Jump to content

Upset a Devonian!


Mallah
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

http://coord.info/GC2FPJ4

 

Following on from a discussion we had a few weeks ago, I decided to be honest about what i found at this cache, but this one was dangerous and had been reported back in April, plus all the logs in the rest of the series had filled up some time ago. So because of my log the whole series has been disabled :unsure:

Now, I do usually take a few spares with me but I used them up on other caches in the area, and being on Holiday I didn't have access to any more, nor did I expect to have to replace so many - certainly not ALL 9!.

I think the CO lives about 30 minutes away from this series, Pity he can't nip out and move this one, and check the rest whilst he's at it.

Link to comment

I have a certain amount of sympathy for you and quite a lot of emapthy as just last week I had all my logs deleted from a series I'd done and on which I put some negative comments. All my logs were deleted, even on the caches where I'd said nice things! Thankfully it's all sorted now though.

COs seem happy to take the praise but naturally criticism isn't quite so easy to take. So many cachers use copy and paste these days or even post a blank log so that when someone does express a less than favourable opinion then it can be a bit of a shock. However, a lot of us rely on the last few logs of a cache to give us an accurate indication of the state of play. It would be a shame if only nice logs saw the light of day and I've no intention of praising a cache which I think is dangerous or badly maintained or thoughtlessly placed but I think we need to word our criticism carefully.

And by the way, I don't carry spare logs about with me and am not in the habit of maintaining other people's caches.

Link to comment

Ok, so you go for a cache that you know is disabled, you find it, and then you say it should be archived because it's not available 24/7, you don't like the placement and the log is full?

 

Yup, I'd be upset too.

 

Darn - pipped to the post.

 

I agree - it was disabled, it says clearly that the first four are only available at low tide. What's the problem?

 

As far as I know ( :laughing: ) even Devon has at least one low tide a day, for all those holidaymakers who can't bear to leave a local cache unfound......

Link to comment

Yes the log was negative but then again the cache had been disabled for close on 4 months with the following statement made <We will endeavour to rehide the cache outside the cave>, but with no attempt to do so and no news updates. I've seen caches archived for less by the reviewers.

We often comment on here about people who either use blank logs or not log at all as logs are a good way of getting info about the condition of caches, so if people say the rocks are dangerous why was this not picked up earlier by the owner.

Personally I think the cache/series owner is being a little petty in disabling the entire series over one negative comment.

We carry a repair kit but only if I am carrying my backpack, I do carry and replace log books/rolls where possible but how many and how many different sizes should I carry, a good stock of Nano ones? plenty of Micro ones? a pair of scissors so as I can trim them to fit the different size ones? What do I do with the old log?

When I put out a cache I agree to maintain my caches, or I arrange with friends in the area to do so if I am away and not expect other cachers to do so while they are out finding them.

Link to comment

I agreed with your comments about the cache in question, it seemed to have been disabled for a while with no action. I also don't think it hurts to tell others why this particular series may not have been your cup of tea. It's good to know pros and cons of a cache as we are all looking for different things from a cache. I think perhaps that where I would have been upset as a CO would have been the comments on how they could have 'done it better' as that is very subjective and may have come across as a little insulting.

Link to comment

Seems fair enough to me, to disable the series if the logs are full, and the CO can't get out to replace them immediately.

 

Why should the CO expect other cachers to carry out maintenance?

 

:ph34r:

 

Edit to add:

Cache page-

No attributes available -May help if the 'Not available 24/7 attribute is used.

 

Cachers-

Try running PQ's with 'Is Active' selected, and maybe 'Does Not Contain Needs Maintenance' attribute.

Edited by Bear and Ragged
Link to comment

Cachers-

Try running PQ's with 'Is Active' selected, and maybe 'Does Not Contain Needs Maintenance' attribute.

This is how I run my PQs by default. Sadly, some COs don't realise that they need to clear the NM log with a OM one... When I include NM caches I see lots of CO notes saying "log replaced" "new cache hidden" etc instead of an owner maint log.

 

I really think GS need to educate some of us hiders!

Link to comment

Cachers-

Try running PQ's with 'Is Active' selected, and maybe 'Does Not Contain Needs Maintenance' attribute.

This is how I run my PQs by default. Sadly, some COs don't realise that they need to clear the NM log with a OM one... When I include NM caches I see lots of CO notes saying "log replaced" "new cache hidden" etc instead of an owner maint log.

 

I really think GS need to educate some of us hiders!

 

... And how many times have you seen an Owner Maintenance log "Will sort at the weekend/next week/soon" and finders still say weeks/months later it requires maintenance!

Link to comment

Cachers-

Try running PQ's with 'Is Active' selected, and maybe 'Does Not Contain Needs Maintenance' attribute.

This is how I run my PQs by default. Sadly, some COs don't realise that they need to clear the NM log with a OM one... When I include NM caches I see lots of CO notes saying "log replaced" "new cache hidden" etc instead of an owner maint log.

 

I really think GS need to educate some of us hiders!

 

... And how many times have you seen an Owner Maintenance log "Will sort at the weekend/next week/soon" and finders still say weeks/months later it requires maintenance!

Fair few... But not as many. I still have one down myself from months ago... It's disabled and I've tried to maintain it several times... But always muggles about, which is strange as it was really quiet there when reconned and hidden!

 

People forget to remove the NM, especially if they had disabled it as it takes 2 actions to make all well, which is wrong.

Link to comment
Fair few... But not as many.
I think the point being made was that cache owners should not post an OM log to say they are GOING to fix the cache, they should only do so AFTER having fixed it.

 

Rgds, Andy

Spot on!

 

OK, OM shows the owner has noticed, but maybe this suggestion -Mark at Owners Log- on Feedback would be useful?

 

Would certainly make it easier to spot comments from the cache owner!

Link to comment

Well if I had wanted to go out and upset another cacher I think I would have made logs like yours, I'm just surprised that you seem surprised that you got a reaction :o .

Only surprise on my part was the effort to disable the whole series rather than re visit the series to do some maintenance. No evidence of him being there since he set them nearly a year ago?

Link to comment

This series has been on my to do list for a while now, as I'm about an hours drive away. I have also done the COs other series nearby at Averton Gifford in Devon last year, which I enjoyed.

 

I do think the criticism about the tide was unfair. The situation was mentioned on the cache page, and the tide times can easily be checked prior to the walk. There are plenty of caches around the country that are dependant on the tide, although these do tend to be by the coast of course :lol:

 

I really hope the series will be up and running soon, as despite the negative comments, from 1 cacher, this does sound like a nice walk.

Link to comment

This series has been on my to do list for a while now, as I'm about an hours drive away. I have also done the COs other series nearby at Averton Gifford in Devon last year, which I enjoyed.

 

I do think the criticism about the tide was unfair. The situation was mentioned on the cache page, and the tide times can easily be checked prior to the walk. There are plenty of caches around the country that are dependant on the tide, although these do tend to be by the coast of course :lol:

 

I really hope the series will be up and running soon, as despite the negative comments, from 1 cacher, this does sound like a nice walk.

You can still do it, a disabled cache doesn't prevent you from doing it - see the number who have found the 'dangerous' one since it was disabled. Perhaps when you go you can do all the maintenance for the CO ;), but will you be attempting No 1????

I wasn't criticising the tide element, but the distinct lack of maintenance and care. My comments about the tide were simply pointing out there is a path on shore that had just as good views and plenty of locations where you can get a view of the creek, enabling the entire series to be completed whatever the state of the tide. The ones affected by the tide could be left as a stand alone series. (In fact I think No 2 can be reached from the shore path at high tide).

 

I haven't yet mentioned how many of these are in Dry Stone walls or equivalent :ph34r:

Link to comment

My comments about the tide were simply pointing out there is a path on shore that had just as good views and plenty of locations where you can get a view of the creek, enabling the entire series to be completed whatever the state of the tide.

IMHO

Another disapointment is that 45% of the series is cut off by the tide which is bad news for those of us on holiday who only really get one shot. So personally I would move the main series to the main path along the estuary section, leaving the current ones as a series for those with boats.

goes somewhat further than pointing out there is a path on shore that had just as good views. It seems to suggest that the CO was being selfish by placing them there as it may limit holiday makers chances of finding them.

I haven't yet mentioned how many of these are in Dry Stone walls or equivalent :ph34r:

To be honest that would be a more valid criticism than the problem with tides.

 

regarding the "sunken green lanes with no view" comment, was that really necessary or just a case of twisting the knife.

 

I fully agree with the comments regarding maintenance, however real life does often gets in the way of such things. Perhaps a more diplomatic wording might have been better and avoiding criticism of subjective elements.

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...
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...