was able to check on it on the trip, I replaced it and the cache is alive and well. It still shows up as archived on this site.

 

However I really don't care if someone else puts a cache 100' away from mine so the spot is more or less open. 528' is this sites rule. It's not the actual minimum needed to keep you from finding the wrong cache.

 

The second question also depends on the cache owner. The logs should teach any cache owner that they have a problem unless their goal is wet logs. I once found a cache about 250' off the posted coods. In my log I posted my coords and mentioned it was 250' off. I didn't email the owner. The owner emailed me and chewwed my butt telling me that they were an engineer and knew coords and how there was no way they were off and I was clearly wrong. blah, blah, blah. In time when log after log after log mentioned the coords they got the hint. Other cache owners are like you and would love to hear solutions to the problems they are having based on the experience of others.

[+PlantAKiss]

1. If you want to be polite you can shoot the owner an email asking if you can place a cache there.

 

Well that's true. Although I really haven't planned on placing any cache exactly in the same spot. Just that a cache I might place would touch within the archived saturation area.

 

In my recent newbie email, the cache hider admitted she was very new (no finds) and thanked me for the suggestions. But "wet contents" continues to show up in the logs. So...I tried.

 

I guess I am an old dog that welcomes new tricks. As long as someone isn't mean about it, I don't mind suggestions for improvement.

 

However I really don't care if someone else puts a cache 100' away from mine so the spot is more or less open.

 

I wouldn't care either but...that would not get past a reviewer I assume.

Edited August 1, 2008 by PlantAKiss

[Keystone]

Just posting to make sure we're appreciating the difference between "archived" and "temporarily disabled." An archived cache can only be revived by a reviewer, and only if it meets current guidelines. It's dead, and the area is open to a new placement. A disabled cache can be enabled by its owner when the cache is ready to be hunted again. In the meantime it still "holds the spot" for 528 feet around the cache coordinates.

 

If you feel a cache has been disabled for too long, write the owner to inquire about their plans. If you don't get a good answer and you're itching for a new cache to be placed in the area, log a "needs archived" to attract a reviewer's attention.

[+KBI]

If you want to be polite you can shoot the owner ...

I agree wholeheartedly. That's SO much more humane than clobbering them to death with an ammo can full of golf balls.

[+PlantAKiss]

(And I'm not talking about a "down for maintenance" note).

 

Perhaps I should have included "temporarily disabled" in my comment. I was talking about "archived"...which I take to mean...done...finished...fini...caput...no longers exists. Except then the owner makes a final note mentioning putting it back "in the future." I would NOT email anybody in regards to a disabled cache. I don't consider disabled the same as archived.

 

And I usually only itch if the skeeters are bad or I hit some poison ivy (as I did recently scouting a brand new hidey spot).

Edited August 1, 2008 by PlantAKiss

[+Gan Dalf]

I recently placed a cache at a location that was less than 30ft from a cache that had been archived. The other cache was archived before I even started caching so I didn't know not to place a cache there. After I placed my cache a bunch of the NUTS in the area started talking about the other cache that was there and that it was still there despite posts to the contrary. I met another cacher at my site a few days later and he showed me the other cache. It was a bison so I unscrewed the lid, pulled the log, signed it and placed it back in it's container and later logged the find online. I don't see anything wrong with placing a cache as soon as an old one gets archived. I have been waiting to place a number of caches in areas where others have been disabled by a reviewer for more than three months. As soon as the reviewere archives them I intend to place cacehs there. The owners are obviously not willing to mantain them so why shouldn't I get to place one there. It will give people who have found the other caceh an excuse to go back and see the area again.

 

To your other point, I am quickly becoming an advocate of requiring a minimum number of finds (please don't rail on me, it's my opinion and it's not going to change) for people to place a cache of their own. If I see a problem with the terrain rating of a cache or if the coords are off or if there is some other problem with the site I will put it in my log and often times I will follow that up with an e-mail explaining my statements. I have been the victim of others who have posted spoiler statements in there logs complaining about the hide and so I try to avoid that in my log posts and follow it up with an e-mail saying why I said what I did.

[+infiniteMPG]

I would agree but...for how long? 2 months? 5 months? I don't know what is considered "polite." Recently a multi I loved sadly was archived but it did open up space for something I wanted to do. In this case, I do know the archive is permanent. But in other cases...I can't tell.

Personally if you wanted the spot then a quick email to the owner asking their intent would settle it for me. If they wrote back they're working on the replacement, I'd move on. If they didn't reply.... pounce!

What's considered a vulture? Someone who immediately takes the open space?

More someone who circles over a problem hide hoping that the owner will archive and as soon as they do, they pounce on it with no consideration for the previous owner when the previous owner made their intent to replace publicly known. It's not a "bad" thing to do or a "wrong" thing to do, more an unethical thing to do.

[+two ninjas and mom]

2) Recently I've seen some caches placed by people that appear to be new to caching and the containers used are obviously not water nor weather resistant (i.e. plastic candy container) and were placed where water will be a problem. In one case, the hider had no finds at all. In this case, I did politely email the hider and gently suggested trying a different container. All her logs mention wet contents and I thought it a kindness to let her know she needed a water-tight container. (She was receptive to my comments.) What is the etiquette when it comes to newbie cachers using containers that are obviously poor choices. Is it better to MYOB and just make a log mentioning cache condition (wet)...or is it good education to personally and privately let someone know why the container isn't a good choice and make suggestions for better options?

 

If it were me, I'd appreciate someone letting me know there was a better way to do things. Then again, some people might be offended.

 

with our first hide - I thought I did an awesome job of making sure it would stay all dry. The log was in a plastic baggie and the cache (lame guardrail) was also in a baggie. On of the first finders had a smaller better bag for both the log and the cache itself, replaced them and emailed me to let me know what they did, and why, and where I could get the smaller bags. I was eternally greatful for this and hope anytime someone finds one of our caches and has a better way to do it, they share the info with me.

[+PlantAKiss]

More someone who circles over a problem hide hoping that the owner will archive and as soon as they do, they pounce on it with no consideration for the previous owner when the previous owner made their intent to replace publicly known. It's not a "bad" thing to do or a "wrong" thing to do, more an unethical thing to do.

 

I see. No, that wasn't my intention. My question is about caches long archived (many months) but with references to maaaaaybe putting it back at a later time.

 

Thanks everybody!