+jellis Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 From the latest logs either the CO or someone else fixed Mingo back up. Now for the CO or Hemlock (or another reviewer) to enable it. See pics on the latest finders logs. Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. Link to comment
+jellis Posted March 17, 2012 Author Share Posted March 17, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. Looks like the same spot but dug out the mortar. And we still don't know who did it. Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. Looks like the same spot but dug out removed the mortar. And we still don't know who did it. I think that is what you really meant, isn't it? Link to comment
+Glenn Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. It sounds like someone is trying their hardest to keep the listing on Geocaching.com alive instead of keeping the area active. So sad. Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 If that was indeed Kansas Stasher that fixed it up, I sure wish that he would also remove the 7 trackables that are listed in the inventory. Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 If that was indeed Kansas Stasher that fixed it up, I sure wish that he would also remove the 7 trackables that are listed in the inventory. and re-enable it. Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 If that was indeed Kansas Stasher that fixed it up, I sure wish that he would also remove the 7 trackables that are listed in the inventory. and re-enable it. True. It doesn't take a reviewer to do that. Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I'm such a detective. The new logbook is made by a surveying supply company, Sokkia. Does this mean anything? Who knows? The person who posted the pictures with their find log claims Mingo as their first and only find. They created the account in 2010, but had no finds on it prior to Mingo. Sock Puppet? Did they put the new cache there? Oh, and IBTL. Link to comment
+jellis Posted March 17, 2012 Author Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. Looks like the same spot but dug out removed the mortar. And we still don't know who did it. I think that is what you really meant, isn't it? Yes I did mean remove it, thanks. So it is like it was before the mortar so what is the big deal if someone fixed it back even if not the CO. They didn't dig a new hole. If you see photo it looks like the exact same spot to me. Edited March 17, 2012 by jellis Link to comment
I! Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Looks like a very tidy job. I thought it a bit of a waste of time replacing a cache in such a dull location, but upon seeing the result I've changed my mind. Link to comment
+SwineFlew Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Just watch, it will be muggled again. Lol! Link to comment
+Glenn Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Looks like a very tidy job. I thought it a bit of a waste of time replacing a cache in such a dull location, but upon seeing the result I've changed my mind. A bit of a waste of time replacing a cache unless it is what the cache owner wants. Link to comment
+EXMAN Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) I'm such a detective. The new logbook is made by a surveying supply company, Sokkia. Does this mean anything? Who knows? The person who posted the pictures with their find log claims Mingo as their first and only find. They created the account in 2010, but had no finds on it prior to Mingo. Sock Puppet? Did they put the new cache there? Oh, and IBTL. Edited March 17, 2012 by EXMAN Link to comment
I! Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 A bit of a waste of time replacing a cache unless it is what the cache owner wants. I doubt KS will retaliate. Link to comment
+Glenn Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Oh, and IBTL. IBTL !! ??????????? In Before The Lock Link to comment
+jellis Posted March 17, 2012 Author Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) A bit of a waste of time replacing a cache unless it is what the cache owner wants. I doubt KS will retaliate. I agree, from his note: Write note Write note 01/05/2012 I will try to get out to Mingo and repair the cache in the next week or so. On a personal note, I think a lot of people are taking geocaching way too serious. This started out as a "hey do you think we could hid something and have someone find it with only a GPS" idea on the news groups. It turned out to be fun and spread. Now we have too many rules and arguments about the size and types of caches, is it the "original" container or not. In my opinion, if you find the location, you can log it on the website (and don't start the virtual cache argument with me). Since this one is getting vandalized so often, you have to make exceptions. Enough of my rant, Mingo will return. Edited March 17, 2012 by jellis Link to comment
+St.Matthew Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Just watch, it will be muggled again. Lol! Sadly, I agree. The oldest cache will always have a target on its back. Link to comment
+addisonbr Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Oh, and IBTL. It's not obvious to me why this thread would get locked - what am I not following? Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 By the way, it still is not the oldest active cache. Hopefully it will be, soon, though. Link to comment
+cheech gang Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I'm such a detective. The new logbook is made by a surveying supply company, Sokkia. Does this mean anything? Who knows? The person who posted the pictures with their find log claims Mingo as their first and only find. They created the account in 2010, but had no finds on it prior to Mingo. Sock Puppet? Did they put the new cache there? Oh, and IBTL. Also the photos entered by the by the guy with one find and the other guy just prior. My CSI friends claim that the shadow on the ground indicates the two photos were taken minutes appart. I don't really know. Link to comment
+jellis Posted March 17, 2012 Author Share Posted March 17, 2012 I'm such a detective. The new logbook is made by a surveying supply company, Sokkia. Does this mean anything? Who knows? The person who posted the pictures with their find log claims Mingo as their first and only find. They created the account in 2010, but had no finds on it prior to Mingo. Sock Puppet? Did they put the new cache there? Oh, and IBTL. Also the photos entered by the by the guy with one find and the other guy just prior. My CSI friends claim that the shadow on the ground indicates the two photos were taken minutes appart. I don't really know. Probably together and may have started with a friend. Someone had to take the picture. Link to comment
4wheelin_fool Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I'm such a detective. The new logbook is made by a surveying supply company, Sokkia. Does this mean anything? Who knows? The person who posted the pictures with their find log claims Mingo as their first and only find. They created the account in 2010, but had no finds on it prior to Mingo. Sock Puppet? Did they put the new cache there? Perhaps it's a sock belonging to the person that muggled it and they had a change of heart. Link to comment
+Ecylram Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. "Mingo". Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. "Mingo". M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O And Mingo was it's name-o Link to comment
+DadOf6Furrballs Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. "Mingo". M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O And Mingo was it's name-o Oh just great. Now that's stuck in my head all night. Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 New container, new spot, obviously placed by somebody that isn't the original owner. Call it Mingo if you like. "Mingo". M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O M-I-N-G-O And Mingo was it's name-o Oh just great. Now that's stuck in my head all night. You're welcome. Link to comment
jholly Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Why do I hear Lorne Greene signing in the background? Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 (edited) Why do I hear Lorne Greene signing in the background? Buried down in the desert sand It was dug up and stolen by a muggle's hand Filled with concrete, they left it for dead But a bison tube was dropped instead Until somebody came and in Kansas Stasher's name Saved the life of Mingo (Mingo.... Mingo...) Edited March 18, 2012 by knowschad Link to comment
jholly Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Why do I hear Lorne Greene signing in the background? Buried down in the desert sand It was dug up and stolen by a muggle's hand Filled with concrete, they left it for dead But a bison tube was dropped instead Until somebody came and in Kansas Stasher's name Saved the life of Mingo (Mingo.... Mingo...) AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Man, that is going to take lots of whiskey to clear the head tonight! Link to comment
+The_Incredibles_ Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 OMG, did someone say the "M" word? Link to comment
+HHD Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 OMG, did someone say the "M" word? Bah-ha Link to comment
+SwineFlew Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 If the CO doesnt enable listing in reasonable time, can a reviewer archive the cache? Link to comment
+Chokecherry Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Reviewers here will archive disabled caches after a period of time. Link to comment
+a-body Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 FWIW, I was there this afternoon. From Norvana's birthday party to Mingo with a stop at Go Big Red in Nebraska on the way. The cache is in good shape, and almost too full of swag to get the cover on. I hope this gets enabled soon before a reviewer archives it Link to comment
knowschad Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Edited March 20, 2012 by knowschad Link to comment
+J the Goat Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It would make sense to me that the replacement being put out without a reactivation indicates that it wasn't replaced by the CO. Let it go. Link to comment
jholly Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Don't quit your day job dog. But it was a good summary. Link to comment
jholly Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) It would make sense to me that the replacement being put out without a reactivation indicates that it wasn't replaced by the CO. Let it go. Yeah think? If I was the CO I would about this time have walked away to let the gods do what ever they please. I would not want to drop the shoe, let Hemlock or Nomex do the deed. Then all I get is a bit of splash when the community gets the pitches the bombs. Moving on to GC12. Edited March 20, 2012 by jholly Link to comment
+Glenn Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It would make sense to me that the replacement being put out without a reactivation indicates that it wasn't replaced by the CO. Let it go. Yeah think? If I was the CO I would about this time have walked away to let the gods do what ever they please. I would not want to drop the shoe, let Hemlock or Nomex do the deed. Then all I get is a bit of splash when the community gets the pitches the bombs. Moving on to GC12. I agree. It is one thing if the CO asks someone to maintain his cache for him or even if he transfer ownership to someone else but it is presumptuous to "fix" someone else cache for them without permission. The "preserving history" argument hold no water because the history of a cache has already happened. That's why it is called history. Link to comment
+Andromeda321 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Good. As the CO said in his January note, I don't see what the big deal is and why so many are insistent that this gets archived. If a bunch of people want to go to an isolated spot in Kansas to sign a log because they think it's the oldest listing out there and get joy out of it, who cares? Are they personally hurting you in some way by doing so? Some cachers have way too much time on their hands if you ask me. Link to comment
+Chokecherry Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 FWIW, I was there this afternoon. From Norvana's birthday party to Mingo with a stop at Go Big Red in Nebraska on the way. The cache is in good shape, and almost too full of swag to get the cover on. I hope this gets enabled soon before a reviewer archives it You should talk to the cache owner about enabling it. It is on his shoulders and no one else's and from the looks of it he doesn't particularly care. Link to comment
+NYPaddleCacher Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 FWIW, I was there this afternoon. From Norvana's birthday party to Mingo with a stop at Go Big Red in Nebraska on the way. The cache is in good shape, and almost too full of swag to get the cover on. I hope this gets enabled soon before a reviewer archives it You should talk to the cache owner about enabling it. It is on his shoulders and no one else's and from the looks of it he doesn't particularly care. If he doesn't particularly care about it, why doesn't he just offer it up for adoption? It sounds to me like a container similar to the original was put in place, at the same location and all it really needs is for someone that *does* care enough about it to keep it maintained and all the drama about Mingo can be put to rest. Yes, it's possible that it'll be muggled again, but, if it is, that's something the new owner can/will deal with. Link to comment
+Chokecherry Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 FWIW, I was there this afternoon. From Norvana's birthday party to Mingo with a stop at Go Big Red in Nebraska on the way. The cache is in good shape, and almost too full of swag to get the cover on. I hope this gets enabled soon before a reviewer archives it You should talk to the cache owner about enabling it. It is on his shoulders and no one else's and from the looks of it he doesn't particularly care. If he doesn't particularly care about it, why doesn't he just offer it up for adoption? It sounds to me like a container similar to the original was put in place, at the same location and all it really needs is for someone that *does* care enough about it to keep it maintained and all the drama about Mingo can be put to rest. Yes, it's possible that it'll be muggled again, but, if it is, that's something the new owner can/will deal with. If the cache owner cared about his cache and the "history" behind it I would assume the owner would adopt it instead of just letting it fall into this state of both cache page and cache neglect. From my outside perspective and not particularly caring about his cache (because there will always be an oldest cache)this looks like someone who can't or isn't willing to deal with and the community is putting infinitely more importance on his cache than he does. Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It would make sense to me that the replacement being put out without a reactivation indicates that it wasn't replaced by the CO. Let it go. It was the 1 find sock puppet account, I tell you. They're not fooling me by posting all the pictures and thanking "whoever replaced it". The video was awesome. I love corny text to youtube videos. Sent to Twitter. Are you going to personally own up to making it, Knowschad? Link to comment
+Castle Mischief Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It would make sense to me that the replacement being put out without a reactivation indicates that it wasn't replaced by the CO. Let it go. Call me crazy, but it would make sense to me that the person that replaced the container and said that they replaced the container in their found it log indicates that the CO didn't replace it. Also, sounds like the mortar was chipped out with, I'm assuming, a pointy object. Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Good. As the CO said in his January note, I don't see what the big deal is and why so many are insistent that this gets archived. If a bunch of people want to go to an isolated spot in Kansas to sign a log because they think it's the oldest listing out there and get joy out of it, who cares? Are they personally hurting you in some way by doing so? Some cachers have way too much time on their hands if you ask me. That's how I see both sides of this issue. Link to comment
+Castle Mischief Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Good. As the CO said in his January note, I don't see what the big deal is and why so many are insistent that this gets archived. If a bunch of people want to go to an isolated spot in Kansas to sign a log because they think it's the oldest listing out there and get joy out of it, who cares? Are they personally hurting you in some way by doing so? Some cachers have way too much time on their hands if you ask me. I think more people are insistant that the CO maintain his cache and his cache page than they are that the cache be archived. If the CO has abandoned the cache then the guidelines should be followed. The onus is on the CO. Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Good. As the CO said in his January note, I don't see what the big deal is and why so many are insistent that this gets archived. If a bunch of people want to go to an isolated spot in Kansas to sign a log because they think it's the oldest listing out there and get joy out of it, who cares? Are they personally hurting you in some way by doing so? Some cachers have way too much time on their hands if you ask me. I think more people are insistant that the CO maintain his cache and his cache page than they are that the cache be archived. If the CO has abandoned the cache then the guidelines should be followed. The onus is on the CO. Wihtout exceptions!!! Link to comment
Recommended Posts