Cache Courtesy...

[+BabaBooyah]

I have a couple of general questions for the group about common cache courtesy.

 

I am a newbee, I am definitely having a lot of fun, and meeting great people along the way. I both find and hide caches, small scale on both at this point.

 

My cache courtesy questions relate to my own caches:

 

1.) Is it appropriate for a cacher to post a detailed description of my cache, including exact location, container details, pictures of GZ, etc. as a log? I have been deleting such posts as they appear, I could encrypt instead. I know that most of us, myself included, go right to those logs when we're in need of help, but imho there should be some element of challenge here. I mean, what's the challenge in "it's a clear box right around the back side of the only black rock on the one hill in the area". That's a giveaway. When I see them, I delete them. Sorry if I've offended anyone by doing so, so, what's the official and un-official view on such log posts?

 

2.) I find it almost too funny that I get hounded regularly to update coordinates that are correct, then go out to discover that someone has moved the cache to a "better location", or they just forget where they found it. I really can't get too upset about this one because if I haven't done it myself, I probably will at some point I've updated a couple of my cache descriptions to say "please put it back where you found it", seems kind of redundant and obvious but, any suggestions on this one? Just part of the game?

 

3.) I have a propensity for placing caches in high muggle areas. It is what it is. I'm not trying to get anyone in trouble, or jeopardize someone's safety, etc., etc. We all know and assume the risks associated with geocaching. The fact is that I live in a relatively congested area, most of the pristine open non-muggle areas appear to be well spoken for in terms of an established cache presence, and I want to keep somewhat close to my small group of hidden caches from an upkeep and maintenance standpoint. I know that there are a variety of views on placing high muggle caches but it seems to me that if someone doesn't want to look for one, they shouldn't, and the rest should be able to follow their bliss accordingly. Surely geocaching has something to offer everybody, and as someone recently told me, there's clearly times when you don't want to be walking through the rain, mud, mosquito and tick laden trails in the summer swelter, when a daring park and cache will do just fine.

 

Otherwise, no complaints. I'm learning every day, thanks to the great cachers all around me. I'll be interested to get some views on the three items above, thanks again.

 

BabaBooyah

[+StarBrand]

1) I would send a very polite email asking them to edit their log due to too much spoiler information - then wait a reasonable number of days for them to comply. If I need to delete it due to spoilers - I write and tell them exactly why - politely inviting them to relog more appropriately.

 

2)I have very little experience with that happening. Just go move it back and verify coordinates.

 

3)Many cachers including myself tend to avoid caching in high muggle areas. Not all spots 'need' a cache. It is what it is. No need to beat up anybody over it though.

 

Welcome aboard!!

[+Ike 13]

2) How far is it moving? 5ft? That's not much. 20+ft maybe your coordinates are not that accurate and the finders think it is in the wrong spot (they still should not move it, but this may be why).

[+NanCycle]

1. Haven't had this problem myself, but there's nothing inappropriate about your response. Starbrand's idea is a bit nicer, though. Maybe you could encrypt the log while waiting for the finder to relog. (I've never tried that, so I don't know how it would work.)

 

2. I've had my caches migrate, but never had anyone tell me to correct the coordinates. Migration happens, for any of a number of reasons.

 

3. To each his own--you do it your way and others will do it theirs. Anyone can ignore any caches that aren't their cup of tea.

[+Coldgears]

I've had one of my geocaches hellbent on going 10 feet from my coords. After two trips of finding it out in the open in the same spot, I decided just to cover it up with a piece of concrete nearby... No use fighting it.

[orb360]

Of the 4 I've found so far I've replaced all of them exactly as found.

 

2 of the 4 were in very high traffic areas (Salt Lake Gateway Mall at 6pm on a Saturday? O_O )

 

Picking the exact time to go grab the cache without mall security/people paying attention was a rush.

[mike'n'marie]

I'm fairly new to caching myself, but if I may suggest a bit of insight; your first problem is that you do not necessarily want blatant spoilers on your logs, yet you're not sure if someone will find it offensive for you deleting their log. Simple: just encrypt the log and leave it! Before a user even scrolls down to the logs, they are informed of a possible *SPOILER ALERT*, and encrypting the log will stop someone from just glancing over it and getting too much info that way. If it is encrypted, then the user has to actively decode the log to get the spoiler hint anyway. Some people may even thank you for it, if they may have had a hard time searching for it over and over on their own.

The second problem I have virtually no experience in my caches migrating... try placing them in places that have meaning. like the quote on the geocaching website says, "If the only reason for the location of your cache is the cache itself, find a better location!" If you are hiding caches just to "fill up space", yet keep them in a general area for maintenance- maybe other cachers are 'migrating' your hides to better locations that would be either more logical, meaningful, or even inconspicuous. However to finished on your third point, You are absolutely correct; if you do not like searching in high-muggle-traffic areas, don't cache there. Just like if you don't like whats on the T.V., change the channel... or if you don't like whats on the menu, don't order. If someone doesn't want to look for your cache at some certain spot, that doesn't mean you are not allowed to put it there!

[+luvvinbird]

I'm starting to see a trend especially among some newbie geocachers who think the cache was placed only for them to find. Some of the spoiler pictures I've seen posted must surely disappoint the CO and definitely spoils the surprise of discovery for anyone else. Check out the photo galleries on GC2M389, GCY2B2, GC2MD6Q. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT!!!

[+A & J Tooling]

I don't really like when they take pictures because they do really help find the CZ. As for deleting for too much info revealed, more power to you.

[+Starwolf013]

I'm starting to see a trend especially among some newbie geocachers who think the cache was placed only for them to find. Some of the spoiler pictures I've seen posted must surely disappoint the CO and definitely spoils the surprise of discovery for anyone else. Check out the photo galleries on GC2M389, GCY2B2, GC2MD6Q. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT!!!

 

I am surprised the CO's haven't emailed the one caching couple that was in all three of these examples to kindly ask them not to post photos of the cache. If they are new, they probably see no harm in posting these photographs. Sometimes it only takes one voice to correct a bad habit.

[+luvvinbird]

I'm starting to see a trend especially among some newbie geocachers who think the cache was placed only for them to find. Some of the spoiler pictures I've seen posted must surely disappoint the CO and definitely spoils the surprise of discovery for anyone else. Check out the photo galleries on GC2M389, GCY2B2, GC2MD6Q. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT!!!

 

I am surprised the CO's haven't emailed the one caching couple that was in all three of these examples to kindly ask them not to post photos of the cache. If they are new, they probably see no harm in posting these photographs. Sometimes it only takes one voice to correct a bad habit.

You're right. I'm about to hide another cache, only this time I'm going to ask that those (spoiler) types of photos not be logged by those who find it. Hopefully, gecachers who read the cache description will read that line as well.

[+luvvinbird]

I'm starting to see a trend especially among some newbie geocachers who think the cache was placed only for them to find. Some of the spoiler pictures I've seen posted must surely disappoint the CO and definitely spoils the surprise of discovery for anyone else. Check out the photo galleries on GC2M389, GCY2B2, GC2MD6Q. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT!!!

 

I am surprised the CO's haven't emailed the one caching couple that was in all three of these examples to kindly ask them not to post photos of the cache. If they are new, they probably see no harm in posting these photographs. Sometimes it only takes one voice to correct a bad habit.

You're right. I'm about to hide another cache, only this time I'm going to ask that those (spoiler) types of photos not be logged by those who find it. Hopefully, geocachers who read the cache description will read that line as well.

[+luvvinbird]

Sorry about the double entries. I don't know how I did that.

[+BabaBooyah]

I'm starting to see a trend especially among some newbie geocachers who think the cache was placed only for them to find. Some of the spoiler pictures I've seen posted must surely disappoint the CO and definitely spoils the surprise of discovery for anyone else. Check out the photo galleries on GC2M389, GCY2B2, GC2MD6Q. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT!!!

 

I am surprised the CO's haven't emailed the one caching couple that was in all three of these examples to kindly ask them not to post photos of the cache. If they are new, they probably see no harm in posting these photographs. Sometimes it only takes one voice to correct a bad habit.

You're right. I'm about to hide another cache, only this time I'm going to ask that those (spoiler) types of photos not be logged by those who find it. Hopefully, geocachers who read the cache description will read that line as well.

 

For the record, the offending log that prompted me to post to this forum in the first place was posted by a veteran geocacher with many thousands of caches under their belt. That's why I was so shocked, and quite frankly, upset about it. The only thing that I could think of is that it was one of many cacher visits to this particular cache that day, and the person wanted to make it easier for their friends to find it. The same person actually posted another less obvious log several days later, granted with no apology or explanation as to why they posted the original offending log in the first place, but as far as I'm concerned, the issue is closed. I am still a novice, but from my perspective, it should be obvious to novices and pros alike that "give away" details in a log (i.e. exact location and container details, photos of GZ, etc.) take the challenge and fun away from the cache in a big kind of way, and can potentially ruin the experience for the next cacher. I'm not going to encrypt when I find those logs posted to caches that I manage, I'm going to delete them, with an explanation and a polite request to the poster, enough said.

[+angevine]

As for #2, it has often amazed me to see how many people do *not* replace caches precisely where they found them. Bizarre. You might even put a note on the cache that your coordinates are correct and that the cache has a tendency to wander a bit.

 

And perhaps #2 is not unconnected to #3 ... caches do wander more when muggles are about. If you like placing them there, then absolutely go for it ... but remember that they *will* disappear, get destroyed, and wander ....

 

Enjoy!

 

Jeannette

(I wrote the book on geocaching, literally! Paperback version of OPEN YOUR HEART WITH GEOCACHING is at http://www.amazon.com/Open-Your-Heart-Geocaching-Exploration/dp/1601660049/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1308329880&sr=8-1 ... ebook version is at http://www.booksaboutgeocaching,com )

[+ncfinn]

As for #2, it has often amazed me to see how many people do *not* replace caches precisely where they found them. Bizarre.

 

If a find the cache out in the open, in full view, right next to a likely hiding spot, i will NOT replace the cache precisely where i found it.

 

If the description says cache is five feet up and i find the cache on the ground, i will NOT replace the cache precisely where i found it.

[+NanCycle]

As for #2, it has often amazed me to see how many people do *not* replace caches precisely where they found them. Bizarre.

 

If a find the cache out in the open, in full view, right next to a likely hiding spot, i will NOT replace the cache precisely where i found it.

 

If the description says cache is five feet up and i find the cache on the ground, i will NOT replace the cache precisely where i found it.

 

Well, duh. And you found them there because someone else didn't replace them exactly as they found them. A little bit of (uncommon) common sense is called for, too.