+user13371 Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 In 2001, I marked a neglected cemetery near my home as a virtual cache. It seemed an interesting place and I was hoping someone would dig up some history about it. Some time later, I archived it because I got a variety of complaints about it. I moved away from the area in 2005. Someone recently emailed me and said they had come across the virtual and asked if they could log a find. I said okay and requested they post some pictures so I could see if the area had changed. They logged it, and I posted a follow-up thanking them. And the next day I got ANOTHER email from someone else asking if THEY could log it. After all this time it's a bit surprising to me. I don't mind, but I'm curious about how and why people seek out archived caches at all ... ? Quote
+Ike 13 Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 They just want a virtual find. The cache has been archived so I would not allow any new finds. If it was someone who found it while it was active then that may be okay. Now that you've drawn attention to it you may be getting more finds or Groundspeak may step in and lock the page to disallow more finds. Quote
+Don_J Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) In 2001, I marked a neglected cemetery near my home as a virtual cache. It seemed an interesting place and I was hoping someone would dig up some history about it. Some time later, I archived it because I got a variety of complaints about it. I moved away from the area in 2005. Someone recently emailed me and said they had come across the virtual and asked if they could log a find. I said okay and requested they post some pictures so I could see if the area had changed. They logged it, and I posted a follow-up thanking them. And the next day I got ANOTHER email from someone else asking if THEY could log it. After all this time it's a bit surprising to me. I don't mind, but I'm curious about how and why people seek out archived caches at all ... ? Whoa, they brought it back from the dead, didn't they? This is a very curious topic. It's not like they stumbled across an abandoned and archived container, figured out what cache it was and logged it. I don't think that anyone would object to that. Being a virtual brings up a bunch of different issues. I looked up the cache and I see one find from 4/2, and then two from 4/9 which seems to be a father and young son team with separate accounts. I personally would let them stand because all have posted photos that show that they are not bogus logging. How they discovered this is a mystery. I would guess that the first logger is friends with the others and shared the GC#. By the way, if what looks to be a seven or eight year old boy claimed to find one of my caches, the log would stand regardless of the circumstances. In this case, there are photos. It's a no brain-er. I wonder if anyone can figure out the longest streak of a cache not being found. 9/22/01 to 4/02/11 has to be in the running. One last question. Why did you archive it? Of course you had no idea that a bunch of years later, victuals would be discontinued, and take on a special significance amongst certain geocachers. Edited April 10, 2011 by Don_J Quote
+Don_J Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 They just want a virtual find. The cache has been archived so I would not allow any new finds. If it was someone who found it while it was active then that may be okay. Now that you've drawn attention to it you may be getting more finds or Groundspeak may step in and lock the page to disallow more finds. Had you done the research, you would realize that 13 images have been uploaded for the three logs. This is not a "Greeting from Germany" thing. Quote
+user13371 Posted April 10, 2011 Author Posted April 10, 2011 Why did you archive it? At the time, there was some discussion (both online and locally, offline) about whether or not cemetery caches infringed on private property, were respectful, etc. Not much different from arguments you hear today -- but this seemed a novel twist at the time. Someone upset about their travel bug being left out in the open by a virtual, rather than concealed, and in a graveyard. How they discovered this is a mystery Good question Stumbling upon archived caches is easy, especially if (like this one) it gets mentioned in the forums. But how would you specifically query for them? Quote
+Ike 13 Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 I never claimed it was bogus, but I don't think it's right to go around looking for archived virtuals to post finds to. I do commend the loggers for asking first. I just offered my opinion. Quote
Andronicus Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 ... After all this time it's a bit surprising to me. I don't mind, but I'm curious about how and why people seek out archived caches at all ... ? Why: They enjoy finding caches like that. How: They probably bumped into a link on a forum, or a fellow cacher told them about a cache they had done back in the day that had been fun etc. I recently asked the CO if I could log a archived virtual. It is part of a series of virtuals that has one in each provincial capital in Canada, and Ottawa (the nation's capital). I wanted to make the find to try to get as many of them as I can. The actual virtual had been archived, literaly; it had been packed up and stored in a warehouse. But google maps looked like it may have been re-assembled. The CO assured me that it was gone, so I didn't visit it. Anyway, that is an example of why someone would want to log an archived cache Quote
+lamoracke Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) I have logged one archived virtual and 2 archived webcams. Got permission in all 3 cases (though there is another archived virtual I am considering). You can't search for them in the classic sense but if you look at cacher's stats who have been around for a while, you will see the archived ones. As long as the COs do not mind, I do not see why GS would lock the caches at all. Whether a cache is active or not, as long as the CO does not mind, why should anyone care if its being logged? Not that many webcams and virtuals to go around anyway. In the example for the webcams, they were archived because the webcam was down indefinitely too long so it was regretfully archived. Years later, it came back. So, the CO was happy to have folks log it. Won't get many folks to log it as its archived, just a few nuts like me. Edited April 10, 2011 by lamoracke Quote
+Don_J Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 I never claimed it was bogus, but I don't think it's right to go around looking for archived virtuals to post finds to. I do commend the loggers for asking first. I just offered my opinion. Sorry. Perhaps my perception was off, but by saying that Groundspeak may lock the cache page led me to believe that you though the cache page was being abused. This is obviously not the case. Quote
+nikcap Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 Wow, it seems like this is a trend in places. I've noticed that several archived virtuals in my area are getting new found logs. I've inquired about this and I've heard the usual rhetoric: "They're Fun", "I'm playing the game my own way", and "what's the harm?" It seems that some are getting permission and logging, some CO are missing and don't notice and some CO are deleting logs and are not amused. Personally, while I agree with the basics sentiment, I don't understand why a "found it" log is better then using a Note log or logging one of the Waymarks that is also related to the virtual, or how about just enjoying the experience. Does every thing need to be validated with a on-line smilie? I kind of find the whole logging archived virtuals gauche and not "in the spirit of the game", if not a little dishonest too. That's my personal opinion, feel free to disagree and pursued me otherwise. As for finding archived virtual caches, it's pretty easy, just click on an old-timers profile and search through their virtual finds. Quote
knowschad Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 How they discovered this is a mystery Good question Stumbling upon archived caches is easy, especially if (like this one) it gets mentioned in the forums. But how would you specifically query for them? Either from your profile, or from the profile of another cacher that had found it when it was still a live cache, I'd guess. Quote
Mr.Yuck Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 Wow, it seems like this is a trend in places. I've noticed that several archived virtuals in my area are getting new found logs. I've inquired about this and I've heard the usual rhetoric: "They're Fun", "I'm playing the game my own way", and "what's the harm?" It seems that some are getting permission and logging, some CO are missing and don't notice and some CO are deleting logs and are not amused. Personally, while I agree with the basics sentiment, I don't understand why a "found it" log is better then using a Note log or logging one of the Waymarks that is also related to the virtual, or how about just enjoying the experience. Does every thing need to be validated with a on-line smilie? I kind of find the whole logging archived virtuals gauche and not "in the spirit of the game", if not a little dishonest too. That's my personal opinion, feel free to disagree and pursued me otherwise. As for finding archived virtual caches, it's pretty easy, just click on an old-timers profile and search through their virtual finds. I agree with this, as far as the logging of them. I also agree it's no great mystery how the guy(s) found them, click on the profile of any 2001 old-timer in your area, and you'll find bunches of long gone archived old-time caches. Heck, I was even doing this myself in 2003, which is quite a long time ago as well. Quote
Andronicus Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 Wow, it seems like this is a trend in places. I've noticed that several archived virtuals in my area are getting new found logs. I've inquired about this and I've heard the usual rhetoric: "They're Fun", "I'm playing the game my own way", and "what's the harm?" It seems that some are getting permission and logging, some CO are missing and don't notice and some CO are deleting logs and are not amused. Personally, while I agree with the basics sentiment, I don't understand why a "found it" log is better then using a Note log or logging one of the Waymarks that is also related to the virtual, or how about just enjoying the experience. Does every thing need to be validated with a on-line smilie? I kind of find the whole logging archived virtuals gauche and not "in the spirit of the game", if not a little dishonest too. That's my personal opinion, feel free to disagree and pursued me otherwise. As for finding archived virtual caches, it's pretty easy, just click on an old-timers profile and search through their virtual finds. I agree with this, as far as the logging of them. I also agree it's no great mystery how the guy(s) found them, click on the profile of any 2001 old-timer in your area, and you'll find bunches of long gone archived old-time caches. Heck, I was even doing this myself in 2003, which is quite a long time ago as well. I don't think it is dishonist, unless it is logged on a absent CO with the intent that the CO will not audit the log. I aggree that the CO should be consulted first. I think the real issue is why it was archived. If it was because cachers were causing some sort of issue, then you really shouldn't log it. Not sure of a good reason though, unless like my previous example, the monument or whatever was put in storage, but then was re-assemble. Quote
Recommended Posts
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.