Jump to content

Mission 9 Project Ape cache missing


Al 7365

Recommended Posts

I may have missed it, but where did MountainBiker ever claim he no longer wished to maintain this cache? I think it was archived due to a decision made a long time ago by Groundspeak.

 

To break from that would cause a huge problem in regards to the previously archived ape caches. Do we really want Groundspeak showing preferential treatment to caches that have a huge impact for their employees or with traffic to and from headquarters? Or do we want to see Groundspeak promote fairness to all, regardless whether or not we like any individual decision?

Link to comment
Perhaps it's just me but isn't collecting the little icons and pixels as much a part of geocahcing as logging caches.

 

Nope, for me geocaching is about finding geocaches. The icons the logs generate in my profile are irrelevant. I realize that some people "collect" icons, but that's a sub game that is only tangentially related to the sport. Unfortunately for the collectors, not every icon will be available to them. Many here will not be able to add locationless icons to their profiles because they started caching after they were removed from the site. C'est la vie.

 

Back to the subject, IMO, it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group.

 

Do you have evidence that there is an anti geocaching group involved with this? That's an angle I haven't heard.

 

As for special treatment, why would it be special treatment to allow someone to adopt it and continue this particular cache.

 

It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

How about it Ground Speak, have a little back bone.

 

They apparently do have backbone. They made an unpopular decision and so far have been sticking with it.

Link to comment
The electronic experience *shouldn't* matter... and yet, I think it does.

 

Let's not tell people what should or shouldn't matter to them about Geocaching. People like what they like and that's OK.

 

Honestly, this criticism isn't really directed at you , addisonbr, but it's not uncommon to hear undertones from people who seem to look down upon those geocachers who enjoy the numbers aspect of the game.

Perhaps it would read better as "... shouldn't matter to me." That was what I was trying to communicate about my letterboxing experiences.

 

I'm in your camp; I prefer not to tell people who enjoy something, that the reasons they enjoy it aren't good enough.

Link to comment

IMO one of the big attractions of the APE caches was the inevitability of them disappearing over time. That's why I was so happy to finally be able to find 1 and why I was so disappointed when 2 others disappeared a few years back. Sure, GS could replace them, but they chose not to. And even though it meant I was disappointed as many others have been and continue to be, I think it was the right move. If not for the icon and the "get it while you can" nature of these caches they'd be just another geocache series.

 

Am I sad to see it go? You bet! I had a great experience there with my brother. Had it not been for the APE cache we probably would have never ventured up there. And I feel for the folks that planned to go after it and now can't. But disappointment is a part of life. I've not yet been able to attend a mega event and I may never be able to. I could not go to the big 10th anniversary shindig. I may never get to get the maze icon. That's just the way things work. But as disappointed as I am by those, I am thankful for being able to do locationless caches, web cams, virtuals, and at least 1 of the APE caches, the Necropolis of Brittania Manor, and a ton of other great caches and events that many people will never know existed. It all evens out in my book.

 

</soapbox>

Link to comment
Do we really want Groundspeak showing preferential treatment to caches that have a huge impact for their employees or with traffic to and from headquarters? Or do we want to see Groundspeak promote fairness to all, regardless whether or not we like any individual decision?
It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

I was okay with the ISS cache, and didn't have a problem with the Original Stash Plaque Cache getting listed, despite both violating guidelines that few other caches would be allowed to. Special treatment for special caches seems okay by me.

Link to comment
Back to the subject, IMO, it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group.

Do you have evidence that there is an anti geocaching group involved with this? That's an angle I haven't heard.

I should start by saying I have no evidence of any kind. But I had heard that it was likely the work of someone with a vendetta against not just the CO but Groundspeak in general. I have been thinking of it as an 'anti-geocaching.com' person, although not 'anti-geocaching' in the environmental vigilante sense.

Link to comment
Do we really want Groundspeak showing preferential treatment to caches that have a huge impact for their employees or with traffic to and from headquarters? Or do we want to see Groundspeak promote fairness to all, regardless whether or not we like any individual decision?
It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

I was okay with the ISS cache, and didn't have a problem with the Original Stash Plaque Cache getting listed, despite both violating guidelines that few other caches would be allowed to. Special treatment for special caches seems okay by me.

 

Yes. but within the context of the other Ape Caches it would be special treatment. Let's compare apples to apples.

Link to comment

I going to Seattle in 3 weeks. One of the main resons why I choosed Seattle is because of the Ape cache.

I'm travelling 4700 miles from Sweden. So I'm not very pleased. :(

 

Any geocacher knows that there is a possibility that the cache may not be there when he hunts it. What if GS decided to replace it, and you traveled 4,700 miles to hunt it and the thief stole the replacement container the day you arrived?

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I'm in your camp; I prefer not to tell people who enjoy something, that the reasons they enjoy it aren't good enough.

 

How enlightened of you. :rolleyes:

 

I don't think anybody has said that they should not enjoy this Ape Cache, it's icon on their stat page, or the bump in numbers as a result of its finding. I think what people object to is the attempt to elevate the cache above all other caches simply because of the icon and to make the act of receiving the icon a greater event than finding any other cache anywhere else.

 

Unfortunately the marketing of this cache by Groundspeak itself kind of puts a wrinkle in things. Whoever brought that up has made the most rational argument of all in this thread.

Link to comment
Yes. but within the context of the other Ape Caches it would be special treatment. Let's compare apples to apples.

I'm not sure I follow... The ammo can at the commemorative plaque outside of Oregon is a simple traditional. But it gets special treatment over any other traditional. And, I think it was the right call. That listing is meaningful for a lot of people. I have no trouble with it getting special treatment over my ammo can traditional.

Link to comment

How enlightened of you. :rolleyes:

 

I don't think anybody has said that they should not enjoy this Ape Cache, it's icon on their stat page, or the bump in numbers as a result of its finding. I think what people object to is the attempt to elevate the cache above all other caches simply because of the icon and to make the act of receiving the icon a greater event than finding any other cache anywhere else.

I guess I'm just referring to the folks who insist that liking the APE cache for the pixels doesn't make sense to them and so it shouldn't matter. For me the focus is that people like something, never mind why they like it.

 

The APE cache and everything surrounding it (including the pixels) seemed to make a lot of folks pretty happy.

Link to comment
Yes. but within the context of the other Ape Caches it would be special treatment. Let's compare apples to apples.

I'm not sure I follow... The ammo can at the commemorative plaque outside of Oregon is a simple traditional. But it gets special treatment over any other traditional. And, I think it was the right call. That listing is meaningful for a lot of people. I have no trouble with it getting special treatment over my ammo can traditional.

 

Yes and neither the ammo can in Oregon nor your traditional are Ape Caches. The one this thread is about is and it's been treated just as all the other Ape Caches before it. Hence, you're applying your logic out of context.

 

It can still be meaningful to many people and archived. Nobody is saying it shouldn't be meaningful. But it should be archived.

Link to comment

How enlightened of you. :rolleyes:

 

I don't think anybody has said that they should not enjoy this Ape Cache, it's icon on their stat page, or the bump in numbers as a result of its finding. I think what people object to is the attempt to elevate the cache above all other caches simply because of the icon and to make the act of receiving the icon a greater event than finding any other cache anywhere else.

I guess I'm just referring to the folks who insist that liking the APE cache for the pixels doesn't make sense to them and so it shouldn't matter. For me the focus is that people like something, never mind why they like it.

 

The APE cache and everything surrounding it (including the pixels) seemed to make a lot of folks pretty happy.

 

Hey I drove four hours a few weekends ago for a GPS Adventure Maze icon. I fully admit it. There's nothign wrong with enjoying an icon.

 

That doesn't mean that this cache shouldn't be archived just because it has an icon and people enjoyed it. Even if you could wheel out an Enjoy-o-meter and point it at the cache page and somehow quantify the enjoyment as higher than some other cache that doesn't protect it from being archived for good reasons and in accordance to the same standards as the other Ape Caches.

 

People enjoy caches every day. These same caches get archived sometimes. There are other caches to find. There's even another Ape Cache to find.

 

Is the real issue here that the Ape Cache in Washington was much easier to find than the one in Brazil...?

Link to comment
Yes and neither the ammo can in Oregon nor your traditional are Ape Caches. The one this thread is about is and it's been treated just as all the other Ape Caches before it. Hence, you're applying your logic out of context.

 

It can still be meaningful to many people and archived. Nobody is saying it shouldn't be meaningful. But it should be archived.

I guess all I'm saying is that I'm comfortable with special caches, within a cache type, getting special treatment. The OSPC was special relative to other traditionals, and gets special treatment.

 

I have a sense that over the last five or six years, Mission 9 became special relative to other APE caches. I would be comfortable with it getting similar special treatment w.r.t. guidelines and policies, in much the way that Groundspeak has applied those exceptions in its past decision-making.

Link to comment
That doesn't mean that this cache shouldn't be archived just because it has an icon and people enjoyed it. Even if you could wheel out an Enjoy-o-meter and point it at the cache page and somehow quantify the enjoyment as higher than some other cache that doesn't protect it from being archived for good reasons and in accordance to the same standards as the other Ape Caches.

This actually gets to the heart of some of where I am in my thinking on this. I don't really disagree with this paragraph.

 

I've argued in the past that just because a lot of people enjoy something or it makes them happy, doesn't necessarily mean that's all we should care about. A lot of people loved the Trail of the Gods and the first installment of the ET Highway. But there were some major negatives that came along for the ride, and in my own (personal) opinion, the negatives outweighed all of that enjoyment.

 

Other than consistency with all of the APE caches that were archived way before Mission 9 evolved into a "thing", I'm having a hard time figuring out what the good reasons for archiving this cache are. It could be because the CO is tired of doing maintenance, although I don't think that's the case from what I've read. It could be because the land managers would like the cache archived, but I haven't seen anything about that. It could be because people fear for the safety of future finders, should the vigilante wait for them at GZ and wish to do them harm. But I haven't heard anything about that either.

 

I haven't seen anything except consistency. Which isn't to say that consistency isn't a valid goal - all things equal I think it's admirable of Groundspeak to strive for consistency. But I also don't think consistency means all flexibility must be abandoned. The inconsistencies generated by past, famous exceptions haven't seemed to hurt us much. Mission 9 is the most 'favorite-voted' cache in the world, out of almost 1.5 million active listings. If there aren't good reasons beyond consistency for consistency's sake, I can see why people are upset.

Link to comment
The experience is the same however and isn't that what this sport is all about?

I would argue that the experience would be significantly different without the clump of pixels. Those pixels are one third of the Trifecta, (or Triad, as some call it), that Groundspeak has touted over the years as being special. By plopping out a new cache, with a new GC number, folks would not be able to achieve the Trifecta. All they would get is a single digit increase in their "Traditional Caches Found" column. For many, a traditional is not valuable enough to warrant driving across the country or flying across the globe. According to what I've seen on the cache page, the Trifecta is worth such efforts and expense.

 

Speaking strictly for myself, a diagonal trip from one side of our country to the other would be very difficult to pull off, due to financial considerations. But it's still possible. Barely. For something as valuable, (to me), as the Trifecta, I would be willing to make the investment. This would be a vacation of a lifetime. I suspect that many who have not made the journey feel the same way.

 

True, one can still get the icon, if they are able to travel to Brazil.

 

But the Trifecta is gone forever.

Link to comment
The experience is the same however and isn't that what this sport is all about?

I would argue that the experience would be significantly different without the clump of pixels. Those pixels are one third of the Trifecta, (or Triad, as some call it), that Groundspeak has touted over the years as being special. By plopping out a new cache, with a new GC number, folks would not be able to achieve the Trifecta. All they would get is a single digit increase in their "Traditional Caches Found" column. For many, a traditional is not valuable enough to warrant driving across the country or flying across the globe. According to what I've seen on the cache page, the Trifecta is worth such efforts and expense.

 

Speaking strictly for myself, a diagonal trip from one side of our country to the other would be very difficult to pull off, due to financial considerations. But it's still possible. Barely. For something as valuable, (to me), as the Trifecta, I would be willing to make the investment. This would be a vacation of a lifetime. I suspect that many who have not made the journey feel the same way.

 

True, one can still get the icon, if they are able to travel to Brazil.

 

But the Trifecta is gone forever.

You would also be unable to get the souvenir, the one in Brazil does not sport the souvenir. Again, a distinction GS made.

Link to comment

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

This cache has always been a marketing campaign. As a business decision, archiving it makes very little sense.

 

Groundspeak elevated the status of this cache by giving it a special icon and souvenir, making it part of the "The Triad", and then marketing the triad as "one of the crowning achievements of geocaching". It is very difficult to understand why they would do that but then turn around and archive cache because the container was stolen. The container ultimately had very little to do with why finding this cache was considered a rite of passage by many geocachers.

 

All the wailing about how it would unfair to treat this cache any differently is just crying over spilt milk. This cache was already being treated differently.

Link to comment
Perhaps it's just me but isn't collecting the little icons and pixels as much a part of geocahcing as logging caches.

 

Nope, for me geocaching is about finding geocaches. The icons the logs generate in my profile are irrelevant. I realize that some people "collect" icons, but that's a sub game that is only tangentially related to the sport. Unfortunately for the collectors, not every icon will be available to them. Many here will not be able to add locationless icons to their profiles because they started caching after they were removed from the site. C'est la vie.

 

Back to the subject, IMO, it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group.

 

Do you have evidence that there is an anti geocaching group involved with this? That's an angle I haven't heard.

 

As for special treatment, why would it be special treatment to allow someone to adopt it and continue this particular cache.

 

It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

How about it Ground Speak, have a little back bone.

 

They apparently do have backbone. They made an unpopular decision and so far have been sticking with it.

 

I was trying not to make this about anyone but you do come to mind. You are one of those cachers that seem to think it's your way or the high way. Glad you are not a GS employee or owner. I won't bother with rebutting your arguments since it would obviously be wasted.

Link to comment
Perhaps it's just me but isn't collecting the little icons and pixels as much a part of geocahcing as logging caches.

 

Nope, for me geocaching is about finding geocaches. The icons the logs generate in my profile are irrelevant. I realize that some people "collect" icons, but that's a sub game that is only tangentially related to the sport. Unfortunately for the collectors, not every icon will be available to them. Many here will not be able to add locationless icons to their profiles because they started caching after they were removed from the site. C'est la vie.

 

Back to the subject, IMO, it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group.

 

Do you have evidence that there is an anti geocaching group involved with this? That's an angle I haven't heard.

 

As for special treatment, why would it be special treatment to allow someone to adopt it and continue this particular cache.

 

It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

How about it Ground Speak, have a little back bone.

 

They apparently do have backbone. They made an unpopular decision and so far have been sticking with it.

 

I was trying not to make this about anyone but you do come to mind. You are one of those cachers that seem to think it's your way or the high way. Glad you are not a GS employee or owner. I won't bother with rebutting your arguments since it would obviously be wasted.

 

I'm the new guy here so I don't know first hand what transpired with these caches.

 

But if what Briansnat has posted is true, it seems like he championed NOT archiving these caches in the past. I believe that is why he has taken the stance now that since they did go through with the archival of the other ape caches then that they should now follow that path to its logical conclusion. That means that eventually Groundspeak knew there would no longer be any ape caches. They had to know that when they archived the very first one.

 

But if I am wrong, please let me know. I just don't feel like researching this one.

Link to comment

As I previously said: I've already found an APE cache and have the icon. Those pixels don't matter to me. Would it be cool to have a '2' next to it instead of a '1'? Sure. Would it be nice to have the souvenir? You betcha. Can I live without them? Yep. Will I make the effort to go to that location, thru that tunnel without being able to get those things? Nope. Like it or not, play the game that way or not- that's what I think the vast majority of people who visited it would also say. There are other tunnels and other views. Without the APE cache as the destination, N 47° 23.514 W 121° 27.305 is just another random spot on the globe. You see it was the entirety of the thing that's the key here- from the scenery, to the access, to those little ephemeral pixels.

Link to comment

It's already adopted - by Mr. Moun10bike. Ultimately he's the one to decide whether to keep it going or end the North American APE Experience.

 

In my personal opinion, if he doesn't want to maintain it he should turn it over to someone else who does. It's not about the tin can, it's about the location and experience - if it were not then all geocaching is is a GPSr aided bean counting game.

I don't think this is a fair characterization. It's a Groundspeak decision, and although he is a Groundspeak employee, Moun10bike the geocacher and cache owner has been nothing if not tireless in his efforts to maintain this cache.

+1 Well said.

Link to comment
Perhaps it's just me but isn't collecting the little icons and pixels as much a part of geocahcing as logging caches.

 

Nope, for me geocaching is about finding geocaches. The icons the logs generate in my profile are irrelevant. I realize that some people "collect" icons, but that's a sub game that is only tangentially related to the sport. Unfortunately for the collectors, not every icon will be available to them. Many here will not be able to add locationless icons to their profiles because they started caching after they were removed from the site. C'est la vie.

 

Back to the subject, IMO, it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group.

 

Do you have evidence that there is an anti geocaching group involved with this? That's an angle I haven't heard.

 

As for special treatment, why would it be special treatment to allow someone to adopt it and continue this particular cache.

 

It would special treatment because every other A.P.E. cache was treated differently when it went missing.

 

How about it Ground Speak, have a little back bone.

 

They apparently do have backbone. They made an unpopular decision and so far have been sticking with it.

 

I was trying not to make this about anyone but you do come to mind. You are one of those cachers that seem to think it's your way or the high way. Glad you are not a GS employee or owner. I won't bother with rebutting your arguments since it would obviously be wasted.

 

If it were "my way" all of the A.P.E. caches would have been replaced, where possible. I spoke out against the archival of Maryland A.P.E. cache, but once the decision was made that there would be no replacement of the A.P.E.s it is only right that Tunnel of Light be archived. I'm sure the cachers in Illinois, Georgia, Japan, NY, Maryland, California etc. would love to have the opportunity to log an A.P.E. cache without buying plane tickets and booking a hotel room. Why should Tunnel of Light be treated any differently just because its the next to last one?

Link to comment

Why should Tunnel of Light be treated any differently just because its the next to last one?

Because GS has treated it different than the others. They promoted it as one of the premier caches of the Northwest, part of the famous Triad and blessed it with it's own special souvenir. Did they do that with the other ape caches? nope. Are they doing that with the remaining ape cache? nope.

Edited by jholly
Link to comment

 

If it were "my way" all of the A.P.E. caches would have been replaced, where possible. I spoke out against the archival of Maryland A.P.E. cache, but once the decision was made that there would be no replacement of the A.P.E.s it is only right that Tunnel of Light be archived. I'm sure the cachers in Illinois, Georgia, Japan, NY, Maryland, California etc. would love to have the opportunity to log an A.P.E. cache without buying plane tickets and booking a hotel room. Why should Tunnel of Light be treated any differently just because its the next to last one?

 

Gee when you put it that way it seems so easy, though I would refer you to the timely quote above from Ralph Waldo Emerson.

 

As for "Geocaching Policy" none of it is written in stone. It was made by human beings who have the power to change it. Since we've been caching there have been all sorts of changes. You used to be able to (with the help of a reviewer) adopt "abandoned" caches. You used to be able to adopt Virtual Caches. You used to be able to require finders take a picture with silly glasses, or tell a knock-knock joke to claim a smiley on a "Traditional Cache." I could go on.... Perhaps it is time to re-examine this particular policy.

 

The reason to re-examine it is in part that this A.P.E. Cache (as other have stated quite eloquently) over the last 5 years has become different than the others. If there were no such thing as the "triad/trifecta" if there were no uniqure souvenir then it wouldn't be different & there might not be a 5 page thread on the forums. ;)

 

jrr

 

(Disclosure, we found this cache last year in counjunction with Geowoodstock. We did not go through the tunnel since it was closed. We are coming back to Seattle for the block party and may still venture through the tunnel for the experience that we missed by coming up the trail.)

Link to comment

I would argue it is not Groundspeak that made the APE cache something special, but Geocachers themselves. Several years ago when I first started hearing about the trifecta, it was Geocachers coining the term, it was Geocachers promoting the idea that this was somehow a special accomplishment -- not Groundspeak. Groundspeak may have done some marketing and promotion, but that came AFTER cachers started making it a big deal -- Groundspeak saw an opportunity and took it; I can't blame them for that since they are a for-profit company.

 

I can only imagine that Groundspeak knows the marketing hit it will take by having this cache Archived. It could not have been an easy decision, given that this cache was being lovingly maintained by one of their own employees. They made a decision many years ago and are living up to that decision.

 

If those pixels on a profile really mean that much to you then I suggest you start planning for a trip to Brazil. Do it, but be aware that cache could disappear at any time too.

 

Now for a conspiracy theory... :ph34r: These caches were hidden as part of a promotion with a movie studio. Perhaps there was a legal clause in the original agreement that stated these caches could only have a limited shelf life and that is why Groundspeak won't make an exception for this cache, even though it will hurt their business. Let's remember that back in 2001 it was Groundspeak that stood to benefit by being tied in with a major motion picture, not the other way around... :ph34r:

Link to comment

Perhaps some of the anger/disappointment should be aimed at the short-sightedness of whoever at Groundspeak developed this policy in the first place.

 

Or maybe at the short-sightedness of whoever promoted such a cache knowing the very real possibility that it would one day need to be archived.

 

Or maybe at the special promotion of this particular cache which may have led to its being stolen.

Link to comment

it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group. It's sort of like giving in to the demands of a terrorist. You gain nothing from it, give up everything and they still do their dirty deed.

 

Quoted for truth

 

I going to Seattle in 3 weeks. One of the main resons why I choosed Seattle is because of the Ape cache.

I'm travelling 4700 miles from Sweden. So I'm not very pleased. :(

 

Any geocacher knows that there is a possibility that the cache may not be there when he hunts it. What if GS decided to replace it, and you traveled 4,700 miles to hunt it and the thief stole the replacement container the day you arrived?

 

Easy for you to say, you did not pay to fly 4,700 miles.

 

If goundspeak would just realize that geocaching is not the same game that existed back when the last one was archived then the whole problem would be moot. Just replace it already.

Edited by releasethedogs
Link to comment
Perhaps there was a legal clause in the original agreement that stated these caches could only have a limited shelf life and that is why Groundspeak won't make an exception for this cache, even though it will hurt their business.
If that would be true, it would be a fair reason. I still don't see the downside of saying "Alright folks - we change the policy: Every APE gets reinstated except for those which can't be replaced because local laws / proximity issues / guideline problems."

 

I am just wondering.

Link to comment

Perhaps some of the anger/disappointment should be aimed at the short-sightedness of whoever at Groundspeak developed this policy in the first place.

 

Or maybe at the short-sightedness of whoever promoted such a cache knowing the very real possibility that it would one day need to be archived.

 

Or maybe at the special promotion of this particular cache which may have led to its being stolen.

 

Not the person who actually stole it?

Link to comment

Perhaps some of the anger/disappointment should be aimed at the short-sightedness of whoever at Groundspeak developed this policy in the first place.

 

Or maybe at the short-sightedness of whoever promoted such a cache knowing the very real possibility that it would one day need to be archived.

 

Or maybe at the special promotion of this particular cache which may have led to its being stolen.

 

Not the person who actually stole it?

 

I thought there was already anger and disappointment aimed at the thief.

Link to comment

It's already adopted - by Mr. Moun10bike. Ultimately he's the one to decide whether to keep it going or end the North American APE Experience.

 

In my personal opinion, if he doesn't want to maintain it he should turn it over to someone else who does. It's not about the tin can, it's about the location and experience - if it were not then all geocaching is is a GPSr aided bean counting game.

I don't think this is a fair characterization. It's a Groundspeak decision, and although he is a Groundspeak employee, Moun10bike the geocacher and cache owner has been nothing if not tireless in his efforts to maintain this cache.

+1 Well said.

 

I don't doubt he has done a great job. What I take issue with is the GS policy which says "It's about the Experience" out of one side of its mouth and then seems to say "The experience takes a back seat to rules" out of the other side. As a GS lackey he has to go along with what the honcho says.

 

But archiving an APE cache because the original (or should we say 90% of the original) tin can is gone is preserving some rule against the interests of those who play the game. (Take note of the visitor from Sweden, please.)

 

As the CO/adopter of the cache is still active and the location is still available for the cache, really, what's the hubbub over it being the exact can? If one of my cache containers goes missing, I don't archive it, I put another one out there (unless the location is untenable or destroyed.) If Moun10bike doesn't want to place another can out there then please adopt it out to someone who will. I'll even buy the can and ship it to someone who does want to look after it, if that's what it takes.

Link to comment

it would be nice if GS would allow someone to adopt the cache and restore it if for no other reason then not caving to a anti-cacher group. It's sort of like giving in to the demands of a terrorist. You gain nothing from it, give up everything and they still do their dirty deed.

 

Quoted for truth

 

I going to Seattle in 3 weeks. One of the main resons why I choosed Seattle is because of the Ape cache.

I'm travelling 4700 miles from Sweden. So I'm not very pleased. :(

 

Any geocacher knows that there is a possibility that the cache may not be there when he hunts it. What if GS decided to replace it, and you traveled 4,700 miles to hunt it and the thief stole the replacement container the day you arrived?

 

Easy for you to say, you did not pay to fly 4,700 miles.

 

If goundspeak would just realize that geocaching is not the same game that existed back when the last one was archived then the whole problem would be moot. Just replace it already.

 

Apparently it isn't. The concept of finding geocaches and with them, interesting new places, has taken a back seat to racking up numbers and collecting icons.

 

I found an A.P.E. cache and it was a very ordinary cache. I was actually a bit disappointed because I was expecting some sort of special experience. Tunnel of Light from what I understand was different because it was not only an A.P.E. cache it was a great experience. If someone where to place an ammo box in the same spot the experience would be the same.

 

Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

 

And BTW I would not pay to fly 4,700 miles to find any cache because I know quite well that caches are transitory.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

The current last surviving APE cache in Brazil had been archived previously in 2004 for over a year because of fake loggers and not being found in 3 years since the FTF. It was unarchived (as well as being moved some 700 feet).

 

It's in a state park where you can drive within 600 feet of it, and not really that much of an unreachable goal. A round trip plane ticket from here is $800 to $900, which really is not too bad considering the beauty of the area, and the experience.

Link to comment

The current last surviving APE cache in Brazil had been archived previously in 2004 for over a year because of fake loggers and not being found in 3 years since the FTF. It was unarchived (as well as being moved some 700 feet).

 

It's in a state park where you can drive within 600 feet of it, and not really that much of an unreachable goal. A round trip plane ticket from here is $800 to $900, which really is not too bad considering the beauty of the area, and the experience.

 

I'm hoping it's still active when I attend WC 2014. I'll just samba over to the cache ...

Link to comment

If someone where to place an ammo box in the same spot the experience would be the same.

Again, it might be the same "to you", because things like the icon, the Trifecta and the suvenier are not important to you. To you, it's just another ammo can. Hopefully, I'll never get that jaded. But even the most cynical cacher should be able to grasp that things like the icon, the Trifecta and the souvenir might very well be important to others. I can assure you that achieving the Trifecta is important to me. If this means you have to discredit me by claiming I'm an icon junkie, I hope you'll reconsider. Typically I find both your caching and your Reviewer personas to be courteous and professional, and it does you no credit to insult those who you disagree with in this matter.

Link to comment

It's already adopted - by Mr. Moun10bike. Ultimately he's the one to decide whether to keep it going or end the North American APE Experience.

 

In my personal opinion, if he doesn't want to maintain it he should turn it over to someone else who does. It's not about the tin can, it's about the location and experience - if it were not then all geocaching is is a GPSr aided bean counting game.

I don't think this is a fair characterization. It's a Groundspeak decision, and although he is a Groundspeak employee, Moun10bike the geocacher and cache owner has been nothing if not tireless in his efforts to maintain this cache.

+1 Well said.

 

I don't doubt he has done a great job. What I take issue with is the GS policy which says "It's about the Experience" out of one side of its mouth and then seems to say "The experience takes a back seat to rules" out of the other side. As a GS lackey he has to go along with what the honcho says.

 

But archiving an APE cache because the original (or should we say 90% of the original) tin can is gone is preserving some rule against the interests of those who play the game. (Take note of the visitor from Sweden, please.)

 

As the CO/adopter of the cache is still active and the location is still available for the cache, really, what's the hubbub over it being the exact can? If one of my cache containers goes missing, I don't archive it, I put another one out there (unless the location is untenable or destroyed.) If Moun10bike doesn't want to place another can out there then please adopt it out to someone who will. I'll even buy the can and ship it to someone who does want to look after it, if that's what it takes.

You're contradicting yourself, and missing the point we were making. As your first statement suggests, it's not Moun10Bike's choice - he wanted to replace it and keep it active; he argued for that. So you and all the people who are clamoring that 'he should allow someone to adopt because apparently he doesn't want to deal with it' are way off-base. As numerous others have noted in this thread, it was Groundspeak's decision to enforce its established policy on APE caches (with their rationale), so Jon didn't have a choice. I don't agree with their rationale, either, I concur with some posts about how times have changed and the Triad concept making it special, but it's not my decision, either, although I still hope to make something happen for my Going APE event in August.

Link to comment
Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

I don't disagree with the general thrust behind the quote; I agree with a lot of what it means.

 

I've just never heard Mission 9 referred to in a negative way. I've only ever heard positive things about people's special trips and WSGA's outings and so on. If there was any negativity towards Mission 9 as it existed a month ago, I never picked up on it.

Link to comment

Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

I agree with that statement which is why this APE cache shouldn't be gone forever.

 

These days geocaching is about finding containers in uninspired locations. Park and grabs, numbers run trails, power trails. We need to have our iconic caches out there to remind us that geocaching is more than just another logbook. There was a time when every new cache took you to yet another park you didn't know about. These days every new cache takes you to a parking lot you wouldn't otherwise visit. Some cachers filter out all micros just so they have a better chance of finding something interesting.

 

What sets certain caches apart? I hear discussions all the time about visiting certain landmark caches: Mingo - the oldest active cache, The Original Stash Tribute Plaque, GC Headquarters, the APE cache, the oldest cache in any particular state, etc. Sure, if Mingo goes away there's a next oldest to fill its place, but not with the APE caches and more specifically, not what the Washington APE cache has become. It has turned into "the cache to find" because it stands for so much: It's part of the "triad" Groundspeak promotes, it gives you a unique icon, it was a memento from the early days of geocaching, the experience getting there is not to be missed, etc.

 

This APE cache is more than just the container and log and has become a destination cache for many. I wish I would have had the time to get it when I was in Washington a few years ago. I had even stopped the car just across from the tunnel, but at that time it hadn't reached the iconic status it has today. There was no "triad" then and there were other APE caches available. Now there is only one other and although it has the icon, it doesn't have nearly the following the one in Washington did.

 

The decision to archive the others was made in a different time. Times have changed. That decision should be reviewed.

Link to comment

Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

I agree with that statement which is why this APE cache shouldn't be gone forever.

 

I'm not sure your conclusion to this is the correct one.

 

Scenario one: Cacher is out to get the icon in their profile. They go to the APE cache, find something there. It could be a micro for all they care. They find it, they get their icon, they're happy. Even if they didn't find anything, they'd still log it.

 

Scenario two: Cacher is out for the experience. They go to the APE cache, find something there. Option A: It's the original APE cache. Reaction: "holy cow, look at that huge thing! And the APE logo on it! wow!" Option B: there's something else there, maybe an ammo can. Reaction: "oh, that's it? Just a regular ammo can?"

 

Now of course this is purely made up, but looking at it in this light would make archive the right choice.

Edited by dfx
Link to comment

Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

I agree with that statement which is why this APE cache shouldn't be gone forever.

 

I'm not sure your conclusion to this is the correct one.

 

Scenario one: Cacher is out to get the icon in their profile. They go to the APE cache, find something there. It could be a micro for all they care. They find it, they get their icon, they're happy. Even if they didn't find anything, they'd still log it.

 

Scenario two: Cacher is out for the experience. They go to the APE cache, find something there. Option A: It's the original APE cache. Reaction: "holy cow, look at that huge thing! And the APE logo on it! wow!" Option B: there's something else there, maybe an ammo can. Reaction: "oh, that's it? Just a regular ammo can?"

 

Now of course this is purely made up, but looking at it in this light would make archive the right choice.

If the cache were to change significantly, then it should be archived. From what I understand, part of the APE container had already been replaced. That could be done again as it was just a large ammo box painted a certain way. Large ammo boxes are easy to come by, so this shouldn't be an issue.

 

If the APE cache was replaced with a micro just to allow it to continue, then that wouldn't be appropriate. The container should stay as close to the original as possible.

Link to comment

Yes, geocaching has changed since the last A.P.E. cache was archived, and not for the better. ####

I agree with that statement which is why this APE cache shouldn't be gone forever.

 

I'm not sure your conclusion to this is the correct one.

 

Scenario one: Cacher is out to get the icon in their profile. They go to the APE cache, find something there. It could be a micro for all they care. They find it, they get their icon, they're happy. Even if they didn't find anything, they'd still log it.

 

Scenario two: Cacher is out for the experience. They go to the APE cache, find something there. Option A: It's the original APE cache. Reaction: "holy cow, look at that huge thing! And the APE logo on it! wow!" Option B: there's something else there, maybe an ammo can. Reaction: "oh, that's it? Just a regular ammo can?"

 

Now of course this is purely made up, but looking at it in this light would make archive the right choice.

 

Well, actually... no. Scenario 2, Option B is not plausible.

 

At the end of that hike through the tunnel, yeah - you might find an ammo can that looks like every other ammo can in the world. Or you might find a bison tube. Heck, you might just find lock-n-lock with a cracked lid and nothing inside but a soggy log book and a "Come to our Church!" flyer - doesn't matter. If you're out for the experience, no matter what the experience is - you'll get it. And you'll tell the story to your mates back home over a pint. THIS is what Mission 9 is all about. Not the silly container. THE EXPERIENCE. Saying that you did the TRIAD, man! Icons and souvenirs are just icing on the cake. Groundspeak and the caching community have made this one special. We have collectively set it up as a stop on the great pilgrimage. It was irresponsible of Groundspeak to think they could take that away from us.

 

I wonder how many people might pause and reflect on this occurrence when it comes time to renew that premium membership?

Link to comment
Well, actually... no. Scenario 2, Option B is not plausible.

 

At the end of that hike through the tunnel, yeah - you might find an ammo can that looks like every other ammo can in the world. Or you might find a bison tube. Heck, you might just find lock-n-lock with a cracked lid and nothing inside but a soggy log book and a "Come to our Church!" flyer - doesn't matter. If you're out for the experience, no matter what the experience is - you'll get it. And you'll tell the story to your mates back home over a pint. THIS is what Mission 9 is all about. Not the silly container. THE EXPERIENCE.

 

Sorry, I should've been clearer. I was talking about the experience of the cache, while you're talking about the experience of the trip. The latter exists on its own, cache or no cache. So the trip alone doesn't warrant keeping the cache alive, as going for any other cache in the same area will give you the same experience. Put a micro in the same spot, list it as traditional cache and the trip experience will be the same, right?

Link to comment

I can't believe this. We have booked a trip to Seattle to go to Groundspeak and of course to visit the ape cache. While creating the first queries I recognized this. This is a no go - sorry, I am so disappointed ..... I think I'll quit

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...