Cache found after bring archived ten years

January 17, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

3.1k · January 17, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

... or people who wish to assist Groundspeak's efforts in promoting geocaching.

January 17, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

... or people who wish to assist Groundspeak's efforts in promoting geocaching.

Dont agree. People don't do it for that reason. They are being nosey poseys. Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do? There are so many caches out there to find and lots of room to hide more! As a matter of fact, I think I'll bow out of this conversation that really is none of my business and look at GC.com to figure out what caches I can go find when I get off work!! Peace my friends!

3.1k · January 17, 2012

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do?

Do you feel the same way about people who report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

January 17, 2012

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do?

Do you feel the same way about people who report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

What about Legally placed caches where cachers could die or be severely hurt? There are several caches to this day that are still unfound that offer the cacher the experience of possibly dying while searching for it. There was also a cache in Germany that I just read about that was perfectly legal and a cacher died trying to retrieve it. Should that be archived as it poses a dangerous threat or severe injury?? IMO no, cachers know the risk of playing this game and anything bad could happen at any minute no matter if you're looking for an LPC or a 5/5.

3.1k · January 17, 2012

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do?

Do you feel the same way about people who report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

What about Legally placed caches where cachers could die or be severely hurt? There are several caches to this day that are still unfound that offer the cacher the experience of possibly dying while searching for it.

If the legally placed cache is hidden in a grossly negligent way, then I do believe it should be reported and archived. For example, if a cache has hidden, serious dangers that the owner is aware of but doesn't provide warnings for, then someone who is aware of these dangers should report that cache.

There was also a cache in Germany that I just read about that was perfectly legal and a cacher died trying to retrieve it.

I haven't heard about that cache. I do know about a cache in Germany where a geocacher died, but it was almost certainly placed on private property without permission.

I noticed you didn't answer my original questions. Do you feel people should not report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

January 17, 2012

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do?

Do you feel the same way about people who report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

What about Legally placed caches where cachers could die or be severely hurt? There are several caches to this day that are still unfound that offer the cacher the experience of possibly dying while searching for it.

If the legally placed cache is hidden in a grossly negligent way, then I do believe it should be reported and archived. For example, if a cache has hidden, serious dangers that the owner is aware of but doesn't provide warnings for, then someone who is aware of these dangers should report that cache.

There was also a cache in Germany that I just read about that was perfectly legal and a cacher died trying to retrieve it.

I haven't heard about that cache. I do know about a cache in Germany where a geocacher died, but it was almost certainly placed on private property without permission.

I noticed you didn't answer my original questions. Do you feel people should not report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

I think they should have a note written on the cache page and a owner maintenance posted also. Illegally placed caches could just be the inexperience of the cacher and don't necessarily require and automatic archive. Give the owner a chance to at least move it to another location. A cacher takes certain responsibilities as I previously stated when going to search for a cache. They know the risks when they get to the spot and have the option of not trying to retrieve it.

It seems to me that everyone likes to use the 'archive' option a little bit to liberally. If the cache is on private property why not contact the reviewer or the c/o directly and tell them the cache is on private property. Then let the reviewer do his job by giving the c/o 24/48 hours to remove the cache from it's currently posted illegal location and move to a good legal spot. If after that time is up and the c/o has done nothing with it, then archived it.

BTW these are way off the subject of the actual intent of the thread.

January 17, 2012

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me. It clearly shows a "holier than thou" attitude. Something i hate. Don't they have something better to do?

Do you feel the same way about people who report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

What about Legally placed caches where cachers could die or be severely hurt? There are several caches to this day that are still unfound that offer the cacher the experience of possibly dying while searching for it.

If the legally placed cache is hidden in a grossly negligent way, then I do believe it should be reported and archived. For example, if a cache has hidden, serious dangers that the owner is aware of but doesn't provide warnings for, then someone who is aware of these dangers should report that cache.

There was also a cache in Germany that I just read about that was perfectly legal and a cacher died trying to retrieve it.

I haven't heard about that cache. I do know about a cache in Germany where a geocacher died, but it was almost certainly placed on private property without permission.

I noticed you didn't answer my original questions. Do you feel people should not report illegally placed caches? What about illegally placed caches that are dangerous and could severely injure or kill someone?

There is a forum post about the Germany cache where the cacher died and pardon my harshness but that appears to have been the cachers fault for not paying attention to his surroundings. There's a picture of the cache location on the cache page (GC37G4T). That cache doesn't appear to be, by looking at the picture, in a dangerous place or somewhere that will cause severe injury. That is also the reason that there are attributes for caches. There is no "dangerous" attribute on that cache. People need to pay more attention to those before even attempting a cache.

Edited January 17, 2012 by DVS14LIFE

January 18, 2012

Just going to point out this thread was about finding a long archived cache...

14k · January 18, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

Once someone plays the game of geocaching in a manner that effects how I play the game it *becomes* my business. If know I will be going out caching, especially in an area I've never cache before, I'm probably going to look over the listings of some potential caches I might find. One of the things I often look at are the recent logs. If the most recent logs show several DNFs in a row I'm probably going to exclude that cache from my search. However, if it's got a recent "Found it" log I'm going to assume that cache is viable and might look for it. If that found it log is bogus (and the cache actually *is* missing) I might waste a considerable amount of time that I could spend searching for caches are actually viable.

January 18, 2012

My first forum post and it's unfortunate that it has to be on this subject. The acronym MYOB comes to mind here. If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours? It seems to me that if you have that much extra time to police other people's activities, you have too much time on your hands. Remember that when you point the finger at others, there are usually 3 of them pointing back at you. That includes me with this post, so on that note, I'll go back to minding my own business and leave you guys to yours.

Peace to all of you and best of everything in all of your endeavours whatever they may be. Remember that this is a light and fun activity. Anyone who is angry is obviously not having fun and should really look at changing the way they are doing things or quit caching altogether. This is just my humble opinion.

Peace and love to you as well. I would be interested to hear your views on why you think armchair logging is acceptable? Additionally, I would like to hear why you think that discussing a practice that appears to contravene the spirit of a game we enjoy isn't any of our business.

Ps- I work really hard to make sure I have plenty of time on my hands.

January 19, 2012

back a few months ago, I found a cache that been reported lost in 2007 and was subsequently archived and someone placed a new cahce in the vacinity, result found both of them and logged them!!!

January 19, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

Or the person who is mislead into looking for a recently "found" cache that has been missing for six months.

Armchair logging does affect others.

10.1k · January 19, 2012

Oh. Let's look at it. The cache was archived 10 years ago. It was confiscated by the NPS, so it has not been there in ten years. Nothing to find, sign the log and log on-line. The CO has been inactive for four years, so could not delete the bogus log. Hey! The cache is missing, and archived, why should he have to worry about it? Toss in GS's willingness to work with the National Park Service, and not have people searching NPS land for non-existant caches. If nothing else, keeping a good relationship with the NPS is very important.

Hey! I remeber that climb up Loudin Heights from my section hiking days. great spot! And a tough climb.

3.1k · January 20, 2012

Oh. Let's look at it. The cache was archived 10 years ago. It was confiscated by the NPS, so it has not been there in ten years. Nothing to find, sign the log and log on-line. The CO has been inactive for four years, so could not delete the bogus log. Hey! The cache is missing, and archived, why should he have to worry about it?

After being caught, this likely "armchair" logger deleted several of the archived caches he had "found." You'd think he would have learned his lesson. Apparently not.

He now claims to have arrived in Indiana, where he has "found" two caches. Interestingly, both caches have "Needs Maintenance" flags. One because the log is missing; the other because the log is full. :rolleyes:

On a recent trip to the Las Vegas area, he "found" ten virtual caches, nine of which are owned by a geocacher who hasn't logged onto Groundspeak in over two years. Six of those nine have "Needs Maintenance" flags; the other three are archived. I'm not sure why he skipped the many other virtual caches in that area.

Edited January 20, 2012 by CanadianRockies

3.6k · January 20, 2012

I'm new to geocaching but what is the problem with searching for archived caches?? I mean was it archived due to the cache being missing, owner passing on, owner quit caching, property issues or someone just archived it and never went to pick up the container? I've talked to friends that say the 1st and last are usually the reasons. If you have it on good authority that the containers are still there why not try to located them and log them?

Now, I've spoken to several local cachers in my area and understand that armchair logging is frowned upon, is what this cacher did any different than someone voluntering to help out with an event and getting to log all the caches without actually finding them? IMHO no, it's the exact same thing. But I've heard through the grapevine of a very prominent cacher that does exactly that but gets no scrutiny or grief for their armchair logging or that if they can't 'find' the actual cache container while at a cache location, they simply pull out another container, sign the new log and drop it where they think it should be, not knowing that the actual container is really in place because they didn't actually find it. That too IMO would be considered armchair logging. Just sayin'

Actually I found out the true story about what happened. This is a story of cacher who put out some(Mystery)Challenges and then after a cacher logs in that they completed the challenge, the CO changes the rules and deletes the cachers log. Well that started it. After that it got worse.

9k · January 20, 2012

Just came across someone sharing their find of a cache that was disabled and archived since 2003. The picture seems to show they actually did find it though

http://rinaedin.tumblr.com/post/16144125024/so-we-went-looking-for-an-old-archived-disabled

3.6k · January 20, 2012

If owners of Virtuals are no longer active and no way to confirm maybe GS should not only archive those virtuals but lock them to prevent bogus logs like they did with the WA Ape cache where they have to have proof to log them.

And give CO owners the right to lock their own archived caches if they have been deemed beyond missing, dangerous etc

But since some cachers think it is okay to log caches caches via phone to friends just because someone can't get to the area, well I would like to log caches in Antarctica,the Brazil Ape cache or even the Space Station. Just need to make some friends there.

Edited January 20, 2012 by jellis

2k · January 20, 2012

not sure COs need the power to lock caches themselves where they can simply ask a reviewer to do it for them. Can't imagine it would come up very often.

Personally, I do not understand why archived webcams or caches that have valid owners and can still have valid logs get locked without giving a reason. Sometimes the reason a grandfathered cache was archived is no longer valid. I mean, if there is no violation of the guidelines or abuse, why lock something.

However, one reason to not lock archived caches is when folks split their accounts up. In that case, wish there was a process for those folks to be able to log their "locked" and "archived" caches. If a husband and wife divorced and both logged the WA Ape cache together, seems not fair only one will be able to keep the find, or any of their locationless, or other certain locked caches.

January 20, 2012

If it is not you armchair logging or it isn't your cache its being done to what business is it of yours?

Perhaps people are appreciative of Groundspeak's efforts to promote geocaching and wish to assist them in those endeavors. Groundspeak considers armchair caching "Found It" logs to be "bogus" finds. According to MissJenn, from Groundspeak: "Stating that you must visit the location is not necessary as this is an implicit requirement..."

I agree, but my point is that its none of anyone's business unless you are Groundspeak, the CO or the person doing it.

... or people who wish to assist Groundspeak's efforts in promoting geocaching.

Just happens that people who police others are annoying to me.

You find it annoying, yet you are in this thread policing people............

January 20, 2012

This thread has derailed and digressed. Closing.

Cache found after bring archived ten years

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment