Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Sylkenkat

Cache found in a 'unreachable place"

Recommended Posts

My husband and I bought a used car yesterday. When we got it home and went to put our jack in the trunk we found a geocache in there!

 

The cache is called Theme Less and was originally placed in Calgary Alberta by someone called Timitu. I cant find the cache on the site to report where we're going to move it to.

 

Where should I be looking?

Share this post


Link to post

The user doesn't seem to exist, and no caches have that name in the 'search by keyword' function.

 

Could be a new cache, that was never placed/listed.

May be listed on another site.

 

Is there a log book with the cache. Does it have any names in there?

May help to track it down, if it's been found.

 

Have to add: Please don't rush out and hide it, until things have been solved, the previous owner may like it back!

Edited by Bear and Ragged

Share this post


Link to post

Timitu appears to be short for thisismeisthatu

 

Here is the cache It was archived on 11/30/08.

 

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post

I couldn't find any reference in the logs about it being replaced, so I assume it is the container that went missing. What is the last entry (or two) in the physical log?

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

I disagree. First, this situation is a random occurrence, a very unlikely random occurrence and I would log a found it on this AND a favourite point (if you could) because it is an unusual find. Second, finding this cache by accident isn't any different than stumbling across a cache by accident in its intended placement. In this case a found is a found.

 

A pocket cache is a container that purposefully gets carried around to events so people can log it. Totally different situation.

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

I disagree. First, this situation is a random occurrence, a very unlikely random occurrence and I would log a found it on this AND a favourite point (if you could) because it is an unusual find. Second, finding this cache by accident isn't any different than stumbling across a cache by accident in its intended placement. In this case a found is a found.

 

A pocket cache is a container that purposefully gets carried around to events so people can log it. Totally different situation.

 

I said it was akin to a pocket cache not identical to pocket cache.

akin means having similar characteristics, properties, etc.

Pocket caches are caches that have been archived but the owner still allows found logs to be made on the cache.

 

There is a big difference between a cache replaced a couple feet from it's intended location and a archived cache riding around in the trunk of a car. The cache listing is no longer active and the cache is no longer anywhere near it's intended location. At best it could be considered a traveling cache. Traveling caches are another type of cache that violates the Guidelines.

 

A note on the cache page, yes. A found it log, NO!

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

If he found the cache and signed the log, he can post his log online. I can quote the guideline if you like.

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

I disagree. First, this situation is a random occurrence, a very unlikely random occurrence and I would log a found it on this AND a favourite point (if you could) because it is an unusual find. Second, finding this cache by accident isn't any different than stumbling across a cache by accident in its intended placement. In this case a found is a found.

 

A pocket cache is a container that purposefully gets carried around to events so people can log it. Totally different situation.

 

Nor, is it any different than finding a cache in the middle of the trail, 2/20th of a mile from it's intend hiding spot.

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

If he found the cache and signed the log, he can post his log online. I can quote the guideline if you like.

Moving caches, pocket caches, retirement cards, etc. all violate the cache permanence guideline. "Listings must contain accurate GPS coordinates."

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

I disagree. First, this situation is a random occurrence, a very unlikely random occurrence and I would log a found it on this AND a favourite point (if you could) because it is an unusual find. Second, finding this cache by accident isn't any different than stumbling across a cache by accident in its intended placement. In this case a found is a found.

 

A pocket cache is a container that purposefully gets carried around to events so people can log it. Totally different situation.

 

Nor, is it any different than finding a cache in the middle of the trail, 2/20th of a mile from it's intend hiding spot.

 

There is a difference. This particular cache listing is archived.

Share this post


Link to post

Sign the log and post your find online. I did the same thing when I found Jesus

That is the worst advice I've ever heard. It's cool that they found an archived cache in the trunk of a used car. But logging it is akin to Pocket Caches which are a violation of the Guidelines.

 

If he found the cache and signed the log, he can post his log online. I can quote the guideline if you like.

Moving caches, pocket caches, retirement cards, etc. all violate the cache permanence guideline. "Listings must contain accurate GPS coordinates."

 

If he were to start passing the cache around to friends or bringing it to events, then I agree. Only the cache owner can make the final decision, but I believe that under these unique circumstances, he found the cache. If he signs the log, he deserves the option of logging it online. I look at this as no different than if he had stepped off the trail and found a cache that had been archived sometime ago and had originally been located a half mile up the trail.

Share this post


Link to post

The issue is moot anyhow. You cant log this cache unless you are 'premium' which I'm not, and its archived so.. shrug. Thanks for the info all.

Share this post


Link to post

If he were to start passing the cache around to friends or bringing it to events, then I agree. Only the cache owner can make the final decision, but I believe that under these unique circumstances, he found the cache. If he signs the log, he deserves the option of logging it online. I look at this as no different than if he had stepped off the trail and found a cache that had been archived sometime ago and had originally been located a half mile up the trail.

 

If I found an active cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return it to it's original location and then log it online. If I found an archived cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return the cache to it's owner. This cache is archived so returning it to it's original location is out of the question. I'd attempt to return to the owner. If the owner then replaces it and get it unarchived then I'd log it as found after I found it in the location it is placed. If he wants to log the cache as he found it in his trunk then he should try and get it listed. Although I suspect he is going to have trouble with the cache permanence guideline.

Share this post


Link to post

My husband and I bought a used car yesterday. When we got it home and went to put our jack in the trunk we found a geocache in there!

 

The cache is called Theme Less and was originally placed in Calgary Alberta by someone called Timitu. I cant find the cache on the site to report where we're going to move it to.

 

Where should I be looking?

 

where did you buy the car?

Share this post


Link to post

The issue is moot anyhow. You cant log this cache unless you are 'premium' which I'm not, and its archived so.. shrug. Thanks for the info all.

 

You can log it by going to geocachingadmin.com Enter the GC# and click log. If you don't feel comfortable logging a find, you can still use that method to post a note and let the cache owner know what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Pocket caches are caches that have been archived but the owner still allows found logs to be made on the cache.

 

 

Actually, according to your link:

 

pocket cache

a cache carried on one's person that others are allowed to log at an event, promoted as a way to get people to mingle at events. Pocket caches violate the Geocaching.com guidelines, and known pocket caches are archived and locked.

 

The archiving part is the punishment for breaking the guidelines.

 

And so long as Groundspeak allows cachers to log finds on archived caches, I think this is a valid find. Perhaps not the way the CO intended, but, as I've said before, it's not like there are a finite number of smilies being rationed out and someone is unfairly taking my share.

Share this post


Link to post

pocket cache

a cache carried on one's person that others are allowed to log at an event, promoted as a way to get people to mingle at events. Pocket caches violate the Geocaching.com guidelines, and known pocket caches are archived and locked.

 

The archiving part is the punishment for breaking the guidelines.

 

And so long as Groundspeak allows cachers to log finds on archived caches, I think this is a valid find. Perhaps not the way the CO intended, but, as I've said before, it's not like there are a finite number of smilies being rationed out and someone is unfairly taking my share.

Locking was the "punishment". Mostly archived caches were used but there was the occasional active cache.

Share this post


Link to post

The issue is moot anyhow. You cant log this cache unless you are 'premium' which I'm not, and its archived so.. shrug. Thanks for the info all.

 

Log it here. You have to be Premium to look at the page, but not to log it. It's up to you and the cache owner whether you can use the "found" log type, but I'd at least write a detailed note, and perhaps the make, model and previous owner of the car if you know...:D

Share this post


Link to post

If he were to start passing the cache around to friends or bringing it to events, then I agree. Only the cache owner can make the final decision, but I believe that under these unique circumstances, he found the cache. If he signs the log, he deserves the option of logging it online. I look at this as no different than if he had stepped off the trail and found a cache that had been archived sometime ago and had originally been located a half mile up the trail.

 

If I found an active cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return it to it's original location and then log it online. If I found an archived cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return the cache to it's owner. This cache is archived so returning it to it's original location is out of the question. I'd attempt to return to the owner. If the owner then replaces it and get it unarchived then I'd log it as found after I found it in the location it is placed. If he wants to log the cache as he found it in his trunk then he should try and get it listed. Although I suspect he is going to have trouble with the cache permanence guideline.

 

So, in this case, the person who found the container should take it back to the original coordinates, wave it around in the general area and then log the find? They found the cache. They're not required to find the location. It seems pretty simple to understand.

Share this post


Link to post

If he were to start passing the cache around to friends or bringing it to events, then I agree. Only the cache owner can make the final decision, but I believe that under these unique circumstances, he found the cache. If he signs the log, he deserves the option of logging it online. I look at this as no different than if he had stepped off the trail and found a cache that had been archived sometime ago and had originally been located a half mile up the trail.

 

If I found an active cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return it to it's original location and then log it online. If I found an archived cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return the cache to it's owner. This cache is archived so returning it to it's original location is out of the question. I'd attempt to return to the owner. If the owner then replaces it and get it unarchived then I'd log it as found after I found it in the location it is placed. If he wants to log the cache as he found it in his trunk then he should try and get it listed. Although I suspect he is going to have trouble with the cache permanence guideline.

 

So, in this case, the person who found the container should take it back to the original coordinates, wave it around in the general area and then log the find? They found the cache. They're not required to find the location. It seems pretty simple to understand.

 

I like that response as it illustrates how silly a lot of this stuff is. I was berated earlier this month in another thread because I described how I had applied a unique solution to a unique situation. I think that it is just the way that that some of us look at things. Some of us are simply wired differently. Some take an almost flow chart like attitude to things. "Did this happen, yes/no" and then look at the box to the left or right and proceed accordingly. Some of us answer, "well, not really", and look ahead and are willing to skip some of the boxes. Granted, we tend to look in the direction that leads us to answer that we wanted in the first place, something that we call "justification", but it also means that we see the bigger picture, and all of the solutions, all at one.

 

So, in the overall scheme of things, we are talking about one archived cache and one cacher logging one "Found it" log. I just don't see a major Butterfly Effect occurring if that one log gets posted.

Edited by Don_J

Share this post


Link to post

If he were to start passing the cache around to friends or bringing it to events, then I agree. Only the cache owner can make the final decision, but I believe that under these unique circumstances, he found the cache. If he signs the log, he deserves the option of logging it online. I look at this as no different than if he had stepped off the trail and found a cache that had been archived sometime ago and had originally been located a half mile up the trail.

 

If I found an active cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return it to it's original location and then log it online. If I found an archived cache a half mile from where it was originally located then I would attempt to return the cache to it's owner. This cache is archived so returning it to it's original location is out of the question. I'd attempt to return to the owner. If the owner then replaces it and get it unarchived then I'd log it as found after I found it in the location it is placed. If he wants to log the cache as he found it in his trunk then he should try and get it listed. Although I suspect he is going to have trouble with the cache permanence guideline.

 

So, in this case, the person who found the container should take it back to the original coordinates, wave it around in the general area and then log the find? They found the cache. They're not required to find the location. It seems pretty simple to understand.

 

If it is an active cache, yes. Either return the cache to the listed coordinates or the CO should update the coordinates for it's current location. According to the guidelines the CO has a responsibility to keep the cache coordinates up to date.

Share this post


Link to post

I like that response as it illustrates how silly a lot of this stuff is. I was berated earlier this month in another thread because I described how I had applied a unique solution to a unique situation. I think that it is just the way that that some of us look at things. Some of us are simply wired differently. Some take an almost flow chart like attitude to things. "Did this happen, yes/no" and then look at the box to the left or right and proceed accordingly. Some of us answer, "well, not really", and look ahead and are willing to skip some of the boxes. Granted, we tend to look in the direction that leads us to answer that we wanted in the first place, something that we call "justification", but it also means that we see the bigger picture, and all of the solutions, all at one.

 

So, in the overall scheme of things, we are talking about one archived cache and one cacher logging one "Found it" log. I just don't see a major Butterfly Effect occurring if that one log gets posted.

 

A unique situation that isn't covered in the guidelines one thing. Ignoring already established guidelines is different.

Some people seem to have the attitude that the guidelines should apply to everyone but themselves.

 

I am sure that some thought that pocket caches were a one off deal before they became a problem and had to banned.

Share this post


Link to post

I like that response as it illustrates how silly a lot of this stuff is. I was berated earlier this month in another thread because I described how I had applied a unique solution to a unique situation. I think that it is just the way that that some of us look at things. Some of us are simply wired differently. Some take an almost flow chart like attitude to things. "Did this happen, yes/no" and then look at the box to the left or right and proceed accordingly. Some of us answer, "well, not really", and look ahead and are willing to skip some of the boxes. Granted, we tend to look in the direction that leads us to answer that we wanted in the first place, something that we call "justification", but it also means that we see the bigger picture, and all of the solutions, all at one.

 

So, in the overall scheme of things, we are talking about one archived cache and one cacher logging one "Found it" log. I just don't see a major Butterfly Effect occurring if that one log gets posted.

 

A unique situation that isn't covered in the guidelines one thing. Ignoring already established guidelines is different.

Some people seem to have the attitude that the guidelines should apply to everyone but themselves.

 

I am sure that some thought that pocket caches were a one off deal before they became a problem and had to banned.

 

Can you please link to the guideline that says that you can't log a cache that you just found in the truck of the used car that you just bought. Now, if people were selling and reselling the car for the express purpose of moving the cache around so that a whole bunch of people could log it, then I see your point.

Share this post


Link to post

Can you please link to the guideline that says that you can't log a cache that you just found in the truck of the used car that you just bought. Now, if people were selling and reselling the car for the express purpose of moving the cache around so that a whole bunch of people could log it, then I see your point.

Cache permanence and the .1 mile rule are two that come to mind right away.

 

I'm going to have to concede because I see that there has been a update to the guideline regarding the finding of physical caches. The old guideline said something like; 1. Find the cache, 2. Trade Items, 3. Sign the Log. Apparently none of that is applicable anymore. As of April 23rd of this year the guideline simple states "Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed." It also states "For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the cache and signing the log are considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional."

 

I have to admit that it sounds like traveling caches and their cousins the pocket cache are within' the guidelines. I can see where making the person actually go to the location listed on the cache page could be considered a ALR. But I have to wonder why would someone wouldn't want to go to the cache location. Maybe I've been blessed with caching in places that are interesting to get to.

Share this post


Link to post

Can you please link to the guideline that says that you can't log a cache that you just found in the truck of the used car that you just bought. Now, if people were selling and reselling the car for the express purpose of moving the cache around so that a whole bunch of people could log it, then I see your point.

Cache permanence and the .1 mile rule are two that come to mind right away.

 

I'm going to have to concede because I see that there has been a update to the guideline regarding the finding of physical caches. The old guideline said something like; 1. Find the cache, 2. Trade Items, 3. Sign the Log. Apparently none of that is applicable anymore. As of April 23rd of this year the guideline simple states "Physical caches can be logged online as "Found" once the physical log has been signed." It also states "For physical caches all logging requirements beyond finding the cache and signing the log are considered additional logging requirements (ALRs) and must be optional."

 

I have to admit that it sounds like traveling caches and their cousins the pocket cache are within' the guidelines. I can see where making the person actually go to the location listed on the cache page could be considered a ALR. But I have to wonder why would someone wouldn't want to go to the cache location. Maybe I've been blessed with caching in places that are interesting to get to.

Certainly the misinterpretation that signing the the log is what constitutes finding a caches (predating eve the physical logging guideling), has contributed to pocket caches, and other practices, as being seen as "finding" a geocache.

 

However I think the better approach is to not worry if occasionally someone finds a cache in an unexpected place. The find count is not a score. We don't need geocaching referees deciding whether someone's find log should "count" or not. The online log is a way of sharing experiences. Stumbling on a cache unexpected is certainly worthy of sharing. It doesn't matter whether you log this a find or write a note.

 

Pocket caches got banned because most of the logs were of the TFTC variety (so they weren't really sharing any experience other than getting a smiley) and because there were were a few particular instances that TPTB found offensive.

 

There have been a number of examples given here where a cache was found by a muggle (or perhaps a newbie) who didn't understand that you're supposed to replace the cache where you found it. They took the cache and either forgot about it in the trunk of their car or they re-hid it someplace else. When some cacher later finds the container and spends some time figuring out which geocache listing this container belonged to, it seems natural to post the story to that cache page. Since they found the container (which is certainly one definition of find) they use a Found log. If this is getting your knickers in a twist, I suggest adjusting them and move on.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Certainly the misinterpretation that signing the the log is what constitutes finding a caches (predating eve the physical logging guideling), has contributed to pocket caches, and other practices, as being seen as "finding" a geocache.

 

However I think the better approach is to not worry if occasionally someone finds a cache in an unexpected place. The find count is not a score. We don't need geocaching referees deciding whether someone's find log should "count" or not. The online log is a way of sharing experiences. Stumbling on a cache unexpected is certainly worthy of sharing. It doesn't matter whether you log this a find or write a note.

 

Pocket caches got banned because most of the logs were of the TFTC variety (so they weren't really sharing any experience other than getting a smiley) and because there were were a few particular instances that TPTB found offensive.

 

There have been a number of examples given here where a cache was found by a muggle (or perhaps a newbie) who didn't understand that you're supposed to replace the cache where you found it. They took the cache and either forgot about it in the trunk of their car or they re-hid it someplace else. When some cacher later finds the container and spends some time figuring out which geocache listing this container belonged to, it seems natural to post the story to that cache page. Since they found the container (which is certainly one definition of find) they use a Found log. If this is getting your knickers in a twist, I suggest adjusting them and move on.

 

Even more certainly, from day one, the most basic tenant of the game has been to sign the logbook.

Anything less, including 'whatever your heart tells you', degrades the game.

Certainly 'House Rules' can be agreed upon by the owner and the logger, but carte blanche is really not kosher.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...