They did not find it...

[Influence Waterfowl Calls]

Have you ever ran into a major case of this? Not on an easy cache but a dif 5 and the such.

 

I ran into mine this week and there is no reasoning with her. She claims the container was never there and that I must have just put it out because the FTF was today after being placed 1 year, 4 months, and 10 days ago.

 

I find it sad that people would even think of holding the container to post pone a find. When I send the listing to the reviewer it is there and ready to be found.

 

Sad, very sad!

[+StarBrand]

Some folks arrogantly believe they are expert enough that if they have to log a DNF - that means the container must surely be missing. I wish I had a nickle for each time one of my caches was declared "missing"

 

 

 

(on a side note - oh no!! - watch out - here we go again)

[Influence Waterfowl Calls]

I wish I had a nickle for each time one of my caches was declared "missing"

 

Preach on brother!

[+uxorious]

Some folks arrogantly believe they are expert enough that if they have to log a DNF - that means the container must surely be missing. I wish I had a nickle for each time one of my caches was declared "missing"

 

 

 

(on a side note - oh no!! - watch out - here we go again)

 

Seems like most of my DNFs I console myself with the thought the cache must be gone. However, I am glad I refrain from saying so in the logs. 90% of the time the next person to log it, logs a found it. Usually this is a newbie with 4 or 5 finds and logs "Wow that was easy."

[+Chrysalides]

Seems like most of my DNFs I console myself with the thought the cache must be gone. However, I am glad I refrain from saying so in the logs. 90% of the time the next person to log it, logs a found it. Usually this is a newbie with 4 or 5 finds and logs "Wow that was easy."

You too? I was convinced that there's a bunch of geocachers stalking me for the sole purpose of humiliating me in the logs

 

Just kidding, of course. I'm not paranoid. My doctors insist I'm cured as long as I stick to the medication schedule and stay away from the forums.

 

Oops.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

You have your panties in a wad because of one critic?

 

Twice she's filed NAs and twice the Reviewer sided with you.

 

The Reviewer even took the time to clean up the listing's logs by deleting those which were editorial.

 

The people who found it are proud of their accomplishment and those who DNFed it are happy for them.

 

I am glad that you could make a cache that was very hard to find. In fact there was a group of us in my local DixieCachers.com forum who were planning a road trip up from Alabama to look for it if it wasn't found by Jan. 2nd. we've been following the logs and clues planning our hunt. I'm happy for the FTF but it cost me a road trip!

 

However, your re-write of the cache listing and opening this forum because you have a mad on has completely changed our perception... I can't bring myself to tell folks about your cache as long as it is used as a release for your frustrations.

 

If you want folks to continue to hunt it get over this and restore the cache listing to something interesting.

[Influence Waterfowl Calls]

I am sorry you see it that way. As the cache owner I feel that I should give an explanation to any false accusations about my cache. I did so on the logs and she kept on. So I defended it again and the reviewer asked me to take it to the forums, it was not my idea. So I did.

 

I do not want potential seekers to skip over the cache because of false accusation so I wanted to provide as much assurance, that it was there and that I would never post a listing for a cache that was not there, as I could.

 

This is what I expect from the forums so it is no surprise to me.

 

Check the listing again! You will see that I have tried to change the tone already. Let's hope it works!

[+bittsen]

Whenever I DNF a cache, I'm sure it's missing. It has to be!

 

Most of them magically reappear once I'm gone from the cache site but when I was there, they were GONE!

[+ras_oscar]

the only thing you can do is after a few DNFs check the hide and write a note that its "right where I left it" that will tell future seekers and the local reviewer that the cache is actively maintained. I'm one of those people that dont always log a DNF. I am more likely to however, if there 's several on file ahead of me. To me a DNF is an alert to the CO that there may be a problem. Up to CO to determine whether its worth a check or not.

[+Danbike_Lizbike]

So give us the GC# so we can learn who the problem child is.

[+BlueDeuce]

I am sorry you see it that way. As the cache owner I feel that I should give an explanation to any false accusations about my cache.

 

Well, I figure someone is either inaccurately posting something about your cache and you should clarify and resolve their concern or you have an issue with someone that you should address with your reviewer. You shouldn't have to air your laundry to resolve a problem poster.

[CoyoteRed]

I'm starting to think that owners of very hard caches are going to have to start taking pictures of the cache in the wild, encrypt it, and post the encrypted file. Then down the road after no one has found the cache and the accusations start flying, archive the cache with the password for the picture. Then watch the nay-sayers slink off embarrassed.

 

Personally, I'd take that cachers complaints under proper advisement. If the cache is still there, then it's there and there's nothing more you need to do. My personal preference is let a cache go two or three years without a find before adding clues. Your preference might be different. Short or longer time before adding clues, if ever, it's up to you.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

The thing is it dosen't have to be a difficult cache......newer cachers especially will call for Maint. or archiving if they can't find a 1-1 as surely they could not have missed it if it were there. Well I've cached for 7 years and have missed a lot of 1-1's........there are a lot of 2-4 difficulty caches listed as 1 or 1-1/2 but thats another story.

I think the Needs Maint. and Needs Archiving logs were a bad addition, overall , to the site. I delete these logs when necessary and email the poster to simply log a DNF.

[Clan Riffster]

Whenever I DNF a cache, I'm sure it's missing. It has to be!

 

Most of them magically reappear once I'm gone from the cache site but when I was there, they were GONE!

You too, huh? I figure it must be Pixies. Them rascally buggers love taunting me.

[+K0BKL]

If a cache goes unfound for a long time, then maybe it is time to quit the cache,

archive it and pick it up. I had some in rural Lee county Iowa that would go a year

or more with no one even looking for them.

I would eventually just pick them up and archive them.

When I planned to move from the county, I put the remaining

caches up for adoption. I now live in Washington county.

 

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

[+bittsen]

If a cache goes unfound for a long time, then maybe it is time to quit the cache,

archive it and pick it up. I had some in rural Lee county Iowa that would go a year

or more with no one even looking for them.

I would eventually just pick them up and archive them.

When I planned to move from the county, I put the remaining

caches up for adoption. I now live in Washington county.

 

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

 

Interesting question you have there.

 

With more and more caches being placed every day, are there too many? Is it time to start picking up caches that aren't sought any longer or should they stay, as litter on the land, hoping that one day a soul will come upon the cache and give it a little bit of a reason to hang on for dear life?

[+Too Tall John]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

Interesting question you have there.

 

With more and more caches being placed every day, are there too many? Is it time to start picking up caches that aren't sought any longer or should they stay, as litter on the land, hoping that one day a soul will come upon the cache and give it a little bit of a reason to hang on for dear life?

A question that can only be answered on an individual cache basis, and only by the owner of the cache.

[+webscouter.]

If a cache goes unfound for a long time, then maybe it is time to quit the cache,

archive it and pick it up. I had some in rural Lee county Iowa that would go a year

or more with no one even looking for them.

I would eventually just pick them up and archive them.

When I planned to move from the county, I put the remaining

caches up for adoption. I now live in Washington county.

 

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

 

Ah but the cache in question was being searched for. There is a difference between one that no one looks for and one that is difficult to find.

 

As for me I say put the cache listing back exactly like it was when you first listed it and let readers determine who has an issue, it will certainly be determined that you were in the right and that she was just crying sour grapes.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

Not being found regularly and no one being interested are different colored horses.

 

We had a puzzle cache get its FTF yesterday after over six months of several folks working REALLY hard on it... a lot of folks spent a lot of time! Was it useless because it wasn't found? Now it's found so it's no longer useless? It may well take another six months of regular and carefully worded hints by the owner before anyone puts just the right words together and a light bulb goes off. Is it useless if it's unlikely to be found again for another six months?

 

The cache in question here certainly wasn't useless, it was very well hidden and lots of folks hunted it for a long time before it was finally found. I had a group of friends here in Alabama scheduled to drive to Kentucky on Jan. 2nd just to hunt this cache and try for an FTF!

 

Maybe we'll get together and try to solve another puzzle here locally that has never been found in almost 2 years.

 

Useless, heck no!

[Influence Waterfowl Calls]

So give us the GC# so we can learn who the problem child is.

 

I did not want this thread to get taken over by any particular cache so I will leave it at that. ok.

[Clan Riffster]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

What an odd concept...

Me, I love finding caches that have gone unfound for some time. It just adds extra zest for some reason. While you might see them as "worthless", I see them as the ultimate caching experience. I recently went on a TB rescue mission for an unpublished cache that was hidden 2.5 years ago. Apparently a noob hid a cache out on an island, with a couple TBs inside, and it got rejected as being too close to an existing hide. They dropped out of the game, and it was thought he might have left the cache there, since none of the bugs/coins moved past that spot. I had an absolute blast DNFing that one.

[jholly]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

 

Adding to Clan Riffster. A cache can be remote that takes a bit if hiking to get to. Just because it is only found a couple times a year does not make it useless, not everyone will seek them. Puzzle caches can have a low find rate. But that does not mean they are useless. I've done a couple multis that have maybe 2 finds a year, but I would not say they are useless. I must say I don't think I have ever found a cache that I would class as useless, maybe a bit mundane or a number builder, but never useless.

 

Jim

[+Chrysalides]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

No. Because each cacher should only log a cache once, a cache that is not being found regularly just means you don't have enough cachers in your area (either living there or visiting).

[+cpine]

I am sorry you see it that way. As the cache owner I feel that I should give an explanation to any false accusations about my cache. I did so on the logs and she kept on. So I defended it again and the reviewer asked me to take it to the forums, it was not my idea. So I did.

 

I do not want potential seekers to skip over the cache because of false accusation so I wanted to provide as much assurance, that it was there and that I would never post a listing for a cache that was not there, as I could.

 

This is what I expect from the forums so it is no surprise to me.

 

Check the listing again! You will see that I have tried to change the tone already. Let's hope it works!

 

One of my favorite things to do is find a cache that has been deemed "lost by one or several previous searchers! There is some sense of accomplishment and an"In your face" effect going on there.

[CoyoteRed]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

I'll "ditto" the other CR. If the cache is there to be found, it's not useless. It could the folks in your area aren't the types that like to get on the beaten path. Me, the longer it goes unfound, the better for when I find it.

 

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

The beauty is a sturdy container will protect the cache until the next find, no matter how long that is. No need for maintenance.

Edited December 22, 2009 by CoyoteRed

[+sseegars]

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

 

Adding to Clan Riffster. A cache can be remote that takes a bit if hiking to get to. Just because it is only found a couple times a year does not make it useless, not everyone will seek them. Puzzle caches can have a low find rate. But that does not mean they are useless. I've done a couple multis that have maybe 2 finds a year, but I would not say they are useless. I must say I don't think I have ever found a cache that I would class as useless, maybe a bit mundane or a number builder, but never useless.

 

Jim

 

Amen, I have one GC15RBB that hasn't been found in over a year AND it's only been found 7 times. Placed 9/7/2007. I would never archive it just because it isn't found often enough. What I get from the logs is a little of the adventure folks took to go there and find the cache.

 

Caches that are not being regularly found are just useless to the hobby.

I'll "ditto" the other CR. If the cache is there to be found, it's not useless. It could the folks in your area aren't the types that like to get on the beaten path. Me, the longer it goes unfound, the better for when I find it.

 

Why maintain a cache that no one is interested in logging?

The beauty is a sturdy container will protect the cache until the next find, no matter how long that is. No need for maintenance.

 

Ammo cans can withstand a lot of abuse. Another cacher and I hid two caches on the Pee Dee river between NC/SC. We went back a year later and both were still secure in their hiding spots with little wear to the exterior of the cache. Judging water levels on the islands they were on and by records online, both caches had been at least 14 feet underwater for extended periods of time. That's most of the summer, a hard winter for the area, then floods, lightning, hurricanes, smog (KILL THE WABBIT!).

 

A secured, sturdy container, hidden in a proper manner will serve you well EVERY time.

 

NO CACHE IS USELESS. Even LPC's can get you to a restaraunt, grocery store, department store, bridge to cross a river, exact location of stop signs.......

[Skippermark]

Whenever I DNF a cache, I'm sure it's missing. It has to be!

 

Most of them magically reappear once I'm gone from the cache site but when I was there, they were GONE!

Of course it's missing. If it had been there, we would have found it.

If a cache goes unfound for a long time, then maybe it is time to quit the cache,

archive it and pick it up. I had some in rural Lee county Iowa that would go a year

or more with no one even looking for them.

I agree with this, to an extent. For "special" caches, I say no. Special being ones that don't get found very often because they're either really long hikes or ultra challenging, things like that. There are some really long, hard caches that only get found every few months but are awesome. When they get found, it's usually either by someone new, someone from out of town or people that have had them on their "to do" list for awhile and just haven't gotten around to it.

 

For regular "average" caches, I think it's okay to archive them after a year or so, once the "rush" of finds has dissipated and no one is finding them anymore. I mean, why not archive them and give people in the area something new to find?

[+Team Cotati]

Have you ever ran into a major case of this? Not on an easy cache but a dif 5 and the such.

 

I ran into mine this week and there is no reasoning with her. She claims the container was never there and that I must have just put it out because the FTF was today after being placed 1 year, 4 months, and 10 days ago.

 

I find it sad that people would even think of holding the container to post pone a find. When I send the listing to the reviewer it is there and ready to be found.

 

Sad, very sad!

 

I wish that I understood why this issue is important or significant.

[jholly]

For regular "average" caches, I think it's okay to archive them after a year or so, once the "rush" of finds has dissipated and no one is finding them anymore. I mean, why not archive them and give people in the area something new to find?

 

I will disagree with that. I have a guard rail cache. Very average. But is the only one of two caches on the Thomas map for the county challenge in my county. Mine you can drive to, the other requires a trip to Seattle and then an expensive excursion ride to an island. There is no guarantee anyone would replace the hide if I archived it.

 

I also do Delorme challenges. Some of the squares, and least here in the Western US, have pretty slim pickings (not to be confused with the actor). In most cases there is a average cache and a terrain 4 to 5 cache. I'm quite happy the average cache is not archived because I doubt it will be replaced and I really didn't want to do the one that requires a 4 wheel drive and a good hike.

 

I don't know if Iowa has a Delorme or county challenge, but the infrequent visitors might well be using this cache to satisfy the requirements. Archiving it can upset applecarts.

 

Jim

[+Border Caz]

Just because no-one has logged a find, or even a DNF, for a cache doesn't necessarily mean no-one has gone looking for it.

 

When I first started I didn't like to log a DNF in case other cachers thought I was stupid, but then I realised it was important to the owner of the cache to know whether it may have gone missing, and sometimes they have contacted me with another hint to help me achieve a find.

 

But I know from talking to other cachers that there are a number who won't log a DNF at all.

[+GeoGeeBee]

As the cache owner I feel that I should give an explanation to any false accusations about my cache. I did so on the logs and she kept on. So I defended it again and the reviewer asked me to take it to the forums, it was not my idea.

 

We've been seeing this a lot lately... people stating that "the reviewer asked me to take it to the fourms."

 

I don't know what, exactly, the reviewer wrote to you. But I'm willing to bet that he or she did not ASK you to take it to the forums. He (or she) probably pointed out that logs are not meant to be discussion forums. He (or she) may have mentioned that there are places for discussion, other than the logs or the cache page.

 

That still doesn't mean they ASKED you to take it to the forums. It's not the reviewers fault that you are here.

 

The fact that ignorant people make ignorant claims in the logs doesn't mean we need to hear about every case of it in the forum. Just email the offender, copy the reviewer if you like, and delete the log. Why does the whole world need to hear about it?

[+Team Cotati]

As the cache owner I feel that I should give an explanation to any false accusations about my cache. I did so on the logs and she kept on. So I defended it again and the reviewer asked me to take it to the forums, it was not my idea.

 

We've been seeing this a lot lately... people stating that "the reviewer asked me to take it to the fourms."

 

I don't know what, exactly, the reviewer wrote to you. But I'm willing to bet that he or she did not ASK you to take it to the forums. He (or she) probably pointed out that logs are not meant to be discussion forums. He (or she) may have mentioned that there are places for discussion, other than the logs or the cache page.

 

That still doesn't mean they ASKED you to take it to the forums. It's not the reviewers fault that you are here.

 

The fact that ignorant people make ignorant claims in the logs doesn't mean we need to hear about every case of it in the forum. Just email the offender, copy the reviewer if you like, and delete the log. Why does the whole world need to hear about it?

 

Amen Brother!!

[+LandStar]

The thing is it dosen't have to be a difficult cache......newer cachers especially will call for Maint. or archiving if they can't find a 1-1 as surely they could not have missed it if it were there. Well I've cached for 7 years and have missed a lot of 1-1's........there are a lot of 2-4 difficulty caches listed as 1 or 1-1/2 but thats another story.

I think the Needs Maint. and Needs Archiving logs were a bad addition, overall , to the site. I delete these logs when necessary and email the poster to simply log a DNF.

 

Well, when you find one torn up into itty bitty pieces, water running out of an absolutely solid rusty orange glob and only pulp for a log....what good does logging a DNF do? As a cache owner I do like to know if and when someone finds my cache in a condition that requires maintenance. Half the time I don't even get a DNF....I just find it missing while performing periodic checks (which is a strange concept to some).

 

My take is that a DNF is only a DNF. If I don't find a cache or any part of it....then it is a DNF.

If I find a cache that is mashed and smashed and just kibbles and bits....then it needs help, that is not a DNF because I did find it. It needs maintenance and will be logged accordingly.

 

I don't understand cache owners that place a cache and then they disappear forever. If a cache owner does place a cache with the full intent of letting it live only until the point at which it no longer supports itself (no maintenance), then they should at least have the decency to monitor it online and archive it when it does degrade, disappear or otherwise requires owner maintenance.

 

I see way too many hides in nature preserves, wilderness areas or along beautiful hike/bike trails that for all intent and purposes are orphaned. No responses from cache owners to 10 or more DNFs, maintenance alerts or requests for verification.

 

Not only are they hurting that particular cache, they also restrict anyone else from hiding AND maintaining a cache in that area that might actually have people looking for it! Also, there may be other caches hidden in proximity to that cache or as part of a trail series that would likewise be affected. If you have 5 caches along 4 miles of trails and 3 have extensive DNFs....how does that inspire people to 'go for it!'?

[+paleolith]

Yeah, last month for the very first time IIRC, I posted that I thought a cache was missing -- one that I hadn't found before that is. Only because a very explicit spoiler photo was posted. And even then I said I was 75% sure it was missing.

 

Illegitimi non carborundum. If there's interest in discussion that goes beyond the bounds of what's generally acceptable in the cache log (which usually means something contentious, not just discussion of trying to find the cache), start a forum thread -- as you did, but in a local or regional forum -- and link to it.

 

Then thank the reviewer for helping to clean it up. The job seems to have been well done, since the hint of the controversy I see on the page now is in your description.

 

I think that very few cachers, seeing a single SBA after a long string of DNFs all of which accept that it's just a difficult cache, would take the SBA seriously. Virtually no experienced cachers, and only an occasional newbie. My advice is to do the same. Ignore the SBA log entirely unless a reviewer asks you to respond, and then just post that it's a difficult cache and there's no reason to think it's gone. Reviewers are generally reasonable if you are.

 

Edward