Negative Cache logs with new hiders

[+penwith pirates]

Hi

I have noticed that some of the geocaching community can be very harsh on their logs when the co-ords are out or they have a DNF on a new cache. They don't look to see if this is the persons first cache and could do with some encouragement and assistance.

Surely as a community that relies on new cachers to hide caches to give us something to find we should encourage them. Some of the logs i have seen could put off a new hider completely.

remember if someone does not hide we don't have a hobby anymore.

Karl (penwith pirates)

Edited August 4, 2009 by penwith pirates

[+8paws4legs]

I had a similar conversation with another cacher the other week after we read some quite harsh comments about a series of caches put out by some inexperienced hiders.

To my mind the comments were mainly unjustified or at least the points could have been put across in a more constructive way. I'm currently feeling quite guilty about all this as there was nothing stopping me from contacting the cache owners and telling them that IMHO their series was fine except for maybe one or two small things .

Maybe we all need to remember that we were newbies once upon a time and think before we criticise too much. However, if there is a valid criticism to be made then we shouldn't be too scared to do so although I think a follow up email to the owner wouldn't go amiss in some cases. I've archived caches that i've placed in a totally inappropriate spot and without the comments of my fellow cachers I'd never have known there was a problem.

[+fat bloke]

What gets me is the expectation of the co-ords being exact a 16 to 20' accuracy is good in some instances as the sat's in the sky get updated every hour to correct the gps signal, so the co-ords drift every hour by a few feet a wide area search is always recomended before a DNF unless there is a good clue

[CLV3]

What gets me is the expectation of the co-ords being exact a 16 to 20' accuracy is good in some instances as the sat's in the sky get updated every hour to correct the gps signal, so the co-ords drift every hour by a few feet a wide area search is always recomended before a DNF unless there is a good clue

 

I have seen coords off by even up to 30 or 40 feet.

[+penwith pirates]

What gets me is the expectation of the co-ords being exact a 16 to 20' accuracy is good in some instances as the sat's in the sky get updated every hour to correct the gps signal, so the co-ords drift every hour by a few feet a wide area search is always recomended before a DNF unless there is a good clue

 

I have seen coords off by even up to 30 or 40 feet.

 

we started caching without gps. I think sometimes people expect the gps to do the work for them and not using their eyes and common sense

[+penwith pirates]

I had a similar conversation with another cacher the other week after we read some quite harsh comments about a series of caches put out by some inexperienced hiders.

To my mind the comments were mainly unjustified or at least the points could have been put across in a more constructive way. I'm currently feeling quite guilty about all this as there was nothing stopping me from contacting the cache owners and telling them that IMHO their series was fine except for maybe one or two small things .

Maybe we all need to remember that we were newbies once upon a time and think before we criticise too much. However, if there is a valid criticism to be made then we shouldn't be too scared to do so although I think a follow up email to the owner wouldn't go amiss in some cases. I've archived caches that i've placed in a totally inappropriate spot and without the comments of my fellow cachers I'd never have known there was a problem.

I am not adversed to criticism, but politeness has seemed to have been lost

[+Birdman-of-liskatraz]

What gets me is the expectation of the co-ords being exact a 16 to 20' accuracy is good in some instances as the sat's in the sky get updated every hour to correct the gps signal, so the co-ords drift every hour by a few feet a wide area search is always recomended before a DNF unless there is a good clue

 

I have seen coords off by even up to 30 or 40 feet.

 

I think you mean - the coordinates shown for the cache are 30 feet different to the coordinates given by the cache setter?

 

Just out of interest:

 

a) Are the setters coordinates wrong?

Are yours wrong?

c) Are you both wrong?

 

or as both the setters and the finders GPSr's are working to an accuracy of say 10 or 15 feet (in a good case) then for there to be a possible difference between the two sets of coordinates of 30 feet is to be expected in some circumstances. I'm sure an expert will be along to put me right shortly!

 

It annoys when I read in logs "The coordinates were 6/10/20 feet out!" how do you know that?

 

As I've said before - if your GPS was accurate to the centimetre - would this hobby be as much fun?

[+Birdman-of-liskatraz]

I recentlyish gave some very negative feedback on a new cache, because it was on the edge of a road on a almost blind bend - I felt, as an adult, that it was dangerous for me and that for children it would be even more so. So whilst I wrote what was a very negative log, I also emailed the cacher and explained why I felt it was in a bad location. The cache was archived shortly afterwards.

 

Did I feel bad about it? Yes

 

Would I do it again? Yes, I surely would... because I'd feel even worse to hear that a youngster had been hit by a car whilst looking for a cache.

 

Has it stopped those Cachers from placing some new caches in "better" locations - Nope!

[+penwith pirates]

I recentlyish gave some very negative feedback on a new cache, because it was on the edge of a road on a almost blind bend - I felt, as an adult, that it was dangerous for me and that for children it would be even more so. So whilst I wrote what was a very negative log, I also emailed the cacher and explained why I felt it was in a bad location. The cache was archived shortly afterwards.

 

Did I feel bad about it? Yes

 

Would I do it again? Yes, I surely would... because I'd feel even worse to hear that a youngster had been hit by a car whilst looking for a cache.

 

Has it stopped those Cachers from placing some new caches in "better" locations - Nope!

it's up to other cachers to not log these if they think they are dangerous and mention it to the cacher so he moves them if he wants to get logs

[+MBFace]

Surely as a community that relies on new cachers to hide caches to give us something to find we should encourage them. Some of the logs i have seen could put off a new hider completely.

I don't think it was meant that way but it sums it up for me. Too many people seem in too much of a hurry to make the transition from new finder to new hider and their inexperience shows up leading to negative logs. The worst example of a first cache we've found was from someone with zero finds when they hid it. We got a lot of stick (which almost prompted us to jack it all in - but that's another thread) about waiting until we had way over 50 finds before placing our first cache but so far none of our albeit small number of hides has had a negative log. We're still learning how to hide/how not to hide a cache with every find.

 

Encourage new cachers, yes. Encourage them to wait a while before placing their first cache, YES.

 

MBF

[+penwith pirates]

Surely as a community that relies on new cachers to hide caches to give us something to find we should encourage them. Some of the logs i have seen could put off a new hider completely.

I don't think it was meant that way but it sums it up for me. Too many people seem in too much of a hurry to make the transition from new finder to new hider and their inexperience shows up leading to negative logs. The worst example of a first cache we've found was from someone with zero finds when they hid it. We got a lot of stick (which almost prompted us to jack it all in - but that's another thread) about waiting until we had way over 50 finds before placing our first cache but so far none of our albeit small number of hides has had a negative log. We're still learning how to hide/how not to hide a cache with every find.

 

Encourage new cachers, yes. Encourage them to wait a while before placing their first cache, YES.

 

MBF

I agree that you should not rush into hiding your first cache but if another experienced cacher took a newbie under their wing with some good ideas and pointed out problems it would help. It is not the inexperience of the new cacher but the harshness of the log entries. Surely a polite email offering help is far better than a scathing comment about gps co-ordinated which have then found to be spot on by other cachers?

[+Gushoneybun]

I agree that you should not rush into hiding your first cache but if another experienced cacher took a newbie under their wing with some good ideas and pointed out problems it would help. It is not the inexperience of the new cacher but the harshness of the log entries. Surely a polite email offering help is far better than a scathing comment about gps co-ordinated which have then found to be spot on by other cachers?

 

I have assisted 1/2 a dozen or so cachers in my area and also offered support to others who have ignored me. There is one such cacher who keeps putting caches in silly places with bad coords, I have given up trying to help him and virtaully all of his recent caches have gone on my ignore list, I do look at the area first, just in case it looks good bad sadly most are not in a way its sad but most of his get slated by others but there is only so many times you can offer support. His coords always seem to be out as well

[+parkmoy]

I think far too much is made of finding a large number of caches before placing one. It's not about how many you've found but how much you've learned from them. Some people can find 100 caches, learn nothing, and still place rubbish. Others will take the trouble to learn about the hobby and place brilliant caches after only finding half a dozen.

 

Maybe the listing guidelines should also give some advice on what helps to make a cache a good one and what tends to makes it a bad one? I realize that 'good' and 'bad' can be subjective but I'm sure there are some cache characteristics which we can all agree are desirable and others which are not.

[+Mustards]

I have to agree with Birdie with regards to gpsr readings. However we don't mind criticism as long as it's constructive, that way you learn from it. We have only had one log who did criticise the cache by saying the information we gave in the description was not correct and that was it, we had to email him and found out that we had spelt Trelawny, Trelawney, so petty. All the person had to do is drop us an email and point out the mistake. We look at several forums and you get the same type of person on all of them, they are spineless as they know that they will never meet the person that they are criticising so they give both barrels. As previous stated, if this is done to a newbie, it can be very off putting.

[+spannerman]

We have only had one log who did criticise the cache by saying the information we gave in the description was not correct and that was it, we had to email him and found out that we had spelt Trelawny, Trelawney, so petty. All the person had to do is drop us an email and point out the mistake. We look at several forums and you get the same type of person on all of them, they are spineless as they know that they will never meet the person that they are criticising so they give both barrels. As previous stated, if this is done to a newbie, it can be very off putting.

 

I read that log on your cache and initially thought it a bit sharp, but, reading some of his other logs I think he just doesn't go in for long logs. He just says it as it is. I had one of his logs on one of my caches and to be honest it made me smile. I wouldn't say he was spineless, just that he calls a spade a spade.

He is quite new to the game as well so it wasn't a case of an old hand criticising a new hider and while I don't know him personally I would guess he is just as succinct in everyday life.

[+Lost in Space]

..it's up to other cachers to not log these if they think they are dangerous and mention it to the cacher so he moves them if he wants to get logs

 

Totally disagree!!

 

If a cache is "dangerous", traffic, snakes, health hazard etc., then the the cacher has a duty to report it to prevent accidents to others. E-Mailing the cache setter does not suffice - what if he is away on holiday for a couple of weeks?

[+HouseOfDragons]

I think far too much is made of finding a large number of caches before placing one. It's not about how many you've found but how much you've learned from them.

 

I agree - if you've found 100 film cannisters under a pile of sticks, that' s what you'll hide. If you've found 10 varied, clever hides, you'll think outside the box.

 

I left a slightly negative log recently, asking why the cache was a micro when an elephant could have been hidden there and also commenting that the terrain was over stated. I then noticed that it was a new cacher's first hide and they'd only found a minimal number before. I did feel a little bad when I realised.

[+HazelS]

What pees me off is this... A great example....

 

A few weeks ago I had a relative newbie (30 odd finds) find one of my caches. This cache is found quite regularly, probably once a month in general.

 

The week before, I had introduced a family to caching and took them to this cache while I was explaining different types of caches, so I knew it was in good nick...

 

Then this newbie arrives, the camo bag is a TINY bit moth / rat / mouse eaten so he reports the cache as needs maintenance... then says that the coords seemed to be "way off - about 10 feet off!!!!"

10 feet?? Blimey.... I must try harder when setting caches!!! lol

 

I emailed him and explained that coords can be up to about 40 ft out and that 10 feet is actually really quite good... And I also said that having a nibbled camo bag does not mean it needs maintenance!!!

He removed his log and amended it. lol

Edited August 5, 2009 by HazelS

[lakeuk]

With new caches I always check the cachers history, you can gleen alot to determine whether to rush out for the cache or how long to spend searching for a cache.

 

A recent cache I was FTF (GC1PNA8) on was one I initially held back on and then went for as a challenged, finding it 313ft away from the quoted co-ords.

 

No point being negative in a log, just give you experience and send a PM to the owner with positive advise to improve their listing and cache

[+penwith pirates]

With new caches I always check the cachers history, you can gleen alot to determine whether to rush out for the cache or how long to spend searching for a cache.

 

A recent cache I was FTF (GC1PNA8) on was one I initially held back on and then went for as a challenged, finding it 313ft away from the quoted co-ords.

 

No point being negative in a log, just give you experience and send a PM to the owner with positive advise to improve their listing and cache

I think this really sums up this thread 'No point being negative in a log, just give you experience and send a PM to the owner with positive advise to improve their listing and cache'

but it seems that a number of cachers are more interested in finding them and not helping

[+Pharisee]

I think this really sums up this thread 'No point being negative in a log, just give you experience and send a PM to the owner with positive advise to improve their listing and cache' but it seems that a number of cachers are more interested in finding them and not helping

 

[rant mode = ON] That's OK as far as it goes but remember that a log written on a cache page is not just for the cache owner... it's also there for future cache seekers to read and glean information about a cache so that they may make in informed judgement on whether or not to go and look for it.

 

Tell things as they are. There's absolutely no point in writing "Great location, terrific cache. Thanks for placing it." if it's a soggy micro in a rubbish strewn hedgerow and you hated it. Sending a PM or email to the cache owner is of no use to future seekers who will never get to read it. State in you log... "This is a crap cache in a rubbish dump. Don't bother coming to look for it." If the cache owner get the hump and never places another cache... so what??. His/her crap caches aren't going to be missed with two or three hundred more coming on line every week and it's the only way that we're going to reverse the decline in cache quality that everyone talks about and nobody does anything about. If people were less sensitive and more truthful in what they write in their logs, maybe we'll start getting better quality caches hidden. [rant mode = OFF]

[Chudley Cannons]

I have seen coords off by even up to 30 or 40 feet.

Especially in Herefordshire where all the caches are 35 feet out.

[+penwith pirates]

I think this really sums up this thread 'No point being negative in a log, just give you experience and send a PM to the owner with positive advise to improve their listing and cache' but it seems that a number of cachers are more interested in finding them and not helping

 

[rant mode = ON] That's OK as far as it goes but remember that a log written on a cache page is not just for the cache owner... it's also there for future cache seekers to read and glean information about a cache so that they may make in informed judgement on whether or not to go and look for it.

 

Tell things as they are. There's absolutely no point in writing "Great location, terrific cache. Thanks for placing it." if it's a soggy micro in a rubbish strewn hedgerow and you hated it. Sending a PM or email to the cache owner is of no use to future seekers who will never get to read it. State in you log... "This is a crap cache in a rubbish dump. Don't bother coming to look for it." If the cache owner get the hump and never places another cache... so what??. His/her crap caches aren't going to be missed with two or three hundred more coming on line every week and it's the only way that we're going to reverse the decline in cache quality that everyone talks about and nobody does anything about. If people were less sensitive and more truthful in what they write in their logs, maybe we'll start getting better quality caches hidden. [rant mode = OFF]

I accept your point, but maybe a more polite log entry like' some problems with this location will contact the owner' and then a constructive email to the owner would be better?

[+SkiBums (UK)]

but if that is all he says how am I going to know what the problems are and make a decision about whether or not those problems he has would be a problem for me as well?????

[+Teacosies]

 

[rant mode = ON] That's OK as far as it goes but remember that a log written on a cache page is not just for the cache owner... it's also there for future cache seekers to read and glean information about a cache so that they may make in informed judgement on whether or not to go and look for it.

 

I quite agree but from the opposite side - i had a really bad post to one of my hides. I freely admit I had made an error with a set of coordinates (1/2 mile out ) but this was sorted out the following day after and before the FTF . I had to ask that they alter the comments or I would delete their find. They were working from info that was neatly two months old when they logged the find and I suspect they may have been working from someone else's info to leave the comments they did.

 

I pointed out via PM that that kind of comment would/could influence weather people attempted the cache. I must admit I wish I could have stopped the email 5 mins after I sent it, it was a very aggressive email that really I should not have sent. but would I do it again - 'Kin right I would

[+penwith pirates]

but if that is all he says how am I going to know what the problems are and make a decision about whether or not those problems he has would be a problem for me as well?????

the constructive email would tell you the problem and where there could be a solution but not a rant on the log

[+HouseOfDragons]

but if that is all he says how am I going to know what the problems are and make a decision about whether or not those problems he has would be a problem for me as well?????

the constructive email would tell you the problem and where there could be a solution but not a rant on the log

 

But that won't help subsequent cachers.

[+Stuey]

I have seen coords off by even up to 30 or 40 feet.

Especially in Herefordshire where all the caches are 35 feet out.

 

[off topic: Herefordshire is one of two counties in England with no registered attendees at the Mega on Sunday... Anyone else coming and not registered?]

[+SkiBums (UK)]

but if that is all he says how am I going to know what the problems are and make a decision about whether or not those problems he has would be a problem for me as well?????

the constructive email would tell you the problem and where there could be a solution but not a rant on the log

 

but that doesn't help me as the next cacher along. I'd much rather see honest feedback on the cache logs so i can make my mind up whether or not I attempt the cache

[+Jacobite]

I think sometimes people expect the gps to do the work for them and not using their eyes and common sense

 

Exactly, it is a hunt after all.

 

Prosposed new guidleine for GSP caches: Cache owner must stand at GZ and hand whiney finder cache....................with a smile

[+currykev]

I have found that giving myself 24 hours between a disappointing DNF and logging it online, eases the pain, and thus lessens my possible vitriolic log. I have also decided that not logging at all maybe the way to go.

[+figures]

Tone is everything.

 

It's very easy for a well meaning constructive complaint to be read as vitriol and vice versa. You'll never get it perfect and it's all a bit of give and take really. Just try not to take yourself so seriously that a DNF or bad cache winds you up and accept that a negative comment on one of your caches could just be a case of someone having a bad day or meant in a slightly different light

[+alma]

although i agree with telling it as it is a few people have told me that any negative logs like that will be deleted so i would have wasted my time finding it as it wouldnt have counted.so i just keep the peace by saying found

[+keehotee]

although i agree with telling it as it is a few people have told me that any negative logs like that will be deleted so i would have wasted my time finding it as it wouldnt have counted.so i just keep the peace by saying found

 

Except a cache owner is no longer allowed to delete a log without good reason...... and a negative log isn't a good reason (AFAIK)

[+alma]

although i agree with telling it as it is a few people have told me that any negative logs like that will be deleted so i would have wasted my time finding it as it wouldnt have counted.so i just keep the peace by saying found

 

Except a cache owner is no longer allowed to delete a log without good reason...... and a negative log isn't a good reason (AFAIK)

thanks for that .i will now tell it as it is

[+Primitive Person]

I think the important thing for everyone involved in caching is being able to learn from mistakes. I hid my first cache after I'd found a dozen or so fairly varied ones, and initially I thought it was a good hide. It led a charmed life until it was muggled about a year later, and at that point I realised it wasn't a good hide at all, although most people had been very nice about it.

 

Although I've come across a few caches that have been a bit unimaginative, or disappointing in some other way, very few have been categorically bad. Sometimes I'll wonder why I've devoted so much time and energy to finding one that's dull, and just suck it up, but on one or two occasions I have felt the need to publicly log a serious problem (like one occasion where the area was full of extremely unsavoury litter) because, as others have said, I wouldn't want subsequent cachers to have an accident or something. I've tried to stay polite, and usually it's gone down well with the cacher concerned.

 

Of course, there are always people around who either can't give, or can't take, constructive criticism. What might be a minor annoyance to me could lead someone else to go to DEFCON 1 and start a massive tirade. So much of what we do with caching is subjective - that's the problem. What might be a terrain 2 or 3 for me could appear as a 1 to someone superfit or a 5 to someone with any kind of mobility problem, and others think nothing of solving very cryptic clues, while they make me feel extremely thick.

 

I think it's fine to politely point out problems, and it needs to be done sometimes. Just take it in the spirit it's intended...

 

Lee

[+tsiolkovsky]

I have found that giving myself 24 hours between a disappointing DNF and logging it online, eases the pain, and thus lessens my possible vitriolic log. I have also decided that not logging at all maybe the way to go.

 

Only 24 hours? Actually did one a while back where I waited 48 hours - even then it simply wasn't enough... four drafts later I realised the best thing to say was DNF and leave it at that... Mind you still very annoyed by that particular cache - seemed to be designed so that only locals with intimate local knowledge could find it...

[+metal-bijou]

I recentlyish gave some very negative feedback on a new cache, because it was on the edge of a road on a almost blind bend - I felt, as an adult, that it was dangerous for me and that for children it would be even more so. So whilst I wrote what was a very negative log, I also emailed the cacher and explained why I felt it was in a bad location. The cache was archived shortly afterwards.

 

Did I feel bad about it? Yes

 

Would I do it again? Yes, I surely would... because I'd feel even worse to hear that a youngster had been hit by a car whilst looking for a cache.

 

Has it stopped those Cachers from placing some new caches in "better" locations - Nope!

 

I hope that you didn't log it then. If it's inappropriate and you say so then you are being hypocritical. Without knowing the situation of that cache I wouldn't want speak out of turn but I've had two similar situations.

 

The first was reference access rights. The cacher logged the find then wrote a note to say it shouldn't be there. The cache is still live today.

 

The second is a dangerous cache that I've set up, it's in the middle of a bypass but on a public footpath. I made this a premium member only cache and got grief for that. You just can't win sometimes.

 

There was also the time I set up a cache series the weekend Groundspeak was "US". Well let's just say that I had previously taken coords but placed them all on the morning they were to go live and re-took some coords quickly with the iPhone as I had moved them slightly. Only for the third cache to be about 150 feet out. Oops, think that was my clanger. The series still hasn't gone live as I want to go and check all the coords (but then my 10 year old GPS 12 isn't know for it's accuracy).

 

My point really is to make an assessment of the location before you go and retrieve; if not appropriate walk away. Not that I ever take my own advice there (ice cold underground streams in Germany, bridge crossings etc).

[+metal-bijou]

I should quickly add though that I do agree with a note being written with your findings.

 

100% in agrement the the logs, be they finds or notes, really are there to

 

Show appreciation

warn future cachers

assist the hider

inform the mods

 

And probably in that order.

[+Lost in Space]

I hope that you didn't log it then. If it's inappropriate and you say so then you are being hypocritical. Without knowing the situation of that cache I wouldn't want speak out of turn but I've had two similar situations.

 

The first was reference access rights. The cacher logged the find then wrote a note to say it shouldn't be there. The cache is still live today.

 

The second is a dangerous cache that I've set up, it's in the middle of a bypass but on a public footpath. I made this a premium member only cache and got grief for that. You just can't win sometimes.

 

There was also the time I set up a cache series the weekend Groundspeak was "US". Well let's just say that I had previously taken coords but placed them all on the morning they were to go live and re-took some coords quickly with the iPhone as I had moved them slightly. Only for the third cache to be about 150 feet out. Oops, think that was my clanger. The series still hasn't gone live as I want to go and check all the coords (but then my 10 year old GPS 12 isn't know for it's accuracy).

 

My point really is to make an assessment of the location before you go and retrieve; if not appropriate walk away. Not that I ever take my own advice there (ice cold underground streams in Germany, bridge crossings etc).

 

I've tried Babelfish but it couldn't help. Cany anyone else explain/translate this for me please?

Edited August 14, 2009 by Lost in Space

[Jester1970]

I recentlyish gave some very negative feedback on a new cache, because it was on the edge of a road on a almost blind bend - I felt, as an adult, that it was dangerous for me and that for children it would be even more so. So whilst I wrote what was a very negative log, I also emailed the cacher and explained why I felt it was in a bad location. The cache was archived shortly afterwards.

 

Did I feel bad about it? Yes

 

Would I do it again? Yes, I surely would... because I'd feel even worse to hear that a youngster had been hit by a car whilst looking for a cache.

 

Has it stopped those Cachers from placing some new caches in "better" locations - Nope!

 

I hope that you didn't log it then. If it's inappropriate and you say so then you are being hypocritical. Without knowing the situation of that cache I wouldn't want speak out of turn but I've had two similar situations.

 

The first was reference access rights. The cacher logged the find then wrote a note to say it shouldn't be there. The cache is still live today.

 

The second is a dangerous cache that I've set up, it's in the middle of a bypass but on a public footpath. I made this a premium member only cache and got grief for that. You just can't win sometimes.

 

There was also the time I set up a cache series the weekend Groundspeak was "US". Well let's just say that I had previously taken coords but placed them all on the morning they were to go live and re-took some coords quickly with the iPhone as I had moved them slightly. Only for the third cache to be about 150 feet out. Oops, think that was my clanger. The series still hasn't gone live as I want to go and check all the coords (but then my 10 year old GPS 12 isn't know for it's accuracy).

 

My point really is to make an assessment of the location before you go and retrieve; if not appropriate walk away. Not that I ever take my own advice there (ice cold underground streams in Germany, bridge crossings etc).

If he found it, he can log it.

He can also point out that is placed in an unsuitable position if that is what he feels, which allows cachers to be advised of it.

He can also follow it up with an email to the owner, and perhaps elaborate on his reasonings, without openly being over critical to all and sundry.

[+metal-bijou]

I recentlyish gave some very negative feedback on a new cache, because it was on the edge of a road on a almost blind bend - I felt, as an adult, that it was dangerous for me and that for children it would be even more so. So whilst I wrote what was a very negative log, I also emailed the cacher and explained why I felt it was in a bad location. The cache was archived shortly afterwards.

 

Did I feel bad about it? Yes

 

Would I do it again? Yes, I surely would... because I'd feel even worse to hear that a youngster had been hit by a car whilst looking for a cache.

 

Has it stopped those Cachers from placing some new caches in "better" locations - Nope!

 

I hope that you didn't log it then. If it's inappropriate and you say so then you are being hypocritical. Without knowing the situation of that cache I wouldn't want speak out of turn but I've had two similar situations.

 

The first was reference access rights. The cacher logged the find then wrote a note to say it shouldn't be there. The cache is still live today.

 

The second is a dangerous cache that I've set up, it's in the middle of a bypass but on a public footpath. I made this a premium member only cache and got grief for that. You just can't win sometimes.

 

There was also the time I set up a cache series the weekend Groundspeak was "US". Well let's just say that I had previously taken coords but placed them all on the morning they were to go live and re-took some coords quickly with the iPhone as I had moved them slightly. Only for the third cache to be about 150 feet out. Oops, think that was my clanger. The series still hasn't gone live as I want to go and check all the coords (but then my 10 year old GPS 12 isn't know for it's accuracy).

 

My point really is to make an assessment of the location before you go and retrieve; if not appropriate walk away. Not that I ever take my own advice there (ice cold underground streams in Germany, bridge crossings etc).

If he found it, he can log it.

He can also point out that is placed in an unsuitable position if that is what he feels, which allows cachers to be advised of it.

He can also follow it up with an email to the owner, and perhaps elaborate on his reasonings, without openly being over critical to all and sundry.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I agree he can. And that's one thing I like about events is that you see how much diversity is in this hobby.

 

But personally I'd rather leave something in a log or note (if it's going to be DNA) that says experience more than opinion where it's going to be very contraversial. I don't feel the log is for that. But I think the volenteers should possibly be warned for it to be discussed further.

 

So maybe we're on the same wave length. I just found it very hypocritical for someone to log but saying that "Cache is on private land not open to the public." In which case take a step back. Actually permission was fine and I think Eckington handled it very well.