Jump to content

A Find or a DNF


genegene

Recommended Posts

OK here is the Question I was asked,

 

Cacher goes to a cache that is listed as a T 4.5 and they find it in a tree about 15 Ft up it, They knock it down with a stick knowing that they wont replace it and even put in the log, that its now a T 1 or 1.5 because they cant replace it because it was to high.

 

A) As the finder, if you log is deleted to you have any right to complain since you did not replace it?

 

:shocked: As the owner would you delete the log since the cacher did not hide it as you left it to be found?

 

C) Ask the cacher to change there log to a note instead of a find since because of there actions, They changed the entire cache T rating knowingly?

 

This is the question that I was asked and thought I would get some more input before responding to the cache owner.

 

P.S. I am not the "cacher" in the story

Link to comment

I respectfully disagree with MM. I have seen a very similar situation happen twice. In the situations that I'm referring to, the "finders" had no intention of returning the cache to where it was hidden. Their only goal was to get a smiley. In my mind, that is cache abuse. If you honestly try, but fail, to return the cache to where it was, that is one thing, but if you, say, knock it down by throwing a stick at it, knowing that there is no way you will be able to rehide it as you found it, that is a deliberate foul and you don't deserve the smiley.

 

 

(Note that I have only once deleted a Found It log on one of my caches, and that was only after the cacher admitted that they saw the cache but could not retrieve or sign the log.)

Link to comment

One of the situations that I'm familiar with is this:

 

 

A well-known high-numbers cacher (Cacher A) couldn't climb the neccessary tree. A couple months later, a friend of his (Cacher :shocked:, who also could never climb that tree, knocks it out of the tree by throwing a stick at it. (S)he signs the log, then brings it home to Cacher A (a distance of about 40 miles) to sign the log. This is all reported in Cacher B's log, by the way.

 

 

A couple days later, the hider of the cache is getting together for a private dinner with some friends. Cacher B drops off the cache at that private event for the hider to put back where it belongs.

 

 

Both Cacher A and Cacher B have "found" this cache. The hider didn't complain, so I guess I can't either, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Its their numbers, not mine, but my regard and esteem for their number of finds is much less than it once was. This is a true story.

Link to comment

Let's see...

 

The cacher finds the cache, signs the log and returns it to "a" place at ground zero. The cacher didn't change the coords so the cache is still viable.

 

Not a good sport, probably. Did they find the cache and sign the log, yes.

 

Delete the find? Why go through the hassle? Just fix the thing if you want to and wait for the next guy to not climb up the tree to replace the hide.

Link to comment
Deliberate vandalism of a cache? Sounds like a valid reason for deleting the 'find'.

Well, I think they deserve that smiley, but the account should be banned for cache vandalism.

 

Of course, all that means is the next person trying that will log it as "found cache on the ground, don't know where it was originally, so I left it there".

Link to comment

Lots of great advice. Please keep them coming.

 

If you're the hider in this case, do what I did...

 

I anticipated someone throwing crap up into the tree to knock something down, and I also anticipated one of our windier storms coming through and blowing them down so, if I do a tree climb cache of Any size, I attached it to a stable, thickish limb with either galvanize wire or cable ties. I prefer galvanized wire because of the flexibility and repositionability, coupled with overall strength (in a brittleness test by bending, it took around 50 three-hundred-degree bends to break it a piece of the wire).

 

I've had a few compliments on my wire hides so far, and you don't get the problems like up above.

 

My second to find on my tree cache here recently even said in her log that she's 5'2 and had to swing her GPSr at it, and even that didn't take it down. I did voluntary maintenance on it anyways and looped it back around one more time (she used her GPSr to unwind it a little bit so she could reach it).

 

But to answer you actual, original question that you probably care about more, I think it should count as a find, but the cache FTFer deserves a stern "talkin' to."

Link to comment

It counts as a find. Their name is in the logbook, so they can claim their smiley, no matter how dispicable their practice is of not returning the cache where it was hidden. Whether you climb the tree, knock the cache down with a rock, hire a hot air balloon and drop in from above or just summon The Force to bring the cache down, you found the cache. As long as you don't destroy whatever was hiding the cache, of course. Rehiding the cache as you found it is a courtesy, not a requirement for a find. Thankfully, 99% of cachers view rehiding as an intregal part of the game. Too bad this cacher didn't.

 

I think this is a good lesson for the hider. If they are going to place a cache in a tree and set the D/T rating in the 4.5 range, they need to make sure that a cacher can't chuck a stick or rock and dislodge the cache from its perch. Use something to secure it in place. Not to condone what the finder did in this case, but what is the incentive to climb the tree after you've knocked the cache to the ground? If you are forced to climb the tree to retrieve the cache and sign the log, you'll rehide it before you climb back down. Unless you're a jerk :D

 

Bruce

Link to comment

It counts as a find. Their name is in the logbook, so they can claim their smiley, no matter how dispicable their practice is of not returning the cache where it was hidden. Whether you climb the tree, knock the cache down with a rock, hire a hot air balloon and drop in from above or just summon The Force to bring the cache down, you found the cache. As long as you don't destroy whatever was hiding the cache, of course. Rehiding the cache as you found it is a courtesy, not a requirement for a find. Thankfully, 99% of cachers view rehiding as an intregal part of the game. Too bad this cacher didn't.

 

I think this is a good lesson for the hider. If they are going to place a cache in a tree and set the D/T rating in the 4.5 range, they need to make sure that a cacher can't chuck a stick or rock and dislodge the cache from its perch. Use something to secure it in place. Not to condone what the finder did in this case, but what is the incentive to climb the tree after you've knocked the cache to the ground? If you are forced to climb the tree to retrieve the cache and sign the log, you'll rehide it before you climb back down. Unless you're a jerk :D

 

Bruce

 

Concur.

Most who would climb a tree to retrieve a cache would find a way to sign it while they are still in the tree, thus negating the need to rescale the tree to rehide the cache.

Link to comment

Maybe add in the cache description something like "please replace the cache as you find it or I will remove your find log"

I was thinking about placing a cache where it would be fairly easy to retrieve, but part of the difficulty would be working out how to replace it. I was going to put something in the cache container that would help them in this task.

then i wondered how many would actually bother to return it at all.

i suppose if you put it in the description, that a condition of the find it being able to return it to its original location. im not sure if thats breaking any guidelines though.

Link to comment

Maybe add in the cache description something like "please replace the cache as you find it or I will remove your find log"

I was thinking about placing a cache where it would be fairly easy to retrieve, but part of the difficulty would be working out how to replace it. I was going to put something in the cache container that would help them in this task.

then i wondered how many would actually bother to return it at all.

i suppose if you put it in the description, that a condition of the find it being able to return it to its original location. im not sure if thats breaking any guidelines though.

Sorry but your idea would create an ALR.

Link to comment

One of the situations that I'm familiar with is this:

 

 

A well-known high-numbers cacher (Cacher A) couldn't climb the neccessary tree. A couple months later, a friend of his (Cacher :D, who also could never climb that tree, knocks it out of the tree by throwing a stick at it. (S)he signs the log, then brings it home to Cacher A (a distance of about 40 miles) to sign the log. This is all reported in Cacher B's log, by the way.

 

 

A couple days later, the hider of the cache is getting together for a private dinner with some friends. Cacher B drops off the cache at that private event for the hider to put back where it belongs.

 

 

Both Cacher A and Cacher B have "found" this cache. The hider didn't complain, so I guess I can't either, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Its their numbers, not mine, but my regard and esteem for their number of finds is much less than it once was. This is a true story.

Wow! In my opinion cacher A certainly should never have signed the log. And cacher B was pretty rude to remove the cache from the area of the hide. Even more rude to drop it off so the hider could replace it.

 

My personal rule is if I can't do what is required to retrieve and replace a cache then I don't claim a find. Works for me.

Link to comment
i suppose if you put it in the description, that a condition of the find it being able to return it to its original location. im not sure if thats breaking any guidelines though.

 

It is. As long as the cachers name is in the logbook, they get credit for the find. You can plead, beg, coerce, admonish all you like in the description about rehiding a cache as it was found, but one thing you can't do is delete a find if it wasn't.

 

I was thinking about placing a cache where it would be fairly easy to retrieve, but part of the difficulty would be working out how to replace it.

 

Is it cynical of me to think that you'd be setting yourself up for disappointment? Don't get me wrong. Many cachers would delight in finding a cache like that and going through the necessary steps to replace/rehide it but as the OP shows, one cacher can come along without giving a dadgum about how YOU want your cache to be replaced and there it will sit on the ground because they signed the log and got their smiley.

 

Bruce

Link to comment

Maybe add in the cache description something like "please replace the cache as you find it or I will remove your find log"

I was thinking about placing a cache where it would be fairly easy to retrieve, but part of the difficulty would be working out how to replace it. I was going to put something in the cache container that would help them in this task.

then i wondered how many would actually bother to return it at all.

i suppose if you put it in the description, that a condition of the find it being able to return it to its original location. im not sure if thats breaking any guidelines though.

 

As you're in UK, you might like to put "One step to heaven" on your Watchlist. It's very difficult to both retrieve and replace.

 

MrsB

Edited by The Blorenges
Link to comment
Deliberate vandalism of a cache? Sounds like a valid reason for deleting the 'find'.

Well, I think they deserve that smiley, but the account should be banned for cache vandalism.

 

Of course, all that means is the next person trying that will log it as "found cache on the ground, don't know where it was originally, so I left it there".

 

So would you also ban the accounts of everybody who finds a cache, but then puts it back where they think it ought to be, rather than where it was originally hidden??

Seems to happen all the time on this side of the pond. well-meaning cachers add piles of stickoflage, or move magnetic nanos higher up the pole..... same difference, just different extremes!!!

Link to comment

One of the situations that I'm familiar with is this:

 

A well-known high-numbers cacher (Cacher A) couldn't climb the neccessary tree. A couple months later, a friend of his (Cacher :D, who also could never climb that tree, knocks it out of the tree by throwing a stick at it. (S)he signs the log, then brings it home to Cacher A (a distance of about 40 miles) to sign the log. This is all reported in Cacher B's log, by the way.

 

A couple days later, the hider of the cache is getting together for a private dinner with some friends. Cacher B drops off the cache at that private event for the hider to put back where it belongs.

 

Both Cacher A and Cacher B have "found" this cache. The hider didn't complain, so I guess I can't either, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Its their numbers, not mine, but my regard and esteem for their number of finds is much less than it once was. This is a true story.

 

This seems very selfish and a different issue than knocking the cache out of the tree and leaving it on the ground. Did the cacher who drove away with the cache have the slightest guilt about those to follow - what about the next cacher who came by a few hours later, climbed the tree, and was rewarded with a DNF because Cacher A had taken the cache with them? The "real" cacher might not mind the DNF but driving away with the physical cache and keeping it for a few days seems just completely unethical.

Link to comment

If I were the hypothetical cache owner in this instance, I'm sure I'd fret for a couple of days over whether to delete the log, ask them to change the log or some other action.

 

But mostly I'd be hitting myself over the head for having failed to tether the hide. If it can be knocked down with a stick, it can be knocked down by a squirrel, or by the wind. It's just bad design.

 

Where cachers have logged finds on my hides that (my opinion) they really shouldn't have, I've ultimately done nothing.

Link to comment

I just did one like this. Unclimbable tree with cache hanging on branch about 20' up.

How hard is it to find a stick long enough to place it back or come back with a step ladder?

I found a long branch, notched the tip like so: V, then hooked it.

This sport is about the adventure.

I would leave the find and post a note above it stating how lame the person is for not putting it back.

I think that would be more satisfying then just deleting it. Everyone who looks at the logs will see it and know they suck.

Link to comment
As the owner would you delete the log since the cacher did not hide it as you left it to be found?

I wouldn't delete the find... just let it be.

It would just need to be put back by the owner... regular maintenance.

I see no reason to make a fuss over a smiley.

The cacher knows they did wrong.

 

You would think that the cacher knew they did wrong but, i wouldn't be surprised at all if it never entered their mind.

 

On second thought, the thought probably did enter his or her mind. With today's "entitlement" generation, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if the finder thought the cache owner was in the wrong because he hid it up in the tree in the first place. It might just be that the finder is one of those who thinks every cache should be available to him. In this case, he knows better than the CO and did the right thing by making the cache available to everyone! :D

 

To delete or not to delete, the CO needs to make that call... :blink:

Link to comment
I was thinking about placing a cache where it would be fairly easy to retrieve, but part of the difficulty would be working out how to replace it.
Is it cynical of me to think that you'd be setting yourself up for disappointment? Don't get me wrong. Many cachers would delight in finding a cache like that and going through the necessary steps to replace/rehide it but as the OP shows, one cacher can come along without giving a dadgum about how YOU want your cache to be replaced and there it will sit on the ground because they signed the log and got their smiley.
I bet that a huge number of cachers would not go through a bunch of complicated steps to return a cache if it was fairly easy to retrieve. Some would not be able to figure out the steps. Others just wouldn't care.
Link to comment

One of the situations that I'm familiar with is this:

 

 

A well-known high-numbers cacher (Cacher A) couldn't climb the neccessary tree. A couple months later, a friend of his (Cacher :D, who also could never climb that tree, knocks it out of the tree by throwing a stick at it. (S)he signs the log, then brings it home to Cacher A (a distance of about 40 miles) to sign the log. This is all reported in Cacher B's log, by the way.

 

 

A couple days later, the hider of the cache is getting together for a private dinner with some friends. Cacher B drops off the cache at that private event for the hider to put back where it belongs.

 

 

Both Cacher A and Cacher B have "found" this cache. The hider didn't complain, so I guess I can't either, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Its their numbers, not mine, but my regard and esteem for their number of finds is much less than it once was. This is a true story.

 

I've got a different opinion on this one. Cacher A might get to keep the smiley but cacher B should loose this one. Is it a traveling cache or not? CO should be discouraged from allowing cacher B's found it to stick.

Link to comment

They signed the log-it's a find.

It's a cheesy one as it is full of holes and smells, but it's a find.

 

If you're referring to the cacher A/B scenario, cacher A made a find. Cacher B received a delivery. There was no "finding" going on there.

 

If this was my local cachers I would go to events and whisper about them and send them waves of scorn from across the room. Scorn. :D

Link to comment

OK here is the Question I was asked,

 

Cacher goes to a cache that is listed as a T 4.5 and they find it in a tree about 15 Ft up it, They knock it down with a stick knowing that they wont replace it and even put in the log, that its now a T 1 or 1.5 because they cant replace it because it was to high.

 

A) As the finder, if you log is deleted to you have any right to complain since you did not replace it?

 

:D As the owner would you delete the log since the cacher did not hide it as you left it to be found?

 

C) Ask the cacher to change there log to a note instead of a find since because of there actions, They changed the entire cache T rating knowingly?

 

This is the question that I was asked and thought I would get some more input before responding to the cache owner.

 

P.S. I am not the "cacher" in the story

I seem to be in a clear minority here. The key element here is that they admitted knocking the cache down with no intention of putting it back. To me, that is vandalism. You can argue semantics all you want, makes no difference. I would delete the find in a heartbeat and archive the cache. Next time I would do as others suggest and find a way to tether the cache. But no way I would let the find stand. As for the idea that the cacher might take revenge on my other caches, well, let's just say I'm perfectly capable of taking the "game" to another level.

In my local area, there have been several caches over the years where putting it back took more energy, strength and concentration than retrieving it. EVERYONE who went after these caches made the greatest effort possible to put the cache back. Just another confirmation that the LIGO community is the best!

Link to comment

I seem to be in a clear minority here. The key element here is that they admitted knocking the cache down with no intention of putting it back. To me, that is vandalism. You can argue semantics all you want, makes no difference. I would delete the find in a heartbeat and archive the cache. Next time I would do as others suggest and find a way to tether the cache. But no way I would let the find stand. As for the idea that the cacher might take revenge on my other caches, well, let's just say I'm perfectly capable of taking the "game" to another level.In my local area, there have been several caches over the years where putting it back took more energy, strength and concentration than retrieving it. EVERYONE who went after these caches made the greatest effort possible to put the cache back. Just another confirmation that the LIGO community is the best!

:D
Link to comment

OK here is the Question I was asked,

 

Cacher goes to a cache that is listed as a T 4.5 and they find it in a tree about 15 Ft up it, They knock it down with a stick knowing that they wont replace it and even put in the log, that its now a T 1 or 1.5 because they cant replace it because it was to high.

 

A) As the finder, if you log is deleted to you have any right to complain since you did not replace it?

 

:blink: As the owner would you delete the log since the cacher did not hide it as you left it to be found?

 

C) Ask the cacher to change there log to a note instead of a find since because of there actions, They changed the entire cache T rating knowingly?

 

This is the question that I was asked and thought I would get some more input before responding to the cache owner.

 

P.S. I am not the "cacher" in the story

I seem to be in a clear minority here. The key element here is that they admitted knocking the cache down with no intention of putting it back. To me, that is vandalism. You can argue semantics all you want, makes no difference. I would delete the find in a heartbeat and archive the cache. Next time I would do as others suggest and find a way to tether the cache. But no way I would let the find stand. As for the idea that the cacher might take revenge on my other caches, well, let's just say I'm perfectly capable of taking the "game" to another level.

In my local area, there have been several caches over the years where putting it back took more energy, strength and concentration than retrieving it. EVERYONE who went after these caches made the greatest effort possible to put the cache back. Just another confirmation that the LIGO community is the best!

 

I'd be prepared to delete the log on the basis of the spoiler "The cache was too high" to replace.

 

OK. If they'd found and retrieved it, signed the log, replaced it at ground level -logged the find, and emailed they had replaced it elsewhere at a lower level - I might let it stand. But to put the spoiler in the log :D

Link to comment
Rehiding the cache as you found it is a courtesy, not a requirement for a find.

 

It may not be written in the guide lines, but it should be understood that re-hiding is part of the game.

 

There are very few things I would delete a log for. If someone found one of my caches, and said they found it but could not retrieve it so didn't sign the log, I would probably let it stand.

If they said they couldn't put it back because there were too many nettles or what ever, I would delete the log. If Groundspeak decides that is an ALR, (to return the cache to where you found it.) I guess I would have to live with that, but wouldn't like it.

 

Two points. One none of my hides are that hard so I should never have this problem. (I have limited mobility, if I can physically hide it most people can retrieve it. ) Two; if you are so selfish and lazy as to not return a cache to the spot you found it, don't be dumb enough to write in your log that you didn't.

 

If you throw my cache out in the middle of the trail, and don't tell me, there would be no way I could know for sure it was you. If I see a log that said they found the cache sitting on a picnic table, I might assume the previous cacher put it there. however, unless they said so I would have no way to know.

 

edited for spelling

Edited by uxorious
Link to comment

The cache owner who establishes and maintains their cache in accordance with the guidelines is obligated to delete bogus logs.

 

As outlined by the OP, the "find" log is not bogus. The cacher found the cache and signed the log. Hence, the find log probably should not be deleted.

 

This is not to say, however, that commentary on the cachers themselves being bogus is incorrect. :D However, cache owners can't fix behaviors of cachers - they can only maintain the credibility of their own caches

Link to comment

It was 30' straight up a palm tree. I tethered it with a chain woven through the palm fronds and wrapped around the trunk. Attached the ammo can with a stainless carabiner. The ammo can is gone. The chain is still there. :D:D:blink:

 

Riffster -

 

The cache is in my car trunk. What, you wanted the chain delivered at the next event? I'll go back and get it, if I can. The elephant was a bit tired, so had to take 'im back to the zoo after getting the can.

 

I can still log it as a find still, right? :o

Link to comment

They signed the log-it's a find.

It's a cheesy one as it is full of holes and smells, but it's a find.

 

If you're referring to the cacher A/B scenario, cacher A made a find. Cacher B received a delivery. There was no "finding" going on there.

 

If this was my local cachers I would go to events and whisper about them and send them waves of scorn from across the room. Scorn. :)

No, I was referring to the OP's scenario. But the A/B one also has some stink to it as well.

Link to comment

Deliberate vandalism of a cache? Sounds like a valid reason for deleting the 'find'.

 

Do you want the kind of person who would do that getting even every time they visit another one of your caches? Seems to me that the kind of person who would do that in the first place is the kind of person who would happily destroy the rest of your caches.

 

Do we want that type of person thinking that they can go around and distroy caches to get a smiley thinking they can keep on with this behavior and that it's OK, because they always get the smiley???

 

Must be fine behavior because no one ever deletes the log; no one ever complains.

Link to comment

On it counting as a find:

I see it as a find. My "rule" is pretty simple: sign the logbook. Doesn't mean I think it okay that you leave my cache open, trade items scattered about, and not back in its hiding spot. A hunt is not done until the cache is ready for the next person.

 

On vandalism:

The finder deliberately changed the hunt is a significant manner. There are some situations where removing the cache is warranted, like you've got the cache in your hands and now there are muggles galore or the land owner requests it. Knocking a cache out of the tree knowing you're not going to replace it is a significant change and deliberate. While the cache container is not damaged, the hunt is different.

 

On the cache's design:

Bad. Cache owner's fault that he made it so easy for the lowest common denominator to claim the find without doing the right thing and making the cache ready for the next seeker. This doesn't absolve the finder of wrong-doing by not doing the right thing. However, when designing a cache one has to think it through and even sometimes think like a cheater.

 

On requesting the cache be returned:

Not an ALR. It's mentioned several times on this site that replacing the cache back in its original spot is part of hobby. It's a common courtesy. IMHO, we don't need anyone in this hobby that deliberately vandalizes caches not makes cache ready for the next seeker. And really, how different is the two mentioned scenarios than the pirate thefts and subsequent returns?

 

As a cache owner, I'd replace the cache and lock it to the tree. As a bystander, I'd roll my eyes and place the cacher right in the little list along side those who constantly "forget" their trinket bag and take something anyway, or those who find any excuse to the not sign logs, etc. As a member of the community, I stand by the practice not being acceptable.

 

If it happened too many time by the same person on any of ours caches, I might just consider pushing the issue of deleting find logs on inconsiderate seekers. Yes, that would mean a change in my own rule. A hide can only be self-sustaining if every seeker does his part. If the idea of not replacing cache became "acceptable" then there would less incentive for anyone to hide a cache--it'd just get muggled every time anyway.

Link to comment

Then I'd go out and tether that sucker to the tree so good an elephant couldn't bring it down.

I tried that when I hid "To Hint, or Not To Hint". It was 30' straight up a palm tree. I tethered it with a chain woven through the palm fronds and wrapped around the trunk. Attached the ammo can with a stainless carabiner. The ammo can is gone. The chain is still there. :D:P:lol:

 

I guess that's what you get for putting it in Alien territory.

You were all set for elephants and gators.

Black suburbans are a different matter entirely. :)

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...
×
×
  • Create New...