Ducking stool for Madame Hoomer?

[+thehoomer]

Back in July, we were planning a trip to Oxford and one of the caches we looked at doing had been disabled for 2 months (has now been so for 7 months). I posted a note in the middle of July to ask if it could be replaced or archived. A week later the CO posted to say it was being fixed but they were having trouble making a cache of the correct size. No further action or note was made, so I posted a NA earlier this month and it was deleted by the CO. The reviewer has now posted the standard ‘repair’ note and the CO has responded by intimating I had been impatient and that they will archive it if it can’t be fixed. Perhaps I was a little hasty but as I wasn’t being impatient; I posted another note to refute the intimation and using ample fun emoticons, joked that a housing estate had been built in my town, in the length of time they had had to fix the cache. I also stated that I genuinely hoped they could fix it because we wanted to do it at some point. Not surprisingly perhaps, this log was also deleted and a note posted by the CO stating, only reviewers or genuine cache visitors are welcome to post on the cache page. To prevent any further upset, I will not be making further communication.

Some of my actions were perhaps questionable but I felt the CO had used the page to make assumptions about my reason for the NA log and I then felt compelled to correct their mistake.

The CO has adopted this cache and according to their profile, is the only cache they have to maintain.

Despite the fact that we have a few adopted caches ourselves, I can’t remember ever having to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes. Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as standard CO’s?

 

Members of the jury….. Guilty or not guilty of misuse of the NA log facility?

Guilty of stupidity?.....The aye's have it, throw away the key.

[+Mad H@ter]

Ducking stool's too good, burn her at the stake

 

All joking apart IMHO you have done exactly the right thing although you have probably been more patient than I would have. I probably wouldn't have done the last post though.

Don't worry about it, they're the one with the problem.

[+qrang]

Totally agree with your actions.

 

Because of our caching style, we often cache in new areas that we haven't visited before.

 

When you have travelled a long distance to travel in a new area the last thing you want is to have a string of DNFs because owner's can't be bothered to maintain their caches, and noone has taken the trouble to put NM and NA logs on missing caches.

 

If we have time we try and review the logs on caches before we get to an area and raise NM and NA logs on those that are obviously in difficulty. Most of the time there is no problem as often the CO has stopped caching and can't be bothered to archive their dead caches. Once or twice we have had some pushback for not being a "local" cacher and therefore not being in any position to raise issues. I regard this as shortsighted. It's quite easy to tell from the logs etc on a cache page that a cache is not being maintained properly and a good caching experience means that poor caches should be sorted out before you go to find them, not after you have spent lots of wasted caching time on a DNF.

 

More people should be raising NM and NA logs on poorly maintained caches.

[+drdick&vick]

Climb aboard Madame

[+drdick&vick]

In all seriously I would have done the same, actually have and had the same reponse as you got. Elsewhere I will add.

[+thehoomer]

Glug, glug . Did I float or sink? That's Classified I'm afraid.

 

Thanks everyone.

 

To prevent me getting another dunking by a CO, does anyone know if adopters of caches have to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes? Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as a cache originator?

As I said, we have got a few adopted caches but I just cant remember what I did when the crib was handed over.

[+maxkim]

Def float :lol: , I'd say, and the NA still stands... and will be acted on if the cache isn't sorted. Many cachers use a sock account to post NA's for exactly this reason ... maybe a thought for the future <_<

[+drdick&vick]

I am happy to post NA logs in my own name, very thisck skinned. Read my signature and work out why

[+mellers]

I think it was fine to both post the original NA and the chaser within the time limits you mention. However, just from a personal point of view, whenever I've posted a NA, I've tried to keep it as short and factual as possible, just in case the CO in question is ill or has suffered some family crisis or something (you never know). In fact, I've been there myself when I was really ill for MONTHS. Couldn't get out caching and couldn't get out to replace my muggled cache. I got a NA, wrote a note to the page immediately and managed to haul my sorry arse out to the GZ after about another month, although it was touch-and-go. I didn't mind getting the NA, but I think I would have been very upset if someone had taken the mickey out of me when I was so ill.

 

The main problem with even the gentlest teasing in writing, is that if it's not someone you know personally, it's so easy to mis-interpret - even with emoticons. I usually (but not always) write something like "Multiple DNF's with no contact from CO " or something similar, if a cache near me has gone without desperately-needed attention.

 

It doesn't sound like the NA was unreasonable so I expect the CO's response came more from a position of their own embarrassment at not having done anything about it in the time. Perhaps if it was me, then maybe I would have backed off as soon as they deleted my log and not responded, but then again, I don't like confrontation.

 

Easier said than done (probably) but DON'T let it bother you. If you are, however, the sort who IS bothered by this sort of excessive umbrage by a CO (and I understand how you could be) then perhaps best not to post a note first, next time, just post a NA and watch what happens. Someone else can get the flack for chasing!

[+Fianccetto]

Glug, glug . Did I float or sink? That's Classified I'm afraid.

 

Thanks everyone.

 

To prevent me getting another dunking by a CO, does anyone know if adopters of caches have to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes? Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as a cache originator?

As I said, we have got a few adopted caches but I just cant remember what I did when the crib was handed over.

 

Yes...and no. They are the new CO and it doesn't matter whether they placed it or not, they are responsible for it and have to adhere to the same guidelines, etc. as any other CO. BUT... The cache isn't resubmitted to a reviewer when it's adopted, so in practice the issue of landowner's permission, the condition of the cache, the accuracy of the coords etc. don't come up unless the new CO looks into it.

[+DizzyPair]

It is important that some of us take responsibility for caches that are not maintained. No-one wants to cause angst, but non maintained caches spoil it for all.

 

We've posted NUMEROUS logs on caches that have been neglected, and only had a handful deleted.

 

Keep up the good work, Madame Hoomer and if we ever meet, we'll tell you how many "Needs Archived" logs we've posted....

[+thehoomer]

I think it was fine to both post the original NA and the chaser within the time limits you mention. However, just from a personal point of view, whenever I've posted a NA, I've tried to keep it as short and factual as possible, just in case the CO in question is ill or has suffered some family crisis or something (you never know). In fact, I've been there myself when I was really ill for MONTHS. Couldn't get out caching and couldn't get out to replace my muggled cache. I got a NA, wrote a note to the page immediately and managed to haul my sorry arse out to the GZ after about another month, although it was touch-and-go. I didn't mind getting the NA, but I think I would have been very upset if someone had taken the mickey out of me when I was so ill.

 

The main problem with even the gentlest teasing in writing, is that if it's not someone you know personally, it's so easy to mis-interpret - even with emoticons. I usually (but not always) write something like "Multiple DNF's with no contact from CO " or something similar, if a cache near me has gone without desperately-needed attention.

 

It doesn't sound like the NA was unreasonable so I expect the CO's response came more from a position of their own embarrassment at not having done anything about it in the time. Perhaps if it was me, then maybe I would have backed off as soon as they deleted my log and not responded, but then again, I don't like confrontation.

 

Easier said than done (probably) but DON'T let it bother you. If you are, however, the sort who IS bothered by this sort of excessive umbrage by a CO (and I understand how you could be) then perhaps best not to post a note first, next time, just post a NA and watch what happens. Someone else can get the flack for chasing!

Thanks for that mellers, illness hadn't really entered my head (although there are many who would contest that). Can I also clarify, that after my NA & subsequent log was deleted, I volunteered no further communication. Like you say, I realised that my wit was misinterpreted and felt that any continued logs would be unwise. To be honest, I lament the fact that I may have disgruntled the CO but that aside, I can still sleep at night.....a lot.

Edited to add:

I didn't make myself very clear in my original post. Both my NA and 'attempt at humor' logs were deleted at the same time by the CO. After this action, I refrained from any further postings.

Edited November 23, 2011 by thehoomer

[+thehoomer]

Glug, glug . Did I float or sink? That's Classified I'm afraid.

 

Thanks everyone.

 

To prevent me getting another dunking by a CO, does anyone know if adopters of caches have to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes? Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as a cache originator?

As I said, we have got a few adopted caches but I just cant remember what I did when the crib was handed over.

 

Yes...and no. They are the new CO and it doesn't matter whether they placed it or not, they are responsible for it and have to adhere to the same guidelines, etc. as any other CO. BUT... The cache isn't resubmitted to a reviewer when it's adopted, so in practice the issue of landowner's permission, the condition of the cache, the accuracy of the coords etc. don't come up unless the new CO looks into it.

That is very interesting. Do you know what that means in the eyes of the law though? If an adopted cache were to cause some kind of accident or legal problem, how could the adopter be held accountable if they haven't ticked any boxes?

I'm in deep now, may be I should just close this lid and go and watch Frozen Planet ?

[+Fianccetto]

Glug, glug . Did I float or sink? That's Classified I'm afraid.

 

Thanks everyone.

 

To prevent me getting another dunking by a CO, does anyone know if adopters of caches have to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes? Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as a cache originator?

As I said, we have got a few adopted caches but I just cant remember what I did when the crib was handed over.

 

Yes...and no. They are the new CO and it doesn't matter whether they placed it or not, they are responsible for it and have to adhere to the same guidelines, etc. as any other CO. BUT... The cache isn't resubmitted to a reviewer when it's adopted, so in practice the issue of landowner's permission, the condition of the cache, the accuracy of the coords etc. don't come up unless the new CO looks into it.

That is very interesting. Do you know what that means in the eyes of the law though? If an adopted cache were to cause some kind of accident or legal problem, how could the adopter be held accountable if they haven't ticked any boxes?

I'm in deep now, may be I should just close this lid and go and watch Frozen Planet ?

I think you do tick a box or two but I don't remember the exact wording.

Hm...So if someone fell and hurt themselves when attempting a find on a cache, they could blame the CO, you think?

[+thehoomer]

Glug, glug . Did I float or sink? That's Classified I'm afraid.

 

Thanks everyone.

 

To prevent me getting another dunking by a CO, does anyone know if adopters of caches have to agree to any T&C’s or tick any boxes? Does the adopter of a cache have to adhere to the same rules as a cache originator?

As I said, we have got a few adopted caches but I just cant remember what I did when the crib was handed over.

 

Yes...and no. They are the new CO and it doesn't matter whether they placed it or not, they are responsible for it and have to adhere to the same guidelines, etc. as any other CO. BUT... The cache isn't resubmitted to a reviewer when it's adopted, so in practice the issue of landowner's permission, the condition of the cache, the accuracy of the coords etc. don't come up unless the new CO looks into it.

That is very interesting. Do you know what that means in the eyes of the law though? If an adopted cache were to cause some kind of accident or legal problem, how could the adopter be held accountable if they haven't ticked any boxes?

I'm in deep now, may be I should just close this lid and go and watch Frozen Planet ?

I think you do tick a box or two but I don't remember the exact wording.

Hm...So if someone fell and hurt themselves when attempting a find on a cache, they could blame the CO, you think?

I don't really know but I seem to remember that there was some kind of legal wrangle about a cache placement once and that the CO was close to being sued or something. May be someone can enlighten us?

If adopters of caches don't have to tick anything, does it make a mockery out of the fact that CO's do?

[+Delta68]

If an adopted cache were to cause some kind of accident or legal problem, how could the adopter be held accountable if they haven't ticked any boxes?

 

 

You have to tick the boxes whenever you edit a cache page

It's not just when you submit a new one for review

 

Also when you adopt a cache you have to tick boxes saying you take responsibility for it etc

 

Just in case there's anyone who hasn't spotted the cache which the thread originally referred to it's: Tee Time?

 

 

Mark

[+Amberel]

Just in case there's anyone who hasn't spotted the cache which the thread originally referred to it's: Tee Time?

"Any other commentary from self appointed arbiters will be deleted"

 

We are all arbiters, appointed by Groundspeak.

 

Rgds, Andy

[+thehoomer]

Just in case there's anyone who hasn't spotted the cache which the thread originally referred to it's: Tee Time?

"Any other commentary from self appointed arbiters will be deleted"

 

We are all arbiters, appointed by Groundspeak.

 

Rgds, Andy

Good point well made.

Ive just noticed, along with my 2 postings, the CO also archived one of their own. This was a comment which they made after the The Odyssians tried to find it on 7th November. I cant remember the exact words but it appeared to me that the CO berated them for going to look for it and that their disappointment was of their own making because the cache was disabled. Under normal circumstances, this would be an acceptable point to make but after 7 months of disablement, my wording would've been somewhat different and would've at least, contained an apology for the length of inaction by me.

[+thehoomer]

If an adopted cache were to cause some kind of accident or legal problem, how could the adopter be held accountable if they haven't ticked any boxes?

 

 

You have to tick the boxes whenever you edit a cache page

It's not just when you submit a new one for review

 

Also when you adopt a cache you have to tick boxes saying you take responsibility for it etc

 

Just in case there's anyone who hasn't spotted the cache which the thread originally referred to it's: Tee Time?

Thanks for the confirmation Mark. I suspected it wasn't a GS faux pas and am now content I did the right thing in posting a NA. Thanks for the link too.....I still don't know how to to it

 

 

Mark

[+drdick&vick]

<Quoted>Only postings from genuine cache visitors or official reviewers should be posted.

Any other commentary from self appointed arbiters will be deleted, particularly offensively sarcastic ones.

 

How can anybody be an official cache visitor when the flipping thing has been unavailable since 21st July.

Flippin hell it can't be that hard to make a new container.

[+Fianccetto]

<Quoted>Only postings from genuine cache visitors or official reviewers should be posted.

Any other commentary from self appointed arbiters will be deleted, particularly offensively sarcastic ones.

 

How can anybody be an official cache visitor when the flipping thing has been unavailable since 21st July.

Flippin hell it can't be that hard to make a new container.

Perhaps it has to be hewn from dwarven plastic by the new moon on a Wednesday to be the right dimensions. Or they tried to order a cheaper box and 'oh dear' it wouldn't fit.

[+thehoomer]

<Quoted>Only postings from genuine cache visitors or official reviewers should be posted.

Any other commentary from self appointed arbiters will be deleted, particularly offensively sarcastic ones.

 

How can anybody be an official cache visitor when the flipping thing has been unavailable since 21st July.

Flippin hell it can't be that hard to make a new container.

Absolutley.

Its funny isn't it, that log came immediately after my 2 logs were deleted and as soon as I read it, I felt chastised and that the CO might be right. However, now I have read all the varying opinions on here, I see things very differently. The problem with the CO deleting my log is that their log now has no point of reference.

With all sincerity, I hope that the adopter does right by the original CO and re-instates the cache. I will be sure to come on here and let you all know if this precisely dimensioned cache was worth the wait.

Edited to add:

Providing the CO doesn't delete my 'found' log of course .

Edited November 24, 2011 by thehoomer

[+Stuey]

I'm considering posting a NA on a certain London webcam cache.... but think I'll be hated for it from some people. Hence my hesitance.

[+The Frosties!]

I'm considering posting a NA on a certain London webcam cache.... but think I'll be hated for it from some people. Hence my hesitance.

the cache link is NA

[+Stuey]

It's not a link. I underlined it to highlight the fact that it is a rare webcam cache that I am talking about. If it was a link that was wrong, you could have said it's NM

[+currykev]

I may go for a jolly jaunt to Oxford (or any other place I feel worthy of a visit). Ooh! There may be a cache that has been disabled for a short time, even 2 months. I politely ask (email rather than post a note)the owner if it shall be replaced, or as a friendly gesture, if I can replace it myself. The owner will probably reply to my email with a positive response. Or the the owner posts a note on the cache page. A few months pass. I'm off for my jolly jaunt to Oxford. The cache is still not up a find. I just ignore it.

Plenty more caches around to look for. Why would I "stress out" so much that I have to relive my frustrations on the gs forums. Move on and find caches that are findable. Happy caching is what I love.