Wierd Cache in "My Finds" Query

[No H]

I have an oddity in my personal "My Finds" PQ that I have wondered about for some time.

One cache is listed as being in the middle of the South Pacific Ocean.

Loading my PQ into Mapsource shows the GC as GCAB22 with a name of "No Go".

The note is "NO GO by (SLAGA), Traditional Cache (1/1)".

The embedded URL is http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...24-cd38f9c34302.

My finds shows that I found this on 4/10/2005.

 

This and a search of the GC shows a page that shows weird errors and no content.

One error is that I'm not logged in.

The next is that this cache is not published yet.

 

Wondering (and wandering) minds want to know:

Anyone know what happened here?

Can a cache be deleted from the system, but still show up in certain places on the site?

Is there any way to get this corrected?

 

Thanks,

Jon

[Keystone]

This cache page was retracted and in the process, the owner moved the coordinates to a far off location. You can delete your "found it" logs if they bother you.

[No H]

Thanks for the info.

I didn't know it was possible to retract a cache.

I'm guessing this can't be done by the owner, as I have never seen that option...

[+MountainRacer]

Oddly, I also just found this out. It's only possible for reviewers (and, I'm guessing, assorted other Higher Powers) to do it, not cache owners. The Retract symbol is the rarely-seen Red Spot, like the teal Publish spot's evil twin.

[+webscouter.]

Back in the day when someone had an event they would create a cache page to log all the temporary event caches that you found.

 

These are no longer allowed and as a result some reviewers retracted the caches, I know that GLN* in Missouri did.

 

Your find was allowed to remain as to not upset your find count.

 

My only issue with this is that they moved them into the middle of the ocean, this really screws up my maps. I wish that they had just left them where they were and retracted them.

[+tozainamboku]

Back in the day when someone had an event they would create a cache page to log all the temporary event caches that you found.

 

These are no longer allowed and as a result some reviewers retracted the caches, I know that GLN* in Missouri did.

 

Your find was allowed to remain as to not upset your find count.

 

My only issue with this is that they moved them into the middle of the ocean, this really screws up my maps. I wish that they had just left them where they were and retracted them.

Are you saying the no couch potato rule has lead to some reviewers retracting caches that had long been in existence and moving their coordinates to the middle of the pacific ocean?

 

I can't see the justification for this if it is so. First of all we were told that the post about couch potato logs was meant to educate people that these logs were not acceptable. We were told there was no scheme to archive caches and that cache owners would be able to work with the reviewer to fix their cache caches so they no longer invited couch potato logs. Even if you had a cache owner who refused to make the change, it seems to me you don't need to retract a cache. In most case a simple archiving would have sufficed, although IMO even just using the threat of archiving to force cache owners to hold to the official line on what logs they would allow is an extreme measure. Clearly some cases may have call for the page to be locked as couch potato loggers would continue to log finds otherwise. Many, probably most, of these caches had a real cache that could be logged by a geocachers who never logged a couch potato log. These were real caches and changing the record for those who found the real cache just to punish a cache owner for allowing a log that in the past he honestly believe he was allowed to do is ludicrous.

 

Finally, my read on the other thread was that while logging a cache that you never visited is no longer allowed, TPTB are still allowing cache owners to allow bonus logs for temporary caches found at events. It is amazing how puritans will read between the lines and say that some practice is no longer allowed when TPTB clearly stated that the issue they were address was logs on caches someone never visited and not bonus logs on a cache you did visit. If reviewers are retracting these caches, I believe they are acting without authority.

[+palmetto]

Are you saying the no couch potato rule has lead to some reviewers retracting caches that had long been in existence and moving their coordinates to the middle of the pacific ocean?

 

No, the cache in question was retracted in 2005. It's not related to the current thread on couch potato logging.

 

I have no idea who moved the coords to the south pacific, the owner probably. Once retracted, a cache is the same as an unpublished cache - ie, it can be edited, unlike an archived cache.

Most likely they didn't understand that the finds would still be good (ie, reported in the finders stats) and that the coord change would make their finds show up as mid Pacific finds.

If the cache owner is still active, they could put the coords back.

[No H]

WebScouter caught the idea of why I found this.

One utility shows my cache to cache distance of 46881.23 miles.

I then went and tried to figure it out.

Once I found it, I figured I would ask the question.

 

I didn't realize why, but WebScouter nailed the reason, too.

The event was MOGA 2005.

This was the very first event that I attended in this hobby, according to my logs.

Right or wrong (please lets not go there), I followed the directions of the time and logged the cache for the temporaries placed for the cache competition.

I seem to remember that this may have been an existing cache in the park, but the effect was the same as if it were released just for logging.

 

Palmetto, that a great idea and I would love to get this fixed, but the owner was a pseudonym and I don't know the real owner.

 

I can deleted these, but then my milestones won't line up.

Once the question was answered, it's just something to live with.

[+webscouter.]

Back in the day when someone had an event they would create a cache page to log all the temporary event caches that you found.

 

These are no longer allowed and as a result some reviewers retracted the caches, I know that GLN* in Missouri did.

 

Your find was allowed to remain as to not upset your find count.

 

My only issue with this is that they moved them into the middle of the ocean, this really screws up my maps. I wish that they had just left them where they were and retracted them.

Are you saying the no couch potato rule has lead to some reviewers retracting caches that had long been in existence and moving their coordinates to the middle of the pacific ocean?

 

I can't see the justification for this if it is so. First of all we were told that the post about couch potato logs was meant to educate people that these logs were not acceptable. We were told there was no scheme to archive caches and that cache owners would be able to work with the reviewer to fix their cache caches so they no longer invited couch potato logs. Even if you had a cache owner who refused to make the change, it seems to me you don't need to retract a cache. In most case a simple archiving would have sufficed, although IMO even just using the threat of archiving to force cache owners to hold to the official line on what logs they would allow is an extreme measure. Clearly some cases may have call for the page to be locked as couch potato loggers would continue to log finds otherwise. Many, probably most, of these caches had a real cache that could be logged by a geocachers who never logged a couch potato log. These were real caches and changing the record for those who found the real cache just to punish a cache owner for allowing a log that in the past he honestly believe he was allowed to do is ludicrous.

 

Finally, my read on the other thread was that while logging a cache that you never visited is no longer allowed, TPTB are still allowing cache owners to allow bonus logs for temporary caches found at events. It is amazing how puritans will read between the lines and say that some practice is no longer allowed when TPTB clearly stated that the issue they were address was logs on caches someone never visited and not bonus logs on a cache you did visit. If reviewers are retracting these caches, I believe they are acting without authority.

 

Nope, different issue.

 

The issue was with placing "temporary" caches at an event for one day. It has never been allowed to place temporary caches. Some people would get around it by placing one "fake" cache and allowing multiple logs on that cache for all the temporary caches placed. The cache never existed in the first place.

 

This is different than allowing a bonus find on a cache as the primary cache for a bonus is not temporary and really exist.

 

These types of caches that have retracted have not been allowed in many years.