After tragic death of experienced geocacher - what needs to change?

[+baloo&bd]

- I do not appreciate the personal attacks. I came here to start a discussion what can be done to avoid something like this from happening again on a global scale in the entire geocaching world. I don't like the fact that some here think I have to "prove" my motivation by posting NA logs on the small number of local caches that are placed in locations that aren't normally open to the public that I personally know. Especially after I already offered to do so once Groundspeak has demonstrated that this is what they think is right and started archiving them all.

 

From what I have read, questioning your motivation is quite valid and not improper or "personal attacks". Someone has died, you come in here and improperly assign blame to an entity that is simply a listing service however has given you the tools to fix the situation but you and others refuse to implement. When a simple action can be initiated that will have a direct bearing and prevent further injury or death, you state that it is not important enough for you and the other locals to act for fear someone may not like you for doing the right thing and expect those of us who work within the system and have seen it work to rally blindly behind you.

 

The community is grieving, as well they should be. Now is the time to act and use that grief to start correcting what is wrong in your area. GS can not fix apathy, and that is the problem there right now. Now is the time to take action and start doing the right thing. Based on comments made in this thread, I fear that this incident may lead to more dangerous caches and people wearing it as a "I survived" badge of honor going forward.

 

We had the same problem in our country, however it was with drunk drivers. It was more or less accepted and prior to the 70's, very few arrests or convictions were made. Instead, officers would warn the person or let someone in the vehicle who was sober take over. Even I got a call on a relative to come get him and his car from an officer that pulled him over.

 

It took a mother who lost her child to a drunk driver to start and organization called MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) to push for laws already on the books to be enforced and make the public aware of the inherent dangers of driving drunk. They were not very popular either early on, however have managed to change the culture of an entire country and even, to some degree, some of our neighboring countries. It was not until they were successful using tools already available to them that they started to work to change the system. Had it not been done in that order, it would never have worked. Same applies here, just on a much smaller, manageable scale.

 

Sorry, but until you start taking action with the tools already in place, no one will take the suggestions seriously and some will inevitably question your motives.

[cezanne]

- I do not appreciate the personal attacks. I came here to start a discussion what can be done to avoid something like this from happening again on a global scale in the entire geocaching world. I don't like the fact that some here think I have to "prove" my motivation by posting NA logs on the small number of local caches that are placed in locations that aren't normally open to the public that I personally know. Especially after I already offered to do so once Groundspeak has demonstrated that this is what they think is right and started archiving them all.

 

From what I have read, questioning your motivation is quite valid and not improper or "personal attacks". Someone has died, you come in here and improperly assign blame to an entity that is simply a listing service however has given you the tools to fix the situation but you and others refuse to implement. When a simple action can be initiated that will have a direct bearing and prevent further injury or death, you state that it is not important enough for you and the other locals to act for fear someone may not like you for doing the right thing and expect those of us who work within the system and have seen it work to rally blindly behind you.

 

I agree that it is allright to question someone's motivation. I do not think, however, that veit did blame Groundspeak for what has happened. If his postings were understood that way, they were most certainly understood in the wrong way. It might well be that one's cultural background and background knowledge also influences the way one understands what veit wrote.

I guess that some of his statements sounded more demanding than he actually wanted them to be. While his English is fluent, it still makes a difference whether one writes in a foreign language and about a topic one is not used to argue about in a foreign language. Moreover, the German way to formulate is way more direct than the North American one and might be misunderstood easily. It has also happened to me several times that people from the US misunderstood something I wrote quite dramatically.

 

There are legal dangerous caches, illegal dangerous caches, legal harmless caches and illegal harmless caches (harmless and dangerous only concerns safety issues, not other valid aspects). So the N/A issue is just one of several involved ones. The same is true for veit's suggestion for a new log type. It was a coincidence that what happened to willi happened at a cache at a location one is not supposed to go. It also could have happened at a location legally reachable. (This is not an attempt to defend caches at illegal location!)

 

Cezanne

[+t4e]

Not sure what 'legal' questions have to do with this topic other than to derail it. Placement permission or the lack thereof has zero bearing on safety or on a cacher's risk-taking decisions.

 

I beg to differ with you.

 

A lot of off-limits/illegal locations are off-limits due to safety concerns. If you ignore this while either hiding OR finding a cache, it can have a lot of bearing on your safety.

 

there, fixed for you

 

 

What exactly do the German reviewers check for? If the cache is 490 feet from another one they won't publish it, but if it requires illegal access and to be done at night, as well having a giant hole in the walkway, then it is okay?

 

they look for what all the reviewers look for with the tools they have...to my knowledge reviewers are not supposed to go out there and see if the cache is in an illegal place or not nor are they supposed to know every illegal place around...its up to the community to report such issues

 

A kid is dead because nobody noticed that they were doing something that was illegal, or had the guts to stand up and say something about it. He just did what everyone else in the community thought was ok.

 

not really, i'm sure they noticed but enjoyed the "challenge" with no consequences

 

he made a conscious decision to go for it, the fact that everyone else got the cache with no incident doesn't mean anything

 

I went ahead and posted a NA log for this cache in Austria, and I think my log stood for about 2-3 hrs:

 

Your log entry for the listing Airlebnis Murpark (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Team Cachehunter at Tuesday, 20 December 2011 21:52:14

 

Visit this listing at the below address:

http://coord.info/GL745NYG

Profile for Team Cachehunter:

http://coord.info/PR33BQ8

 

i'm glad it was deleted, what exactly business you have posting a NA on a cache all the way on the other side of the world, have you visited this cache?

 

 

I mentioned the cache for that very reason as in this thread it has been suggested that by logging NA on caches like the one where Willi died his death while caching could have been avoided which I do not think to be true.

Maybe so, but was it not a cache that lured Willi onto that bridge? Would he have been on that structure, at night, by himself, if not for the cache?

 

 

partially true....the cache lured him out there, going alone was his own choice, once there he had a chance to asses the situation and decide whether to go for it or not....apparently he thought he can get it safely alone at night....unfortunately that was a moment of bad judgement and the unthinkable happened

[+baloo&bd]

I agree that it is allright to question someone's motivation. I do not think, however, that veit did blame Groundspeak for what has happened. If his postings were understood that way, they were most certainly understood in the wrong way. It might well be that one's cultural background and background knowledge also influences the way one understands what veit wrote.

I guess that some of his statements sounded more demanding than he actually wanted them to be. While his English is fluent, it still makes a difference whether one writes in a foreign language and about a topic one is not used to argue about in a foreign language. Moreover, the German way to formulate is way more direct than the North American one and might be misunderstood easily. It has also happened to me several times that people from the US misunderstood something I wrote quite dramatically.

 

There are legal dangerous caches, illegal dangerous caches, legal harmless caches and illegal harmless caches (harmless and dangerous only concerns safety issues, not other valid aspects). So the N/A issue is just one of several involved ones. The same is true for veit's suggestion for a new log type. It was a coincidence that what happened to willi happened at a cache at a location one is not supposed to go. It also could have happened at a location legally reachable. (This is not an attempt to defend caches at illegal location!)

 

 

If there is a mus-communication, which I believe is not at issue here, it is because every time something is directed to him or responded to, you answer for him and try to interpret and, as pointed out in an earlier post, often not correctly.

 

Frankly, there is no "Illegal Harmless caches". If it is illegal, while there may or may not be a physical danger, there most certainly is a legal one. To put it in simple terms, you live in a house or apartment, just because you leave the door unlocked does not mean I can come in and rest on your couch and use your TV. The same holds true for someplace that is off-limits. It belongs to someone and just because you figured out how to get in and out without being caught, does not mean you should. There simply is no hiding behind cultural differences on that.

 

This is the apathy that I mentioned earlier and is the largest contributing factor to the tragedy in question.

[+Chokecherry]

As stated numerous times here there are a large variety of ways for danger to be communicated but the finders and hiders have to actually use them. On top of that the person looking for the cache has to take some ownership of their own safety. Ultimately it is the fault of the finder in this case that he went up there. The cache itself shouldn't have been there but the community failed this man in that they didn't bother to use the tools at hand.

 

Maybe it's not common there but here it is exceedingly common to use the exiting log types to warn others of dangers at a cache site that may not be immediately clear. One simply has to go back and actually read the logs to extrapolate that information. But that would be something that has to be worked on in each little geocaching community that will not be solved by coming here.

 

There are a myriad of tools which could have been used in this case and weren't and finally the finder went into some place he shouldn't have been by using his own judgement. Nothing can stop people from making a bad choice in the end.

 

As baloo&bd stated we can't fix apathy. This is a time when that community is grieving and there appear to be a variety of ways that this problem can be addressed in that community. Behaviors that are making caching more dangerous than it should be in that community. It's not appropriate to apply a global solution to a localized problem. As baloo stated it appears that the community would likely view the warning log as a way to glorify already problematic caches. That would only escalate the risk taking behavior.

 

But in the end if you all are not willing to address this in your community and work on your reviewer situation there is really no reason to make any globalized changes as the problems that led up to this accident would just perpetuate. There are many dangerous caches around but this person died doing this cache and what needs to be looked at are the circumstances leading up to that death. This person died because of an apathetic community, a cache that was placed where it shouldn't have been and his own bad judgement when he got to ground zero.

[+Snoogans]

I went ahead and posted a NA log for this cache in Austria, and I think my log stood for about 2-3 hrs:

 

Your log entry for the listing Airlebnis Murpark (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Team Cachehunter at Tuesday, 20 December 2011 21:52:14

 

Visit this listing at the below address:

http://coord.info/GL745NYG

Profile for Team Cachehunter:

http://coord.info/PR33BQ8

 

i'm glad it was deleted, what exactly business you have posting a NA on a cache all the way on the other side of the world, have you visited this cache?

 

 

I too don't understand why someone would post an SBA on a cache that they have never visited.

 

This discussion is starting to chase its tail.

 

It appears that posters are going off half cocked on a crusade to get cache(s) archived with no actual on the ground experience with the cache(s) they are posting an SBA on and then posting links to the profile of the CO to villify them. What is the purpose of this crusade? It's not going to bring Willi back. I will personally barf if someone proposes some sort of Willi's Law to justify their actions.

 

Some of the OP's most recent comments are a bit of a concern to me.

 

I'm going to stop posting to this thread until I have read every word and checked the links of the current 8 pages and taken a few notes.

 

Willimax died and it could have been easily prevented. Stop laying blame. That is for the local authorities to do. If you want to do something about this, try to discuss ways to prevent the next geocaching death in a constructive way that doesn't lob rocks at already injured parties and try do disagree civilly.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Snoogans

[veit]

Ok, maybe I haven't done such a good job at channeling or moderating the discussion here. Can we try to overcome the fact that we might disagree which of the many ideas or solutions is the right one, but get back to collect more ideas? I will try to collect all that have been put forward so far below, please help me by completing the list:

 

- every individual cacher should be more aware of the risks he is taking. Ultimately it is his or her responsability if he goes for a cache. There have been suggestions how this general awareness can be heightened: a new Forum category Safety, as well as a global communication campaign by the platform.

- generally place more emphasis in the community on safety rather than on find-counts (here we can all play our part, but again, global communication might help/nurture such a culture change)

- place more emphasis on safety rather than avoidance of being seen by muggles. Plastic containers can be replaced, lifes cannot.

- caches not to be placed in "illegal locations". The many existing ones to be archived. This can be achieved by Groundspeak on a global scale (database query, mail to all reviewers to take action) and on a local scale (encouraging everyone to use NA logs on existing caches).

- cachers to have better tools to warn other cachers of dangers than the currently existing mix of cache description and attributes by CO, and normal logs+NM/NA logs+emails to reviewers+GS by finders. Possibly a new Warnings logtype. Or a wiki-like editable warnings section where any cacher can point out dangers.

- an anonymous "report cache" button for every cache to circumvent local peer pressure

- owners to be encouraged to think twice about possible dangers with their cache when publishing a cache and to correctly list those (even if it means spoilering). All current COs could be sent an email by GS to revisit their cache pages and update them about dangers (something that has already happened locally, I'm starting to see caches being archived and updated)

- give cachers better tools to meet at a cache so they are not there alone

 

Let me know what I missed and I'll add it.

Edited December 21, 2011 by veit

[Mr.Yuck]

I went ahead and posted a NA log for this cache in Austria, and I think my log stood for about 2-3 hrs:

 

Your log entry for the listing Airlebnis Murpark (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Team Cachehunter at Tuesday, 20 December 2011 21:52:14

 

Visit this listing at the below address:

http://coord.info/GL745NYG

Profile for Team Cachehunter:

http://coord.info/PR33BQ8

 

i'm glad it was deleted, what exactly business you have posting a NA on a cache all the way on the other side of the world, have you visited this cache?

 

 

I too don't understand why someone would post an SBA on a cache that they have never visited.

 

This discussion is starting to chase its tail.

 

It appears that posters are going off half cocked on a crusade to get cache(s) archived with no actual on the ground experience with the cache(s) they are posting an SBA on and then posting links to the profile of the CO to villify them. What is the purpose of this crusade? It's not going to bring Willi back. I will personally barf if someone proposes some sort of Willi's Law to justify their actions.

 

Some of the OP's most recent comments are a bit of a concern to me.

 

I'm going to stop posting to this thread until I have read every word and checked the links of the current 8 pages and taken a few notes.

 

Willimax died and it could have been easily prevented. Stop laying blame. That is for the local authorities to do. If you want to do something about this, try to discuss ways to prevent the next geocaching death in a constructive way that doesn't lob rocks at already injured parties and try do disagree civilly.

 

Snoogans is the voice of reason in this thread! I do believe the Austrian cache referenced in the quotes above is the only one with an SBA that can be documented in this thread although there may have been more posted to caches in Germany that haven't been mentioned here. And of course I could be wrong.

 

In defense (sort of) of the SBA poster, the cache page gallery, along with the Google Street view (actually the Bing Street view gives a better angle) clearly show the cache near the top of a 50 foot tall or more entrance sign at a shopping mall.

[+t4e]

I went ahead and posted a NA log for this cache in Austria, and I think my log stood for about 2-3 hrs:

 

Your log entry for the listing Airlebnis Murpark (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Team Cachehunter at Tuesday, 20 December 2011 21:52:14

 

Visit this listing at the below address:

http://coord.info/GL745NYG

Profile for Team Cachehunter:

http://coord.info/PR33BQ8

 

i'm glad it was deleted, what exactly business you have posting a NA on a cache all the way on the other side of the world, have you visited this cache?

 

 

I too don't understand why someone would post an SBA on a cache that they have never visited.

 

This discussion is starting to chase its tail.

 

It appears that posters are going off half cocked on a crusade to get cache(s) archived with no actual on the ground experience with the cache(s) they are posting an SBA on and then posting links to the profile of the CO to villify them. What is the purpose of this crusade? It's not going to bring Willi back. I will personally barf if someone proposes some sort of Willi's Law to justify their actions.

 

Some of the OP's most recent comments are a bit of a concern to me.

 

I'm going to stop posting to this thread until I have read every word and checked the links of the current 8 pages and taken a few notes.

 

Willimax died and it could have been easily prevented. Stop laying blame. That is for the local authorities to do. If you want to do something about this, try to discuss ways to prevent the next geocaching death in a constructive way that doesn't lob rocks at already injured parties and try do disagree civilly.

 

Snoogans is the voice of reason in this thread! I do believe the Austrian cache referenced in the quotes above is the only one with an SBA that can be documented in this thread although there may have been more posted to caches in Germany that haven't been mentioned here. And of course I could be wrong.

 

In defense (sort of) of the SBA poster, the cache page gallery, along with the Google Street view (actually the Bing Street view gives a better angle) clearly show the cache near the top of a 50 foot tall or more entrance sign at a shopping mall.

 

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

[cezanne]

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

Actually, while my intention when posting the example was only to provide an example where N/A logs are by reviewers ignored and not to come up with an example of a dangerous or problematic cache, I am not that convinced that a solution to the complex problem which is behind a lot of the issues we are discussion here will come from a local community.

 

Already back in 2009 when I noticed the N/A log and the reaction of an experienced cacher to it, I was somehow concerned what might happen if a young guy (it was known in the local community that the guy posting the N/A log was 14 or 15 at that time) feels provocated by the reply he received and revisits the location, climbs up to prove that he is not anxious and can manage the task and fells down in such an attempt. Back in 2009 I sent a private mail to the guy posting the N/A and told him that I agree with him and that it is sad that much older people than he act in such an immature manner.

 

I know of numerous examples where cachers would post N/A logs for certain caches if they would not have to deal with the negative consequences. I do think that a report option for caches which does not show up on the cache page and where the alias of the reporting person is only visible to Groundspeak would be very important. This would be helpful for those in the local communities who at the moment simply do not dare to voice their concerns - their number is not ignorable.

 

I think that the N/A system makes only sense if sometime has the time, energy and motivation to really look into reported cases if a security or legal issue is reported. Dealing with N/A logs of the type "This cache should be archived as it has been disabled for 1 year" can certainly wait and it is not a problem if they are overlooked. I believe, however, that we need a system that makes sure that serious concerns are dealt with. Currently this is not guaranteed in all parts of the world and depends a lot on how much engagement the cachers with concerns wants to invest and how familiar these people are with the different alternatives.

 

Cezanne

Edited December 21, 2011 by cezanne

[Mr.Yuck]

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

Hmm. Apparently there have been 3 SBA's posted, according to a note by Jess and Todd (and who knows, maybe that note will too be deleted). No clue if it was by 3 different accounts, maybe a watcher of the cache knows.

 

I think I'm going to now be done talking about that cache though.

[cezanne]

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

Actually, while my intention when posting the example was only to provide of an example where N/A logs are by reviewers ignored and not to come up with an example of a dangerous or problematic cache, I am not that convinced that a solution to the complex problem which is behind a lot of the issues we are discussion here will come from a local community.

 

Already back in 2009 when I noticed the N/A log and the reaction of an experienced cacher to it, I was somehow concerned what might happen if a young guy (it was known in the local community that the guy posting the N/A log was 14 or 15 at that time) felt provocated by the reply he received and revisits the location, climbs up to prove that he is not anxious and can manage the task and fells down in such an attempt.

 

I know of numerous examples where cachers would post N/A logs for certain caches if they would not have to deal with the negative consequences. I do think that a report option for caches which does not show up on the cache page and where the alias of the reporting person is only visible to Groundspeak would be very important. This would be helpful for those in the local communities who at the moment simply do not dare to voice their concerns - their number is not ignorable.

 

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

Hmm. Apparently there have been 3 SBA's posted, according to a note by Jess and Todd (and who knows, maybe that note will too be deleted). No clue if it was by 3 different accounts, maybe a watcher of the cache knows.

 

Two from the first who mentioned to have posted a N/A and one from Jess and Todd, all from the US.

My point is still about the existing N/A log from 2009 which comes from a local cacher who has been at the location, and not about the new N/A logs that have been deleted. One might indeed argue about N/A logs coming from far abroad, but the key point is quite a different one. What happened to Willi could also have happened to a cacher at the mentioned cache. My goal is not to blame anyone - just to mention that the N/A system is not working everywhere in the way some seem to assume here.

 

 

I think I'm going to now be done talking about that cache though.

 

I think we have talked already too much about it anyway. It was meant as an example with respect to the N/A log from 2009 which is till there.

I could have mentioned many other similar examples. It's not that very specific cache that defines an issue.

 

Cezanne

[cezanne]

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

Hmm. Apparently there have been 3 SBA's posted, according to a note by Jess and Todd (and who knows, maybe that note will too be deleted). No clue if it was by 3 different accounts, maybe a watcher of the cache knows.

 

Two from the first who mentioned to have posted a N/A and one from Jess and Todd, all from the US.

My point is still about the existing N/A log from 2009 which comes from a local cacher who has been at the location, and not about the new N/A logs that have been deleted. One might indeed argue about N/A logs coming from far abroad, but the key point is quite a different one. What happened to Willi could also have happened to a cacher at the mentioned cache. My goal is not to blame anyone - just to mention that the N/A system is not working everywhere in the way some seem to assume here.

 

As the cache where Willi died is much less dangerous than my example, I do not think that a N/A log will have changed anything for Willi. (Of course I cannot prove this - it is just my personal belief). It might even be that Willi's life has been happier due to some potentially dangerous, illegal caches he has visited before as if these caches had not existed. Of course his death is very tragic for his family and his friends and I am not defending illegal caches. I just think that it is not so easy to decide how to act as individual cacher when coming across problematic caches.

Sometimes I tend towards reporting caches where I am concerned about the high risks, sometimes when I see how much the people who go for these caches enjoy them, I ask myself whether it is better not to take any action. Of course, in case I were a reviewer, owner of this site or anyone else with some official role, I would also go for the safe variant.

 

I think I'm going to now be done talking about that cache though.

 

I think we have talked already too much about it anyway. It was meant as an example with respect to the N/A log from 2009 which is till there.

I could have mentioned many other similar examples. It's not that very specific cache that defines an issue.

 

 

Cezanne

Edited December 21, 2011 by cezanne

[+JL_HSTRE]

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

And what if they can't or wont deal with them?

 

This thread has given a strong indication that the German and Austrian geocaching community doesn't want to police themselves.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Joshism

[+Snoogans]

Ok, maybe I haven't done such a good job at channeling or moderating the discussion here. Can we try to overcome the fact that we might disagree which of the many ideas or solutions is the right one, but get back to collect more ideas? I will try to collect all that have been put forward so far below, please help me by completing the list:

 

- every individual cacher should be more aware of the risks he is taking. Ultimately it is his or her responsability if he goes for a cache. There have been suggestions how this general awareness can be heightened: a new Forum category Safety, as well as a global communication campaign by the platform.

- generally place more emphasis in the community on safety rather than on find-counts (here we can all play our part, but again, global communication might help/nurture such a culture change)

- caches not to be placed in "illegal locations". The many existing ones to be archived. This can be achieved by Groundspeak on a global scale (database query, mail to all reviewers to take action) and on a local scale (encouraging everyone to use NA logs on existing caches).

- cachers to have better tools to warn other cachers of dangers than the currently existing mix of cache description and attributes by CO, and normal logs+NM/NA logs+emails to reviewers+GS by finders. Possibly a new Warnings logtype. Or a wiki-like editable warnings section where any cacher can point out dangers.

- an anonymous "report cache" button for every cache to circumvent local peer pressure

- owners to be encouraged to think twice about possible dangers with their cache when publishing a cache and to correctly list those (even if it means spoilering). All current COs could be sent an email by GS to revisit their cache pages and update them about dangers (something that has already happened locally, I'm starting to see caches being archived and updated)

- give cachers better tools to meet at a cache so they are not there alone

 

Let me know what I missed and I'll add it.

 

I will. I will be taking notes. I will also be updating the list of facts surrounding Willi's death.

 

That's a good list you started. Whether or not it all comes about (or should) remains to be seen.

 

I trust the folks at Groundspeak will do what's right from their perspective and over the years I have mostly trusted their judgement. Their wagons may be circled at the moment because the cache passed the review process. Give them time and ask rather than demand. I doubt that they can please everyone.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Snoogans

[veit]

Thanks :-)

 

I just remembered that fear of being discovered by muggles (not so much authorities, apparently) also led to the CO recommending to do this cache at night. I'll add something to the list above via edit (it's much better having a few plastic containers disappear because muggles steal them rather than get killed because of doing a cache at night).

 

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible. So they would be another party that played their little role in the making of this tragedy.

Edited December 21, 2011 by veit

[+GeoBain]

Not sure what 'legal' questions have to do with this topic other than to derail it. Placement permission or the lack thereof has zero bearing on safety or on a cacher's risk-taking decisions.

 

I beg to differ with you.

 

A lot of off-limits/illegal locations are off-limits due to safety concerns. If you ignore this while either hiding OR finding a cache, it can have a lot of bearing on your safety.

 

there, fixed for you

 

No need to fix it. I meant either hiding or finding. It doesn't matter which. If you are there illegally to hide the cache it can have a lot of bearing on your safety as well as when you find it. In fact, you don't even need to be geocaching.

 

As was pointed out earlier, the fact that you are in the area under the cover of dark for fear of being caught makes you act differently than you would if you were authorized to be there. It doesn't really matter what you are doing while there. Doing it illegally can up the danger dramatically.

[+ArcherDragoon]

 

...

 

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible.

 

...

 

Hearsay and Assumptions...

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible. So they would be another party that played their little role in the making of this tragedy.

 

So the authorities did something to prevent people from using something as a bridge (something it was not intended for) so they had some role in the tragedy? I don't follow the logic.

[veit]

Hearsay and Assumptions...

 

Of course, and I clearly marked them as such.

Edited December 21, 2011 by veit

[cezanne]

I just remembered that fear of being discovered by muggles (not so much authorities, apparently) also led to the CO recommending to do this cache at night. I'll add something to the list above via edit (it's much better having a few plastic containers disappear because muggles steal them rather than get killed because of doing a cache at night).

 

Are you sure that the main concern here really was to avoid that a muggle detects the cache and removes it? I rather thought the issue is that muggles do not call the police or inform other authorities. In the first case just a box is lost - in the second case it can lead to serious troubles for the hider as we know from incidents from the past. I do think that many hiders fear the second option (like having to pay for a special bomb investigation team).

 

Also during day light the fear to be discovered at locations where one is not supposed to be adds extra stress and the tendency to hurry and not take one's time. I have come across quite a number of complaints and insulting comments about cachers that were caught while going for a secret agent style cache. The argument than typically runs like "If these cachers (typically some insulting words are used here which I want to avoid on purpose) are not clever enough to avoid attracting attention, then they should keep away from caches that require the secret agent mode."

 

Cezanne

Edited December 21, 2011 by cezanne

[+GeoBain]

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible. So they would be another party that played their little role in the making of this tragedy.

 

So the authorities did something to prevent people from using something as a bridge (something it was not intended for) so they had some role in the tragedy? I don't follow the logic.

 

I follow the logic. But what it says to me is that the log should have been a Needs Archive instead of a note.

[veit]

I just remembered that fear of being discovered by muggles (not so much authorities, apparently) also led to the CO recommending to do this cache at night. I'll add something to the list above via edit (it's much better having a few plastic containers disappear because muggles steal them rather than get killed because of doing a cache at night).

 

Are you sure that the main concern here really was to avoid that a muggle detects the cache and removes it? I rather thought the issue is that muggles do not call the police or inform other authorities? In the first case just a box is lost - in the second case it can lead to serious troubles for the hider as we know from incidents from the past. I do think that many hiders fear the second option.

 

Also during day light the fear to be discovered at locations where one is not supposed to be adds extra stress and the tendency to hurry and not take one's time.

 

Cezanne

 

No, I am not 100% sure. It's my gut feeling from the cache listing. ("Ich empfehle euch allerdings ihn in der Nacht zu machen, weil die Muggel am Tag sehr aktiv sind."). I think we can agree though that both issues (fear of discovery by muggles and by authorities) can lead to unwise actions.

[4wheelin_fool]

I went ahead and posted a NA log for this cache in Austria, and I think my log stood for about 2-3 hrs:

 

Your log entry for the listing Airlebnis Murpark (Traditional Cache) was deleted by Team Cachehunter at Tuesday, 20 December 2011 21:52:14

 

Visit this listing at the below address:

http://coord.info/GL745NYG

Profile for Team Cachehunter:

http://coord.info/PR33BQ8

 

i'm glad it was deleted, what exactly business you have posting a NA on a cache all the way on the other side of the world, have you visited this cache?

 

 

I too don't understand why someone would post an SBA on a cache that they have never visited.

 

This discussion is starting to chase its tail.

 

It appears that posters are going off half cocked on a crusade to get cache(s) archived with no actual on the ground experience with the cache(s) they are posting an SBA on and then posting links to the profile of the CO to villify them. What is the purpose of this crusade? It's not going to bring Willi back. I will personally barf if someone proposes some sort of Willi's Law to justify their actions.

 

Some of the OP's most recent comments are a bit of a concern to me.

 

I'm going to stop posting to this thread until I have read every word and checked the links of the current 8 pages and taken a few notes.

 

Willimax died and it could have been easily prevented. Stop laying blame. That is for the local authorities to do. If you want to do something about this, try to discuss ways to prevent the next geocaching death in a constructive way that doesn't lob rocks at already injured parties and try do disagree civilly.

 

Snoogans is the voice of reason in this thread! I do believe the Austrian cache referenced in the quotes above is the only one with an SBA that can be documented in this thread although there may have been more posted to caches in Germany that haven't been mentioned here. And of course I could be wrong.

 

In defense (sort of) of the SBA poster, the cache page gallery, along with the Google Street view (actually the Bing Street view gives a better angle) clearly show the cache near the top of a 50 foot tall or more entrance sign at a shopping mall.

 

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

 

People on that side of the globe are afraid to post NA logs. They dont want a backlash from other cachers. The tools are there, but are not being used. I suspect that is the case elsewhere also. If nobody is going to post those logs the illegal caches will multiply even further and is the reason why they have already. I suppose that turning a blind eye and allowing anything to be published should be popular as local cachers will allow it, and when cachers in other areas should have no say?

 

Perhaps it could escalate to the point where the authorities in the entire country bans geocaching as an illegal activity. Then what next? It makes the paper and when you try to hide a cache in a hollow tree in your area, it gets nixed.

 

Geocaches are routinely published by cachers who live hundreds, if not thousands of miles away. The idea that it is only the business of the locals is ridiculous. So cachers who post NAs on caches in their backyards get harassed to the point that they dontwant to do it anymore, and if they do it on caches in other areas then they are told to butt out. What next? Publish anything, and when someone dies doing something illegal just shrug your shoulders. People are going to die when caching. If they are doing something illegal thats a whole different story.

[cezanne]

People on that side of the globe are afraid to post NA logs. They dont want a backlash from other cachers. The tools are there, but are not being used.

 

I guess the story is a bit more complex. It also needs to be taken into account that if N/A logs are posted, there is no guarantee at all that they will be handled.

Recall that the cache I used as example has received a N/A log that still exists. Neither did any reviewer react (two existed back then for the country) nor was the N/A logger treated with respect. Telling him that he should go to a shop and buy diapers or toilette tissue if he is not courageous enough to go for the cache is certainly nothing most cachers want to receive as reaction to their concern.

 

I suspect that is the case elsewhere also. If nobody is going to post those logs the illegal caches will multiply even further and is the reason why they have already. I suppose that turning a blind eye and allowing anything to be published should be popular as local cachers will allow it, and when cachers in other areas should have no say?

 

I can understand your motivation for posting the N/A log. I think that posting N/A logs from places far from the cache who have never been at the location or posting N/A logs with sockpuppet accounts is in most cases better than taking no action at all for cache with serious concerns. At the same time I think however that changing the system so that it makes it easier for local cachers to voice their concerns without having to fear quite a lot of troubles, is an even better solution. Moreover, I think that "needs reviewer attention" is often a much better term than "needs archived". Some concerns might get away when being provided with information not present on the cache page.

 

Cezanne

[+JesandTodd]

I posted the third NA log. Was I out of line? Probably. I admit this...

 

But I think I proved a point while doing so. Logging an NA feels bad. It puts you in a bad spot. Few people are ok doing this. People who are new to the game, nice, or dont like to be labeled as troublemakers probably won't take that step when it's needed. Instead, they will fall in line with their community culture, notice that 'everyone else did it so it must be ok,' and fail to leave appropriately logged warnings.

 

So, yeah, I'm thousands of km away. Fair enough. But it doesn't take a brainiac to see that this cache in particular is just a fatality waiting to happen. I'm not sure how our sport/game will look if another death happens so close. Especially one with multiple logs with the words "illegal" or "life threatening" in them., and ith multiple warnings deleted.

 

I think I also proved, as far as that area is concerned, that NA logs aren't working. Our current system of warning other cachers isnt working. maybe in my community, but not consistently everywhere.

 

If I had flown over there, and stood at the base of that structure and then walked away, what difference would my NA log make as compared looking at the gallery pics (for this particular cache)?

If I'm a new player with under 100 finds will my NA log be treated the same? Or will I be labeled a noob who doesn't understand this game?

If I've never attempted a T=5 cache prior, will my NA log be the same? Or will I be told to buy diapers and let the real cachers do this cache?

 

The NA log from Oct. '09 still stands. It wasn't deleted. From what I gather, the person who logged it was ridiculed. And also, from what I gather, the reviewers don't care one bit.

 

I need to be done with this thread for a while. Really, I was just looking for a way to prevent this from happening in the future to me or anybody else.

So much resistance....

[+t4e]

still not anyone's business, outside of that community, to deal with it, let alone someone that is thousands of kms away and never visited the cache

 

people should take care of things in their own "backyard" before looking over the fence trying to fix the rest of the world

i'm sure the Austrians are very capable of dealing with their own issues, they don't need any outsiders sticking their nose in trying to tell them how to do things

 

And what if they can't or wont deal with them?

 

This thread has given a strong indication that the German and Austrian geocaching community doesn't want to police themselves.

 

so what?

 

its nobody's business outside those countries to police them

 

i will stop here as my next comment will get into politics and its not the place here

[cezanne]

No, I am not 100% sure. It's my gut feeling from the cache listing. ("Ich empfehle euch allerdings ihn in der Nacht zu machen, weil die Muggel am Tag sehr aktiv sind."). I think we can agree though that both issues (fear of discovery by muggles and by authorities) can lead to unwise actions.

 

I read the cache page myself. My interpretation was however that the hiders are concerned that some muggle might call the police or inform the authorities, not that a cacher is directly watched by a police man or someone official. So the danger comes indeed from muggles - we just interpret it differently why being seen is dangerous. I guess the average person passing by the location (probably a lot of retired people, people walking with their dogs etc) will not climb up this bridge to remove a container (it is not easily reachable), but rather will be concerned about what these strange people are doing up there.

 

Cezanne

[+t4e]

 

People on that side of the globe are afraid to post NA logs. They dont want a backlash from other cachers. The tools are there, but are not being used. I suspect that is the case elsewhere also. If nobody is going to post those logs the illegal caches will multiply even further and is the reason why they have already. I suppose that turning a blind eye and allowing anything to be published should be popular as local cachers will allow it, and when cachers in other areas should have no say?

 

 

so here we come to the rescue from across the globe..woohooo

there is always the option of contacting the reviewer directly

 

people need to understand that it is a global game and different countries have different cultures and perhaps that influenced how the game developed

 

i find it insulting as well as annoying when people try to make order where they don't belong

Edited December 21, 2011 by t4e

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible. So they would be another party that played their little role in the making of this tragedy.

 

So the authorities did something to prevent people from using something as a bridge (something it was not intended for) so they had some role in the tragedy? I don't follow the logic.

 

I follow the logic. But what it says to me is that the log should have been a Needs Archive instead of a note.

 

Can you explain it to me then?

[veit]

No, I am not 100% sure. It's my gut feeling from the cache listing. ("Ich empfehle euch allerdings ihn in der Nacht zu machen, weil die Muggel am Tag sehr aktiv sind."). I think we can agree though that both issues (fear of discovery by muggles and by authorities) can lead to unwise actions.

 

I read the cache page myself. My interpretation was however that the hiders are concerned that some muggle might call the police or inform the authorities, not that a cacher is directly watched by a police man or someone official. So the danger comes indeed from muggles - we just interpret it differently why being seen is dangerous. I guess the average person passing by the location (probably a lot of retired people, people walking with their dogs etc) will not climb up this bridge to remove a container (it is not easily reachable), but rather will be concerned about what these strange people are doing up there.

 

Cezanne

 

Sure, fair enough - agree with you - it is possible that the fear of muggles calling authorities might have been more in the mind of the owner to give the "night, please" advice than the precious plastic container being lost, and that it probably was the larger fear when cachers actually went for it.

Edited December 21, 2011 by veit

[veit]

From now on, I'll keep posting the updated list of suggestions from time to time, please feel free to correct and add to it. I updated a few parts.

 

List of suggestions for changes to the geocaching features/culture to prevent more injuries or deaths from happening:

 

- every individual cacher should be more aware of the risks he is taking. Ultimately it is his or her responsability if he goes for a cache. There have been suggestions how this general awareness can be heightened: a new Forum category Safety, as well as a global communication campaign by the platform.

- generally place more emphasis in the community on safety rather than on find-counts (here we can all play our part, but again, global communication might help/nurture such a culture change). This includes making sure cachers don't get ridiculed if they post valid safety concerns in logs.

- place more emphasis on safety rather than avoidance of being seen by muggles (for fear of them calling authorities or stealing caches). Plastic containers can be replaced, lifes cannot.

- caches not to be placed in "illegal locations". The many existing ones to be archived. This can be achieved by Groundspeak on a global scale (database query, mail to all reviewers to take action) and on a local scale (encouraging everyone to use NA logs on existing caches). It can also be achieved by non-local geocachers posting NA logs if they become aware of illegal or dangerous caches, although there is debate whether this is seen as interference from afar and might offend local communities.

- improvements to the treatment of NA logs (example was the case of a dangerous cache in Austria that has had a NA log since 2009 without anything happening other than the poster being ridiculed).

- cachers to have better tools to warn other cachers of dangers than the currently existing mix of cache description and attributes by CO, and normal logs+NM/NA logs+emails to reviewers+GS by finders. Possibly a new Warnings logtype. Or a wiki-like editable warnings section where any cacher can point out dangers.

- an anonymous "report cache" button for every cache to circumvent local peer pressure

- owners to be encouraged to think twice about possible dangers with their cache when publishing a cache and to correctly list those (even if it means spoilering). All current COs could be sent an email by GS to revisit their cache pages and update them about dangers (something that has already happened locally, I'm starting to see caches being archived and updated)

- give cachers better tools to meet at a cache so they are not there alone (http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=287203&view=findpost&p=4924638)

 

Let me know what I missed and I'll add it.

Edited December 21, 2011 by veit

[4wheelin_fool]

 

People on that side of the globe are afraid to post NA logs. They dont want a backlash from other cachers. The tools are there, but are not being used. I suspect that is the case elsewhere also. If nobody is going to post those logs the illegal caches will multiply even further and is the reason why they have already. I suppose that turning a blind eye and allowing anything to be published should be popular as local cachers will allow it, and when cachers in other areas should have no say?

 

 

so here we come to the rescue from across the globe..woohooo

there is always the option of contacting the reviewer directly

 

There was a cache near me that was unecessarily archived very recently for being buried. The cache page mentioned permission, as well as the names of those who allowed it. It was archived anyhow. There was no NA logs posted, but from looking at the cache logs it seemed clear about who had contacted the revicewer. No finds for a few months, and then a recent find with the archival the next day.

The cacher who seemingly reported it also has had a few caches gone missing before that. Perhaps he had done the same thing before, and that is why? Who knows?

 

Which is worse being a cache cop, or being part of a cache mafia? Reporting illegal hides, or being intimidated not to do so?

 

people need to understand that it is a global game and different countries have different cultures and perhaps that influenced how the game developed

If it doesnt affect us, then why do we post in a common forum? I suppose the German death should be kept in the German forums?

 

i find it insulting as well as annoying when people try to make order where they don't belong

 

Such as trespassing in unauthorized areas?

[+t4e]

 

If it doesnt affect us, then why do we post in a common forum? I suppose the German death should be kept in the German forums?

 

bad conclusion

 

i never said not to discuss it, perfectly fine and welcomed to help bring awareness about such problems and hopefully learn from their mistakes

 

jumping the gun and posting NA logs when you haven't been at the cache is a totally different story

 

 

Such as trespassing in unauthorized areas?

 

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

perfectly fine to offer advice but do not take it upon yourself to act

 

 

 

- give cachers better tools to meet at a cache so they are not there alone

 

 

i am not quite getting this point

Edited December 21, 2011 by t4e

[veit]

 

- give cachers better tools to meet at a cache so they are not there alone

 

 

i am not quite getting this point

 

Just an idea I threw out there in post #172 http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=287203&view=findpost&p=4924638

[4wheelin_fool]

 

If it doesnt affect us, then why do we post in a common forum? I suppose the German death should be kept in the German forums?

 

bad conclusion

 

i never said not to discuss it, perfectly fine and welcomed to help bring awareness about such problems and hopefully learn from their mistakes

 

jumping the gun and posting NA logs when you haven't been at the cache is a totally different story

 

 

Such as trespassing in unauthorized areas?

 

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

perfectly fine to offer advice but do not take it upon yourself to act

 

 

A Needs Archived log is advice. They are free to ignore it, which they have.

 

Just as I'm free to ignore your advice, as well.

 

If there is nobody over there with the cohones to do so, there exists a problem.

 

They can archive it and scapegoat "the angsty American" if they wish.

Edited December 21, 2011 by 4wheelin_fool

[+CanadianRockies]

It is a sad story...however a safety warning really is not needed. How many times have each of us parked road side for a cache? That is extremely dangerous even when you park safely. You are at risk beyond your control for drunk drivers, driver texting/using cell phone or drivers just not paying attention. A safety warning would be needed for a large % of caches in similar conditions, so it would really would be meaningless.

Nobody is suggesting that warnings should be posted for every conceivable danger. You don't have to tell everybody to look both ways before crossing the street. Or watch where you're hiking since you could trip on a rock and fall.

 

All each of us can do is to try to minimize the probability by working in our own comfort zone, and hopefully using common sense.

One way to reduce your chances of injury or death is to be informed, and appropriate warning messages can help with that. Not all hazards are obvious to all people.

 

I have a cache in an area where hunting is allowed at certain times. My listing mentions this, encourages people to wear appropriate clothing, and provides a phone number where they can get more information. Bears occasionally travel in the area, so I also provide a link to information about bear safety. Many geocachers already understand all this and don't need these warnings. However, a significant number of others could be unaware of these issues and might appreciate the information.

Edited December 21, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+CanadianRockies]

Moreover, if I have to go to GZ this means than I also would to climb up e.g. the bridge and search for the cache and then post a N/A log thereafter.

You most certainly do NOT have to go to GZ to report an illegally placed cache. If a cache is on the wrong side of a "No Trespassing" sign, for example, then you could simply take a picture of the sign and notify the appropriate reviewer. If the reviewer refuses to act, then you can appeal to Groundspeak directly.

[+SwineFlew]

More reasons to change the wording of "Needs Archive" to "Needs Reviewer Attention".

 

Time for GS to give people a time out for turning a blind eye on problem caches if they log a smiley. That will make cachers think twice.

[4wheelin_fool]

So i'm visiting a foreign country. All of the locals know very well that a cache is off-limits despite there not being any signage, but don't say anything out of fear of reprisal. I go to look for it and get arrested, and while on vacation.

 

 

 

 

How is this a local issue, again?

Edited December 21, 2011 by 4wheelin_fool

[+GeoBain]

Also, a tidbit maybe: one of the guys who did the cache before Willi posted online that he's convinced that the city authorities removed that one grille so people wouldn't use this bridge as a regular crossing. There wasn't anything about that in the article, but it does seem very plausible. So they would be another party that played their little role in the making of this tragedy.

 

So the authorities did something to prevent people from using something as a bridge (something it was not intended for) so they had some role in the tragedy? I don't follow the logic.

 

I follow the logic. But what it says to me is that the log should have been a Needs Archive instead of a note.

 

Can you explain it to me then?

 

The intentional removal of the grid (if it really happened) in order to prevent the public from using it as a bridge would open them up to liability. At the very least it would make them partially responsible. Rather than remove the grid they could have secured the hatch better.

 

However, this still does not relieve the individual of his own personal responsibility. Regardless of what the city did or did not do, he was tresspassing. We can speculate on what else he was doing wrong, but given that we don't have those facts, I'd rather not.

[+GeoBain]

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

What if local cache A is afraid to post the NA and asks cacher B from across the pond to post it for him?

[+Snoogans]

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

What if local cache A is afraid to post the NA and asks cacher B from across the pond to post it for him?

 

And we have reached the bottom. Shovel anyone???

[+GeoBain]

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

What if local cache A is afraid to post the NA and asks cacher B from across the pond to post it for him?

 

And we have reached the bottom. Shovel anyone???

 

Do you mind explaining that comment?

[+vds]

My personal idea/opinion is to add a new section to every cache: "Warnings:" where specific warnings can be added to not only by the cache owner but by every cacher. A boiler plate warning just doesnt do since most of us would quickly glance over it soon.

 

While this event is sad, I don't see any action needed in the general sense.

 

People often over-estimate their abilities. People often are thinking of other things. People often aren't even thinking/looking at all. Stuff happens. That's why it's called an accident.

 

The fact that the fellow is reported to have been caching at the time is a mere detail. The general problem is that in caching, like in doing anything else, you need to be aware of your surroundings and the associated risks. Just as you can fall off a bridge, you can fall out of a tree, or step in a hole, or walk backwards into traffic, or the like. That's why you teach your children to look both ways before crossing the street.

 

I don't see any action required here.

[+Snoogans]

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

What if local cache A is afraid to post the NA and asks cacher B from across the pond to post it for him?

 

And we have reached the bottom. Shovel anyone???

 

Do you mind explaining that comment?

 

A far fetched "what if" scenario on a thread that now resembles a puppy chasing its tail... We have reached rock bottom and we are preparing to dig.

 

I just wanted to pass out the shovels.

[+Ike 13]

1) NA logs should become anonymous. It is apparent that in some areas the local community is very abusive and maybe even threatening to people who post legitimate NA logs

2) NA logs should not be able to be deleted by the CO. Let the reviewers have the ability and if the log is truly bogus it can be deleted afterwards.

3) If the local reviewers are too afraid of opinion to do their job and archive caches that are illegal then GS needs to find new reviewers.

 

Groundspeak guidelines do NOT address safety. They however do address trespassing. There is a huge difference of not getting explicit permission to place a simple straight forward cache in a park and this one that looks to be placed in a spot that no one (outside the employees) should go. I have done extreme caches, but I would never do something like this by myself at night and in a spot that is clearly off limits to anyone. It's sad that 30+ finders did nothing and that speaks to a larger local problem.

[+Snoogans]

My personal idea/opinion is to add a new section to every cache: "Warnings:" where specific warnings can be added to not only by the cache owner but by every cacher. A boiler plate warning just doesnt do since most of us would quickly glance over it soon.

While this event is sad, I don't see any action needed in the general sense.

People often over-estimate their abilities. People often are thinking of other things. People often aren't even thinking/looking at all. Stuff happens. That's why it's called an accident.

 

The fact that the fellow is reported to have been caching at the time is a mere detail. The general problem is that in caching, like in doing anything else, you need to be aware of your surroundings and the associated risks. Just as you can fall off a bridge, you can fall out of a tree, or step in a hole, or walk backwards into traffic, or the like. That's why you teach your children to look both ways before crossing the street.

 

I don't see any action required here.

 

There is no organized standard of care for the finder of a geocache. Here's our (Groundspeak's) disclaimer. Swim at your own risk.... And that worked for 10 years. I seriously doubt that attitude will fly over the Mainstream Event Horizon.

 

What has changed is the growth rate of listed caches and new cachers. With that we have an increased frequency of deaths.

 

3 deaths from 2003 to November of 2009. The 3rd being on the cusp of the 1 million listed caches mark.

 

We hit a million and bound wayyy past it and boom, 2 deaths just 5 months apart and this last death was easily prevented.

 

At some point we as a community need to sit up and take notice and reflect... Is swim at your own risk really the best policy?

 

Can't we DO something to educate or at least address the issue of safety? Or is it sombody else's problem?

 

If folks aren't reading the cache pages to get safety info, how do we reach them?

 

The most recent frequency in geocaching deaths is 5 months. Heinrich's Law applies. I would almost expect at least one more death in the next 12 months.

 

I hope I'm wrong. But if I'm not, what could have been done to try to prevent that next geocaching death especially if it is due to a cache that shouldn't have been posted in the first place as in the case of Willimax's death?

 

Facts

 

#1 The CO placed a cache in an off limits area. Whether he knew or not.

#2 It passed review and was published.

#3 34 finders either didn't know to report it, didn't care to report it, or were afraid to report it. Mix and match.

#4 Willimax chose to go there alone, at night, and died hunting it. He was 21yo.

 

Off the top of my head, I see close to 40 proactive ways his death could have been prevented just from those 4 facts. Now ask yourself this..... Is it really okay to be hearing over and over, eh it was his choice....? Certainly, the final steps were his.... But there are at least 36 ways that he could have never had the chance to make that choice.

 

I am not assigning blame. I will leave that up to the local authorities. What I am saying is that in an established geocaching culture of safety Willi MIGHT NOT have died. He was 21 years old. That keeps going over and over in my mind. He was 21yo.

 

The preceeding response is cobbled together from 2 posts in a different forum for those that just experienced deja vu.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Snoogans

[+GeoBain]

no, such as going into another country to make order

 

What if local cache A is afraid to post the NA and asks cacher B from across the pond to post it for him?

 

And we have reached the bottom. Shovel anyone???

 

Do you mind explaining that comment?

 

A far fetched "what if" scenario on a thread that now resembles a puppy chasing its tail... We have reached rock bottom and we are preparing to dig.

 

I just wanted to pass out the shovels.

 

Well, that scenario is very close to what has been described in this thread. Apparently the folks in Germany are hesitant to post NA logs. Those that do get told to put on their Pampers.

 

So if someone brings the issue up in these forums, I don't see a problem with someone across the pond posting the NA for them.

 

Of course, it would be much better if the local community would grow a pair and start posting their own NA logs. And if the local reviewers fail to respond, they should take it a step further with an email to contact@geocaching.com.