Jump to content

I90 cache thief


_Shaddow_
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

My caches have been stolen again and when I reached out for help again, I was blown off, again.

 

Even after providing some evidence to GS and a reviewer. Basically, I did all I could do, which is to show that a premium account holder, active for two years without and hides or finds, is checking out my premium cache days before it's stolen. Each time. I replaced the cache last year only because I was going to do just that, sit back and collect the only info I could then submit a strong correlation between the thefts and this account. I was pretty sure at that time which account they were using, and the pattern has continued to happen.

 

I felt confident that with this info I could get some help. But no, none. Somehow, I'm supposed to collect better evidence before they will do anything. How? I showed a connection that can be checked or cross-referenced to see if it warrants further investigation. But I don't have the power to do that, only GS or a reviewer. And all I got was lip service So I'm literally stuck and can do nothing about it.

 

What a waste of time. It's madness to keep replacing my caches when I know they will be stolen again and again. I'm archiving PCT Point of Entry Snoqualmie Pass North and when the first DNF comes in PCT Point of Entry Snoqualmie Pass South. I've already had to archive McClellan Butte Trailhead which I gave up on after being stolen several times in a row, often before being found once.

Link to comment

I know that this is very frustrating and not getting the help you expected is also very frustrating. But the sad fact is the audit log is really worthless in this situation. It does look like one person in particular is doing the deed, but since I can get the full cache data with a PQ, a smartphone or the API and never show up in the audit log does limit the usefulness of the audit log. It will be sad, but it may come down to a large empty area around the summit, wonder what the thief will do then?

Link to comment

I know that this is very frustrating and not getting the help you expected is also very frustrating. But the sad fact is the audit log is really worthless in this situation. It does look like one person in particular is doing the deed, but since I can get the full cache data with a PQ, a smartphone or the API and never show up in the audit log does limit the usefulness of the audit log. It will be sad, but it may come down to a large empty area around the summit, wonder what the thief will do then?

 

Hopeful get boring and move on to other things.

 

I got a feeling he/she is watching this thread as well.

Link to comment

Interesting!

 

Have you considered a TrailCam? Just a thought thrown out there.

 

I think everyone who has placed a cache along Iron Horse has lost their cache several times. It's a unique situation that these can grow feet and walk off. I know mine have mysteriously disappeared.

 

Good Luck to all until a solution can be brought forward...

 

Yes, of course. Decided that if I didn't have support, it wasn't worth it.

 

I know that this is very frustrating and not getting the help you expected is also very frustrating. But the sad fact is the audit log is really worthless in this situation. It does look like one person in particular is doing the deed, but since I can get the full cache data with a PQ, a smartphone or the API and never show up in the audit log does limit the usefulness of the audit log. It will be sad, but it may come down to a large empty area around the summit, wonder what the thief will do then?

 

Not worthless, think through it please. First, audit logs don't show PQ access. The account in question has no finds or hides and is therefore used only to view information. The only reason that I can see that someone would pay for an extra premium account is to get extra PQs, do things they don't want associated with their primary account, or do something with maliciousness in mind. It's probably not their primary account incidentally picking it up via smartphone as one would reasonably expect that their phone would be set to their primary account as there is no reason to use the extra one in this situation.

 

It is possible that it's via API but they didn't answer an email sent to their account, I'm not even sure an API access counts towards a view (do you?), and GS could take a look at the account to quickly tell if that is the case deduced by account activity. And that doesn't account for the views right before it goes missing. Not to mention the view count at 34 over two years, which is high compared to most other viewers, but low if considering it is an API. Also, as an extra account to view extra APIs means that they want more than 6,000 views a day then it would seem that if they were that hell bent on getting so much information at once, I would figure that would it much more often then the view count suggests.

 

But in any case, there is enough circumstantial evidence to at least take a look and see if it warrants more investigation. Or rule out the account. Of course, we can't do that, only GS can, and as noted they are providing zero help. In fact, I would say that their responses seem to DISCOURAGE doing anything.

 

Regarding what the thief will do if there are no more caches up there to steal: possibilities include that they will be encouraged with the positive results and perhaps expand their area or use it as PR to recruit more thieves, or both.

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

You are right that the usefulness of the audit log is pretty limited. But it's ALL WE HAVE to work with. More the reason that we need help from those that can give it. And should be giving it.

I don't disagree that the circumstantial evidence strongly points to a particular person, and I do agree with you on that point. But the audit log only tracks website views of the cache page. Given that I would have a hard time saying, without a doubt, that this person is responsible. But you raise an interesting point. I don't know if GS has internal logs of PQ requests and API requests. PQ's probably since they can re-run them for users when there is a problem with the generator, so yes they probably can look at what is being pulled via PQ. API's I don't have a clue. Outside of playing whack-a-mole banning accounts I don't know what GS can do to stop the thief. Perhaps that is why they are not more pro-active in this affair. As a side note there is a well-known travel bug thief in the Seattle area that GS has yet to take more firmer steps other than a bit of conversation, so the lack of positive action in this case does not surprise me. Probably if you got trail cam pictures you might be able to pursue action with the sheriff or rangers, but outside of that not sure what you can do.

Link to comment

The audit log could be an indicator, but by itself it is not enough to be actionable. It's like accusing me of being the robber of my neighbor's house merely because I happend to glance at it every morning on my way to work. There is very little Groundspeak can do about situations like this, beyond acting like they care.

Link to comment

The audit log could be an indicator, but by itself it is not enough to be actionable. It's like accusing me of being the robber of my neighbor's house merely because I happend to glance at it every morning on my way to work. There is very little Groundspeak can do about situations like this, beyond acting like they care.

 

No it's not like that. It's like you're a complete stranger to the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie so we can't tell who you are and you're not willing to identify yourself when approached, and my house often gets broken into soon after you walk by. And the correlation between others walking by, the people I know or can at least identify, and my house being robbed is about zero.

 

I was only expecting a little closer look, a look that we can't do, to determine if there is something there or not.

 

And yes, there is things they can do. They can help find the account by looking into situations like this. They can look and see if there is a pattern with this account and other caches being stolen. They can see if the is correlation between access from this account with other areas that are being robbed. And if, through these means or others, they can determine that the account is most likely the one used, they can coordinate with law enforcement and provide the IP address aka street address for a legal review. Or coordinate with us and a camera to solidify the evidence. At the very least, they could shut the account down so our PM caches would not be accessible to them. That's just off the top of my head

Link to comment

 

No it's not like that. It's like you're a complete stranger to the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie so we can't tell who you are and you're not willing to identify yourself when approached,

With this analogy, aside from AZ's recent law changes, there is no law requiring an individual to identify themselves. The reason the Feds are pursuing a lawsuit against the AZ laws is based on previos cases laying down the precedent that the requirement is unconstitutional. That means you and I are not required to 1) identify ourselves to anyone out of idle curiosity (and that also applies to the PD asking without due cause), 2) provide a means of identification. In fact, unless you're attempting to evade a legal obligation or attempting to commit a fraud against your creditors or anything that can be defined by local laws, you don't even have to give up your real name when asked. So, that hooded stranger walking down the street is there as legally as you or I regardless of circumstances directly afterward, unless you catch that individual in the act, or you can plainly see they have the property in question in hand.

 

A perfect example of this is someone creased your car in the parking lot and their car is parked next to yours. Unless you have a witness connecting the driver and car to yours, there is no legal cause for the local PD to take any acton. Been there... suffered that.

 

The person on the trail may or may not be your culprit, but unless you catch him or her with the goods in hand or spot it in an unzipped backpack... and so the same is true with what you have with your audit logs.

 

I feel for you because of the expense and effort it takes to produce and hide your caches, but there has to be a physical witness to the theft. I'll wager this is the same reason why nothing was done about the Ape Cache being tampered with and ultimately stolen. Even though someone was bragging about it, it's vapor without physical evidence in their posession, or a witness.

Link to comment

 

No it's not like that. It's like you're a complete stranger to the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie so we can't tell who you are and you're not willing to identify yourself when approached,

With this analogy, aside from AZ's recent law changes, there is no law requiring an individual to identify themselves. The reason the Feds are pursuing a lawsuit against the AZ laws is based on previos cases laying down the precedent that the requirement is unconstitutional. That means you and I are not required to 1) identify ourselves to anyone out of idle curiosity (and that also applies to the PD asking without due cause), 2) provide a means of identification. In fact, unless you're attempting to evade a legal obligation or attempting to commit a fraud against your creditors or anything that can be defined by local laws, you don't even have to give up your real name when asked. So, that hooded stranger walking down the street is there as legally as you or I regardless of circumstances directly afterward, unless you catch that individual in the act, or you can plainly see they have the property in question in hand.

 

A perfect example of this is someone creased your car in the parking lot and their car is parked next to yours. Unless you have a witness connecting the driver and car to yours, there is no legal cause for the local PD to take any acton. Been there... suffered that.

 

The person on the trail may or may not be your culprit, but unless you catch him or her with the goods in hand or spot it in an unzipped backpack... and so the same is true with what you have with your audit logs.

 

I feel for you because of the expense and effort it takes to produce and hide your caches, but there has to be a physical witness to the theft. I'll wager this is the same reason why nothing was done about the Ape Cache being tampered with and ultimately stolen. Even though someone was bragging about it, it's vapor without physical evidence in their posession, or a witness.

 

TL, I understand your need to be rational and explain things to people that you deem to be less informed or lacking in knowledge, and thanks for your efforts, but that's not the case here. I appreciate your empathy though support would be more valuable at this point.

 

First: Circumstantial Evidence

Second: I'm pretty sure a police officer does have the right to spot and question you if he deems you suspicious. If he finds that something isn't right, he can detain you for further investigation

Third: this is not a matter of constitutional law between the feds and the states. While it could be a legal action that would only be the extreme end. But I've not made the jump directly from the audit log to court, nor should you. It's GS's website, they have every right to look into and investigate it's misuse and block people who do so.

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

No it's not like that. It's like you're a complete stranger to the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie so we can't tell who you are and you're not willing to identify yourself when approached, and my house often gets broken into soon after you walk by. And the correlation between others walking by, the people I know or can at least identify, and my house being robbed is about zero.

Don't be so trusting of your neighbors. That's how they catch you unawares. We caught one neighbor in the act of stealing some of our firewood. Another accepted a package addressed to us, opened it, and neglected to report it to Fedex. Our closest neighbor had a tortoise wander off. They put up missing signs all over the place and then two months later it showed up in a box on their front porch with a leg gnawed off. There was a note on the box asking if they were missing a tortoise. I happend to be home when the lady from the next closest house dropped it off. She kept it for two months and only returned it when it was going to need an expensive visit to the vet because her stupid little yapper dog tried to eat it. Nice. And that's on Peace, Love and Understanding Island. It's even worse out in the real world.

 

I was only expecting a little closer look, a look that we can't do, to determine if there is something there or not.

 

And yes, there is things they can do. They can help find the account by looking into situations like this. They can look and see if there is a pattern with this account and other caches being stolen. They can see if the is correlation between access from this account with other areas that are being robbed. And if, through these means or others, they can determine that the account is most likely the one used, they can coordinate with law enforcement and provide the IP address aka street address for a legal review. Or coordinate with us and a camera to solidify the evidence. At the very least, they could shut the account down so our PM caches would not be accessible to them. That's just off the top of my head

Yeah, I know. But even if they did any of that, they are not going to disclose it to anyone other than law enforcement and that's not going to happen unless you catch the thief in the act.

Link to comment

No it's not like that. It's like you're a complete stranger to the neighborhood, wearing a hoodie so we can't tell who you are and you're not willing to identify yourself when approached, and my house often gets broken into soon after you walk by. And the correlation between others walking by, the people I know or can at least identify, and my house being robbed is about zero.

Don't be so trusting of your neighbors. That's how they catch you unawares. We caught one neighbor in the act of stealing some of our firewood. Another accepted a package addressed to us, opened it, and neglected to report it to Fedex. Our closest neighbor had a tortoise wander off. They put up missing signs all over the place and then two months later it showed up in a box on their front porch with a leg gnawed off. There was a note on the box asking if they were missing a tortoise. I happend to be home when the lady from the next closest house dropped it off. She kept it for two months and only returned it when it was going to need an expensive visit to the vet because her stupid little yapper dog tried to eat it. Nice. And that's on Peace, Love and Understanding Island. It's even worse out in the real world.

 

I was only expecting a little closer look, a look that we can't do, to determine if there is something there or not.

 

And yes, there is things they can do. They can help find the account by looking into situations like this. They can look and see if there is a pattern with this account and other caches being stolen. They can see if the is correlation between access from this account with other areas that are being robbed. And if, through these means or others, they can determine that the account is most likely the one used, they can coordinate with law enforcement and provide the IP address aka street address for a legal review. Or coordinate with us and a camera to solidify the evidence. At the very least, they could shut the account down so our PM caches would not be accessible to them. That's just off the top of my head

Yeah, I know. But even if they did any of that, they are not going to disclose it to anyone other than law enforcement and that's not going to happen unless you catch the thief in the act.

 

Island drama, I know it well :rolleyes: . Though I would disagree with you that the normal world is worse lol

 

Yes, that is the way it is. That's the problem. It doesn't have to be that way. It should be a coordinated effort between the community. Geocaching is not GS's sole domain (well mostly right now), but rather the game of caching belongs to all of us and always will. By being the way that they are, they are not only not being unhelpful, they are actually getting in the way of solving the problem.

 

You guys can continue to debate this issue if you care too. I've made my decision, I've archived my caches that are affected. Before someone jumps my case for being passive-aggressive, it's insane to 'fight' this issue the way that it's being suggested. The time and effort on my side is so much more than the thief's time and effort. I already put in a lot of effort and I won't be putting in more.

 

Putting this on the table so everyone is informed. Do what you want with it.

Link to comment

I've made my decision, I've archived my caches that are affected. Before someone jumps my case for being passive-aggressive, it's insane to 'fight' this issue the way that it's being suggested. The time and effort on my side is so much more than the thief's time and effort. I already put in a lot of effort and I won't be putting in more.

Can't say that I blame you. I'd do the same thing, especially after receiving the usual "this conversation is over" from customer service.

Link to comment

I reported one of Shaddows caches gone this weekend. In my log I bet many other local and easy caches would be gone, now that the mega event is over.

 

and I was right. A string of 4 caches had DNF up on the PCT South.

 

This type of thieving behavior is sad as I like to plan hikes where I can traverse a trail and collect GC along the way. It is a small disappointment to travel to and make the hike and not have GC along with the hike.

 

But short of spy cams I have to imagine there is not a lot the PTB can do about the situation .

 

Seems to me that people who do these thefts ( and to me they are theft) have issues that the average person is not equipped to deal with

 

there are many sad and sick personalities in the world. I thought GC would be one way to be free of them, but no I see they are here as well, pissing on other peoples fun.

 

Shaddow, once again I am sorry for your troubles and sad that Western Washington seems to be becoming an area where you dare not leave a bug since the GC might easily be transported away or the bug hoarded.

 

I have been at this less than a year and I caught on quickly.

 

edited for more clarity which my mind often has issues with ;-)

Edited by Meandering WA
Link to comment

There are reasons why GS doesnt want to play police when people caches disappear. It will open too many lawsuits against GS. The audit log is like wings on a chicken.

 

GS is a listing site, not a cache protector.

Groundspeak is a listing site, not a _____. So we are told. Repeatedly. By the self-appointed mouthpieces who dwell here.

Link to comment

<_< First & foremost this is a game. How we play the game is our choice. Some actually find and log their finds/DNFs while a small group may log a find which they have not.

Now a new group has stepped forward and feel their removals are their choice of finds. We can allow this to bother us and quit or we move forward by replacing the Cache so others can enjoy the game correctly.

We make our choices, GS has allowed us the ability to enjoy the outdoors with a game within the terms/conditions set forth. As in any game someone somewhere will break the rules.

May we all enjoy that brief enjoyment of finding that next cache.

:unsure: PEACE

Link to comment

Well, yes I too am sort of a victim of the I90 cache thief. I planned a cache-n-hike today along the PCT south to log some GC's and maybe break 700 finds, but after going 0 for 3, and with 2 along the way already offline I just decided to enjoy the hike instead. I don't know why people steal GC's. It just doesn't make sense to me. The amount of time, effort, and expense it takes; to find online, download coords., hike/search with GPS, drive to area; for what? A piece of tupperware with a notebook, a pen, and a few items. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Link to comment

Well, yes I too am sort of a victim of the I90 cache thief. I planned a cache-n-hike today along the PCT south to log some GC's and maybe break 700 finds, but after going 0 for 3, and with 2 along the way already offline I just decided to enjoy the hike instead. I don't know why people steal GC's. It just doesn't make sense to me. The amount of time, effort, and expense it takes; to find online, download coords., hike/search with GPS, drive to area; for what? A piece of tupperware with a notebook, a pen, and a few items. It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Some people steal them because they think geocaching is not environmentally friendly, then they steal the caches, thinking it will stop people from coming there, when in fact what it does is create a situation where people are more likely to trash the environment because they try harder to find it when in fact it's not there.

 

Other people do it because they are sitting on a mountain of anger and don't have the balls to deal with it and the situations in their life head on. They'd rather take it out on some strangers because it's easy.

 

Other people do it for the attention. They know if they steal a string of caches there's going to be fireworks on the forums so they steal them then come in here to watch the show.

 

There are probably more possible scenario's I'm missing here.

It was probably a rhetorical question anyway. <_<

Link to comment

My caches have been stolen again and when I reached out for help again, I was blown off, again.

 

Even after providing some evidence to GS and a reviewer. Basically, I did all I could do, which is to show that a premium account holder, active for two years without and hides or finds, is checking out my premium cache days before it's stolen. Each time. I replaced the cache last year only because I was going to do just that, sit back and collect the only info I could then submit a strong correlation between the thefts and this account. I was pretty sure at that time which account they were using, and the pattern has continued to happen.

 

I felt confident that with this info I could get some help. But no, none. Somehow, I'm supposed to collect better evidence before they will do anything. How? I showed a connection that can be checked or cross-referenced to see if it warrants further investigation. But I don't have the power to do that, only GS or a reviewer. And all I got was lip service So I'm literally stuck and can do nothing about it.

 

What a waste of time. It's madness to keep replacing my caches when I know they will be stolen again and again. I'm archiving PCT Point of Entry Snoqualmie Pass North and when the first DNF comes in PCT Point of Entry Snoqualmie Pass South. I've already had to archive McClellan Butte Trailhead which I gave up on after being stolen several times in a row, often before being found once.

 

 

I'm really sorry to hear this is happening.

There are a whole lot of nasty people out there these days.

 

As far as Groundspeak giving you help, their hands may be more tied than you think.

 

My place was robbed recently. My expensive computer was stolen, along with all my jewelery and a lot of other things.

The thing is, I know who did it. It was a neighbor who sat in front of my place in his car for many days before it happened. I've got other evidence too.

 

When he broke in, he also stole the keys to my van. I tend to store stuff in my van, and now he takes things out of my van. I can't put anything in there I want to keep any more, and I've disabled the vehicle so he can't steal it too. Yet this means i can't drive my own car.

 

I talked to the police again last week and the officer said that WA State protects the criminals, not the victims. She said there's nothing they can do. I said I wanted support. I wanted to plant a GPS device that can be tracked in something they would steal out of the van, and then follow it to their place. She said they can't get search warrants that easily. That easily????? They would have some pretty strong evidence this guy took it because we've got a GPS reading leading us there. She said we won't be able to get a search warrant for that. She said WA state protects the criminals.

 

So this guy took a whole lot more than some boxes in the woods, thousands of dollars worth of stuff, and is still taking from me, yet supposedly I can't do anything about it.

 

For those who will reply to my situation, please do so on the thread on this subject in Off Topic Forums so as to not derail this thread. Cameras and all sorts of things were discussed on that thread. If you wish to add anything you can do it there. Unless you're just offering to blow this guy away then PM me for my address. :laughing:

Link to comment

There's even bigger drama out there than a few missing caches. Some clown or clowns are torching cars at trailheads in Jefferson County. These pictures were posted in a TR for the Duckabush Trail- parked at the trailhead.

 

Looks like just one car. It's happened over here too. My guess is that it was a stolen car, brought there and burned to cover evidence (as well as give them a thrill)

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

There's even bigger drama out there than a few missing caches. Some clown or clowns are torching cars at trailheads in Jefferson County. These pictures were posted in a TR for the Duckabush Trail- parked at the trailhead.

 

Looks like just one car. It's happened over here too. My guess is that it was a stolen car, brought there and burned to cover evidence (as well as give them a thrill)

These are cars left overnight at the trailhead by backpackers heading up the trail.

Link to comment

There's even bigger drama out there than a few missing caches. Some clown or clowns are torching cars at trailheads in Jefferson County. These pictures were posted in a TR for the Duckabush Trail- parked at the trailhead.

 

Looks like just one car. It's happened over here too. My guess is that it was a stolen car, brought there and burned to cover evidence (as well as give them a thrill)

These are cars left overnight at the trailhead by backpackers heading up the trail.

 

Do you know what trail heads this has happened at?

You are sure it was backpackers cars??

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

There's even bigger drama out there than a few missing caches. Some clown or clowns are torching cars at trailheads in Jefferson County. These pictures were posted in a TR for the Duckabush Trail- parked at the trailhead.

 

Looks like just one car. It's happened over here too. My guess is that it was a stolen car, brought there and burned to cover evidence (as well as give them a thrill)

These are cars left overnight at the trailhead by backpackers heading up the trail.

 

Do you know what trail heads this has happened at?

You are sure it was backpackers cars??

"These pictures were posted in a TR for the Duckabush Trail"

 

I realized that we’d arrived at the parking area for the trailhead, and there in front of us were the burnt-out shells of three cars, just the thin, charcoal-black frames, swimming in a sea of melted steel and glass. The car in the middle was Finn’s.

 

The TR is here.

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

 

Well, I do not know if there will be a 2/3rd majority here and am not looking at the rules when I post this, but I would have no problem with this. Its obvious you are someone in the area and who certainly can and have replaced your caches, you are just admitting that on certain caches, you do not mind if folks want to replace the caches if they are stolen, they can, without having to call you in advance or something. I would think you would have to make the hide very clear where it is or folks could replace a cache that is not even missing.

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

 

Well, I do not know if there will be a 2/3rd majority here and am not looking at the rules when I post this, but I would have no problem with this. Its obvious you are someone in the area and who certainly can and have replaced your caches, you are just admitting that on certain caches, you do not mind if folks want to replace the caches if they are stolen, they can, without having to call you in advance or something. I would think you would have to make the hide very clear where it is or folks could replace a cache that is not even missing.

And you might want to make it clear that dropped caches should be the same size as the orginial - or you'll get a bunch of film cans (which you might be able to pile up to hide the 'real' cache :laughing: ).

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

 

Well, I do not know if there will be a 2/3rd majority here and am not looking at the rules when I post this, but I would have no problem with this. Its obvious you are someone in the area and who certainly can and have replaced your caches, you are just admitting that on certain caches, you do not mind if folks want to replace the caches if they are stolen, they can, without having to call you in advance or something. I would think you would have to make the hide very clear where it is or folks could replace a cache that is not even missing.

 

I also am not looking at the rules, but it's fine with me.

I'd love to help out and wouldn't mind planning a few trips with just that in mind, if I have time this year before it starts snowing.

 

I know of other community maintained caches, and although I know GS does not think highly of it, because you are still maintaining them, it's just that they've turned into high maintenance caches and they are far out of the way, I think it's fine.

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

 

I like this idea but I wouldn't acknowledge the cache thief with a note on the cache page. I also wouldn't burden visitors to our area by asking them to help out. It is really up to the CO if they want community help in maintaining their caches. CO involvement is important because there are going to NM posts made on the caches and only the CO (and reviews) can clear the NM flag. What would be nice is if someone could contact all the CO in the affected area and see if we can't blanket approval, or at least a majority approval, to replace missing caches. Just don't forget to email the CO when you've replaced a cache, especially if the cache page has the NM attribute set.

Link to comment

I have, of course, not stopped thinking about this and had an idea come to me for a possible work-around to deal with the thief and want to see what you guys think. The main issue right now is the time and effort required to replace the caches, it is the thief that has the advantage well in their favor since it's much easier and less effort for them to steal a bunch at once than it is for us to go up and individually replace them. This also has the huge side-effect putting most of the caches in the temp-disable status for a majority of the time.

 

So my thought is to go to community serviced caches for those ones in jeopardy. There would be a few ways of doing that and in particular I'm thinking about giving searchers the ok to drop a cache if it's missing. Not only does that ensure replacement of the cache with very little effort (almost none since the searcher would be there anyway), which would swinging the effort/results ratio back far into our favor, it also has the great benefit of keeping the cache in service at all times.

 

To do that would require a note on the page discussing the thefts and indicating that it's ok to bring and drop a cache. I'm a little concerned that this might run against the GC 'rules' or be rather unaccepted within the community. Thoughts?

 

I like this idea but I wouldn't acknowledge the cache thief with a note on the cache page. I also wouldn't burden visitors to our area by asking them to help out. It is really up to the CO if they want community help in maintaining their caches. CO involvement is important because there are going to NM posts made on the caches and only the CO (and reviews) can clear the NM flag. What would be nice is if someone could contact all the CO in the affected area and see if we can't blanket approval, or at least a majority approval, to replace missing caches. Just don't forget to email the CO when you've replaced a cache, especially if the cache page has the NM attribute set.

 

Sorry this is going to seem like I'm picking on you a little but I don't follow the thinking 'not acknowledging' the cache thief though I've heard it many times in the forums and in private emails. We have to talk about it...

 

The way I see it the burden is much heavier if a cacher spends time to go DNF a cache unknowing that it's been stolen before and is likely to be again. I think the burden is much lower if the info is up front, that it may not be there, and if it's not than the searcher has the option to place a drop cache if they want. That way, they are informed and can make better choices for themselves.

 

I'd agree, this would need to be something that initiated by the CO and they need to be involved. So far, I'm just talking about doing this with my caches. I think it may have a lot of potential and I'm willing to try it out and see how it goes...

 

Thanks for all the feedback to date. So far I'm getting that it seems to be generally more on the 'it's ok' side of things than the 'not ok' side.

Link to comment

Sorry this is going to seem like I'm picking on you a little but I don't follow the thinking 'not acknowledging' the cache thief though I've heard it many times in the forums and in private emails. We have to talk about it...

 

I see ignoring the situation and not acknowledging the cache thief as two different points of view. You don't want to ignore the situation but at the same time you don't want to directly acknowledge the cache thief. Putting on cache page "There is a cache thief in the area" is only going to feed their ego, if that is their motivation. I'd word it something like "This cache is frequently going missing". Although if cachers check the logs they will see this.

 

Whatever their motivation it is best to just keep going on like everything is normal. Which it is because caches go missing all the time. Because of this there is a process for reporting missing caches and replacing them.

Link to comment

Sorry this is going to seem like I'm picking on you a little but I don't follow the thinking 'not acknowledging' the cache thief though I've heard it many times in the forums and in private emails. We have to talk about it...

 

I see ignoring the situation and not acknowledging the cache thief as two different points of view. You don't want to ignore the situation but at the same time you don't want to directly acknowledge the cache thief. Putting on cache page "There is a cache thief in the area" is only going to feed their ego, if that is their motivation. I'd word it something like "This cache is frequently going missing". Although if cachers check the logs they will see this.

 

Whatever their motivation it is best to just keep going on like everything is normal. Which it is because caches go missing all the time. Because of this there is a process for reporting missing caches and replacing them.

 

I can see that. In point of fact, without the motivation, or at least some pep at all from them acknowledging the thefts, I can't be sure that it's just one person. Still, it's clear that it's not just missing but taken, and targeted. I think that needs to be explained otherwise searchers just have to guess the why. The first place my guessing would go is somewhere along the line of 'the co should find a better hiding spot, he sure is lazy' etc.

 

I can see the benefit of not directly acknowledging the person doing the poor behavior, treat them like a young child, but not to discuss the behavior and pretend it doesn't exist would be like being a bad parent. I'll think on this a bit too, see if I come to a different perspective.

Link to comment

Sorry this is going to seem like I'm picking on you a little but I don't follow the thinking 'not acknowledging' the cache thief though I've heard it many times in the forums and in private emails. We have to talk about it...

 

I see ignoring the situation and not acknowledging the cache thief as two different points of view. You don't want to ignore the situation but at the same time you don't want to directly acknowledge the cache thief. Putting on cache page "There is a cache thief in the area" is only going to feed their ego, if that is their motivation. I'd word it something like "This cache is frequently going missing". Although if cachers check the logs they will see this.

 

Whatever their motivation it is best to just keep going on like everything is normal. Which it is because caches go missing all the time. Because of this there is a process for reporting missing caches and replacing them.

 

I can see that. In point of fact, without the motivation, or at least some pep at all from them acknowledging the thefts, I can't be sure that it's just one person. Still, it's clear that it's not just missing but taken, and targeted. I think that needs to be explained otherwise searchers just have to guess the why. The first place my guessing would go is somewhere along the line of 'the co should find a better hiding spot, he sure is lazy' etc.

 

I can see the benefit of not directly acknowledging the person doing the poor behavior, treat them like a young child, but not to discuss the behavior and pretend it doesn't exist would be like being a bad parent. I'll think on this a bit too, see if I come to a different perspective.

 

I can understand this opinion.

Just for some insight into another opinion:

We used to have a thread on these forums to point out people posting bad things on these forums. After a while it starting becoming evident that the more we pointed the behavior out the worse it got.

You may not realize, but the main English speaking forums here are just moderated in the day. Things got so bad, with really horrific things being posted that they had to have 24 hour moderation. This was not simple swearing, but things like photos that I will never forget and no one should ever have to see. Real photos that were nightmare material.

So we discussed this at length and pointed it out in this thread. The behavior became constant.

 

At some point the thread owner brought up the fact we could be encouraging it. I didn't think so. Then someone linked to some forums on a competing site where people talked at length about doing bad behavior for the attention. We all agreed to close the thread discussing the bad posting.

That was the end of that behavior. There were no more of those posts.

 

For me, it was a big lesson learned at the time. I did not believe we could be encouraging it by just talking about it, but it turns out we were.

Link to comment

I replaced the bison tube at the Talapus Lake traihead.

I could see where this one could easily go missing, it's a really busy spot.

Thank you very much; I just reactivated it. I have an idea for a better placement but would take a bit of effort in crafting and been very busy so put it off and off and off... Hopefully this will hold for a while until I can find the time

 

Sorry this is going to seem like I'm picking on you a little but I don't follow the thinking 'not acknowledging' the cache thief though I've heard it many times in the forums and in private emails. We have to talk about it...

 

I see ignoring the situation and not acknowledging the cache thief as two different points of view. You don't want to ignore the situation but at the same time you don't want to directly acknowledge the cache thief. Putting on cache page "There is a cache thief in the area" is only going to feed their ego, if that is their motivation. I'd word it something like "This cache is frequently going missing". Although if cachers check the logs they will see this.

 

Whatever their motivation it is best to just keep going on like everything is normal. Which it is because caches go missing all the time. Because of this there is a process for reporting missing caches and replacing them.

 

I can see that. In point of fact, without the motivation, or at least some pep at all from them acknowledging the thefts, I can't be sure that it's just one person. Still, it's clear that it's not just missing but taken, and targeted. I think that needs to be explained otherwise searchers just have to guess the why. The first place my guessing would go is somewhere along the line of 'the co should find a better hiding spot, he sure is lazy' etc.

 

I can see the benefit of not directly acknowledging the person doing the poor behavior, treat them like a young child, but not to discuss the behavior and pretend it doesn't exist would be like being a bad parent. I'll think on this a bit too, see if I come to a different perspective.

 

I can understand this opinion.

Just for some insight into another opinion:

We used to have a thread on these forums to point out people posting bad things on these forums. After a while it starting becoming evident that the more we pointed the behavior out the worse it got.

You may not realize, but the main English speaking forums here are just moderated in the day. Things got so bad, with really horrific things being posted that they had to have 24 hour moderation. This was not simple swearing, but things like photos that I will never forget and no one should ever have to see. Real photos that were nightmare material.

So we discussed this at length and pointed it out in this thread. The behavior became constant.

 

At some point the thread owner brought up the fact we could be encouraging it. I didn't think so. Then someone linked to some forums on a competing site where people talked at length about doing bad behavior for the attention. We all agreed to close the thread discussing the bad posting.

That was the end of that behavior. There were no more of those posts.

 

For me, it was a big lesson learned at the time. I did not believe we could be encouraging it by just talking about it, but it turns out we were.

Sounds like topical internet trolls. Their only goal is the size and quality of the reaction. I highly doubt that is the cache thief's goal as they would target much more popular and visited caches to maximize the reaction. My cache is just a random one in a random spot, most likely just hitting it because it is easiest for them in time and effort. Still don't get their motives though, and I don't really care at this point either.

Link to comment

... On the PLUS SIDE, you can now Smoke Mary Jane Recreationally in WA..

 

I hate that people have to keep steeling caches from these great caching areas. At somepoint I would HOPE That Groundspeak would allow the caches to become Virtuals for this reason.

 

The Steaks

Link to comment

... On the PLUS SIDE, you can now Smoke Mary Jane Recreationally in WA..

 

I hate that people have to keep steeling caches from these great caching areas. At somepoint I would HOPE That Groundspeak would allow the caches to become Virtuals for this reason.

 

The Steaks

That one has a long way to go and we'll see if it really will be implemented.

Link to comment

... On the PLUS SIDE, you can now Smoke Mary Jane Recreationally in WA..

 

The Steaks

That one has a long way to go and we'll see if it really will be implemented.

And this is relevant to this discussion HOW? :lostsignal:

Perhaps the cache thief smokes funny cigarettes. :blink:

... and needs many containers to place his stash in...

Link to comment

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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...