Safe or snarky

[Team Kryptos]

So I just got an angry email from a hider whose cache we tried to find. It was on a cannon and the barrel contained a broken bottle, sharp edges facing out. We mentioned this in our DNF log, but we had quit searching because of muggles, and it was in a cemetery. I don't look for cemetery caches when folks are visiting. We did not quit because of the broken glass. I mentioned it in consideration for the next cacher so they didn't just jam their fist in a hole filled with broken glass. This evidently ticked them off. They told me to stop complaining and stop finding their caches, which I certainly will.

 

Was I wrong? Or should I just let the next guy get sliced up? If you get injured finding a cache due to sharp metal or broken glass do you warn of it in your log or stay silent? This was the second of their hides that I had found and mentioned sharp material in. The other I sliced my hand open on a sharp guardrail. Said so in my log and that was why I DNF'd it. I wasn't b##ching, just stating why I DNF'd it.

 

Opinions?

[+flask]

the log you write ought to be representative of your experience with the cache.

 

not every log is a happy one, and it doesn't need to be.

 

a cache owner who can oly tolerate glowing logs is just one more example of the trend in which needy peopel think of everything in their day as an opportunity to be validated, praised, and flattered.

 

i have to wonder why the cache owner would not want you to mention an existing hazard, unless the broken glass is part of the intended mystery of the cache or the cache owner is so sensitive as to consider broken glass at theri cache to be a personal insult.

[+jmd65]

 

Was I wrong?

 

No. If I were going for that cache, I'd appreciate the heads up. I went for one recently where a previous log mentioned that a scorpion had taken up residence in the hole where the container was. The little devil was still there, and I was glad I'd come equipped with tongs.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I would have CITOd the glass and solved the problem. Not being there I don't know exactly, but if removing the bottle was impossible I probably would have balled up a sheet of paper or a wad of grass and stuck it in the barrel to block the bottle.

 

If that was not possible I would have posted a Needs Maintenance note saying "There is broken glass in the barrel that could hurt searchers" and let the owner deal with it.

 

Edit to add: If you want our opinion it's always better to link to the facts, in this case the cache, so we can read the logs themselves and get a better idea of whether something is snarky. What cache was it?

Edited November 28, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+SkellyCA]

Maybe the owner expected you to sign the log in blood?

[Team Kryptos]

I would have CITOd the glass and solved the problem. Not being there I don't know exactly, but if removing the bottle was impossible I probably would have balled up a sheet of paper or a wad of grass and stuck it in the barrel to block the bottle.

 

If that was not possible I would have posted a Needs Maintenance note saying "There is broken glass in the barrel that could hurt searchers" and let the owner deal with it.

 

Edit to add: If you want our opinion it's always better to link to the facts, in this case the cache, so we can read the logs themselves and get a better idea of whether something is snarky. What cache was it?

 

I went ahead and deleted my log to appease the owner. But the cache in question was GC21FH5. Should have probably left it up but I am so done with this guy's caches. I had said to BE CAREFUL when looking in the barrel as there is broken glass. then mentioned that we quit due to cemetery visitors. I guess the CITO would have been the way to go.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

nevermind, nothing to see here folks, keep moving

Edited November 28, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+Six Little Spookies]

As a cacher with kids (and as a cache owner) I would definitely appreciated knowing about a safety hazard like that.

 

Just speculating, but maybe it was behind the bottle? That could explain his getting upset over its mention, but if so, man, that's messed up.

[+briansnat]

If it were possible, CITOing the glass out would have been the best alternative. Failing that, you did the right thing by warning the cache owner and others. If all is as you described, it is the cache owner who is out of line.

[+cycler48]

My personal feeling is that you did the right thing. I recently found a cache that had a fishing lure in it and the hooks were not protected. I certainly noted that in my log. I could just imagine shoving my hand in there and getting impaled on one of the hooks. Sounds like your cache owner has some problems to deal with.

[+Walts Hunting]

He had no right to tell you to remove your log because he didn't like it. Personally I would have submitted a SBA log saying that is hazardous and people could seriously injure themselves. He can't remove that.

[+sbell111]

He had no right to tell you to remove your log because he didn't like it. Personally I would have submitted a SBA log saying that is hazardous and people could seriously injure themselves. He can't remove that.

'Hazards' are not against the guidelines.

[+Walts Hunting]

No but it sure would have gotten his goat.

[Clan Riffster]

Deliberately doing something just to aggravate someone else would make you even worse than the CO who can't handle truthful logs.

[+Sagefox]

The glass in the barrel issue is now dealt with on the cache page. Another cacher posted a very short needs maintenance log and the CO apparently responded by editing the page telling folks not to look in the barrel.

 

How was your DNF worded?

[+sbell111]

Deliberately doing something just to aggravate someone else would make you even worse than the CO who can't handle truthful logs.

Agreed. Geocaching is not about "getting people's goat". We have forums for that.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

The glass in the barrel issue is now dealt with on the cache page. Another cacher posted a very short needs maintenance log and the CO apparently responded by editing the page telling folks not to look in the barrel.

 

How was your DNF worded?

That solves nothing for anyone who did not read the cache description. I would file a Needs Archived note asking the Reviewer to shut 'er down because the owner refuses to do maintenance. No, it's not in the guidelines, but I betcha the Reviewer would still get it cleared up!

 

Let the CO appeal to Groundspeak that he's being forced to remove a broken glass bottle that threatens cachers and see how that goes over!

[+sbell111]

The glass in the barrel issue is now dealt with on the cache page. Another cacher posted a very short needs maintenance log and the CO apparently responded by editing the page telling folks not to look in the barrel.

 

How was your DNF worded?

That solves nothing for anyone who did not read the cache description. I would file a Needs Archived note asking the Reviewer to shut 'er down because the owner refuses to do maintenance. No, it's not in the guidelines, but I betcha the Reviewer would still get it cleared up!

 

Let the CO appeal to Groundspeak that he's being forced to remove a broken glass bottle that threatens cachers and see how that goes over!

The owner should not be forced to clean up any trash in the area.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked that multiple people have complained about a single broken bottle rather than either of them bothering to trash it out.

 

BTW, sticking your hands blindly into a hole is a danger that every cacher should already be aware of.

[+HouseOfDragons]

 

Frankly, I'm shocked that multiple people have complained about a single broken bottle rather than either of them bothering to trash it out.

 

 

Perhaps it's wedge in place and immovable.

[+Sagefox]

That solves nothing for anyone who did not read the cache description. I would file a Needs Archived note asking the Reviewer to shut 'er down because the owner refuses to do maintenance. No, it's not in the guidelines, but I betcha the Reviewer would still get it cleared up!

 

I think that would do the trick. I sometimes file SBAs to get the COs attention to a situation that should be cause for archive if the CO doesn't act.

 

The CO might be a real snark or he might be an alright guy, we don't know for sure. He did respond to the NM log and he states he will get to the site when he can to clean up the glass. So technically he has not refused to do the maintenance. Time will tell if he is serious or not.

 

I too often like to hunt without reading the description and often reach into places I shouldn't. I might also feel snarky if I got cut but I would be somewhat humbled if the cache page description posted a warning that I did not read.

[+sbell111]

That solves nothing for anyone who did not read the cache description. I would file a Needs Archived note asking the Reviewer to shut 'er down because the owner refuses to do maintenance. No, it's not in the guidelines, but I betcha the Reviewer would still get it cleared up!

 

I think that would do the trick. I sometimes file SBAs to get the COs attention to a situation that should be cause for archive if the CO doesn't act. ...

Glass at a cache site is not cause for archival.

[+Sagefox]

That solves nothing for anyone who did not read the cache description. I would file a Needs Archived note asking the Reviewer to shut 'er down because the owner refuses to do maintenance. No, it's not in the guidelines, but I betcha the Reviewer would still get it cleared up!

 

I think that would do the trick. I sometimes file SBAs to get the COs attention to a situation that should be cause for archive if the CO doesn't act. ...

Glass at a cache site is not cause for archival.

 

Yes, I agree. I got myself off on a tangent about using the SBA concept to inspire maintenance but SBA should only be posted "...to a situation that should be cause for archive".

 

I totally agree that this cache does not warrant an SBA.