Manipulative cachers...

[+nittany dave]

<major snip>

It all seems a little weird that that person that logged the needs archive is the child of the new cache owner.

So what? I've posted NAs on caches that the CO wasn't maintaining so I could place a new cache in that spot. Bottom line is if someone isn't maintaining their cache it needs to go. The only odd thing is that the new cache hider didn't post their own NA but again it shouldn't matter who posts one on a cache that needs it.

[+ByronForestPreserve]

Hey, I get what you're saying. I had someone ask me to post a NA log on a cache that is in a fairly "famous" tourist spot because the CO doesn't seem to cache anymore. He outright told me that he wants to adopt or replace this cache and get all of the favorite points.

 

On the other hand...there is a cache in my neck of the woods owned by someone who hasn't logged on in years. I've considered posting a NA, but until it actually falls apart, I won't do it.

Edited March 11, 2013 by ByronForestPreserve

[Keystone]

I'm wondering if the reviewer had any idea of the qr code reader being necessary to find the final location. At the very least, the cache should have been published as an "Unknown" rather than a multi.

The reviewer was told prior to publication about the cache design. But, there is no requirement in the listing guidelines forcing a cache owner to disclose the "secret" of the multicache to the general geocaching public. I am not seeing any reviewer error, whether in disabling the neighboring cache, in archiving the neighboring cache when there was no response, or in publishing the new cache.

 

I am sure that the reviewer would have allowed more time had the first CO posted a note saying they were really busy right now, but would check on the cache in March.

[Mr.Yuck]

I'm wondering if the reviewer had any idea of the qr code reader being necessary to find the final location. At the very least, the cache should have been published as an "Unknown" rather than a multi.

The reviewer was told prior to publication about the cache design. But, there is no requirement in the listing guidelines forcing a cache owner to disclose the "secret" of the multicache to the general geocaching public. I am not seeing any reviewer error, whether in disabling the neighboring cache, in archiving the neighboring cache when there was no response, or in publishing the new cache.

 

I am sure that the reviewer would have allowed more time had the first CO posted a note saying they were really busy right now, but would check on the cache in March.

 

Correct. I just did a ? cache a few weeks ago where the QR code was a total surpise to me. Supposedly there is a container there too with coordinates in it, but I stumbled on the QR code first, and am QR code capable out in the field.

[+Mudfrog]

I'm wondering if the reviewer had any idea of the qr code reader being necessary to find the final location. At the very least, the cache should have been published as an "Unknown" rather than a multi.

The reviewer was told prior to publication about the cache design. But, there is no requirement in the listing guidelines forcing a cache owner to disclose the "secret" of the multicache to the general geocaching public. I am not seeing any reviewer error, whether in disabling the neighboring cache, in archiving the neighboring cache when there was no response, or in publishing the new cache.

 

I am sure that the reviewer would have allowed more time had the first CO posted a note saying they were really busy right now, but would check on the cache in March.

 

Correct. I just did a ? cache a few weeks ago where the QR code was a total surpise to me. Supposedly there is a container there too with coordinates in it, but I stumbled on the QR code first, and am QR code capable out in the field.

 

I was kinda amused as well reading the replies above saying they would be annoyed. I've found a few caches that required use of a QR code reading device and i don't believe any of them told me ahead of time that it was needed. A "special tool required" attribute and/or a subtle play on words or hint on the cache page might be ok i suppose, but naming the exact tool is not necessary at all.

 

On topic, i've read every post and just don't see where the problem is. As far as a cache being in need of repair or missing, a person can file a "needs archived" as much as they want but it doesn't automatically get a cache taken down. There is a process that is followed which gives the cache owner time to make repairs.

 

If your log was deleted because you posted correct coordinates, then i might contact gc.com. It doesn't sound like this is the case here.

 

From what you have stated, my advice would be to just step away from the drama and ignore the other cacher(s) and their caches.

Edited March 12, 2013 by Mudfrog

[+Don_J]

Without reading further, I can offer you a simple solution. Simply don't look for any more of their caches.

[+Don_J]

This one? http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=81c832ed-6455-4209-82b8-b9c68d8acef2

 

464 Feet away. If this is the one it appears the owner is no longer caching(or maintaining) I am all in favour of having these caches removed so that another can be put in place. especially a Multicache.

 

dont get me wrong i get as a placer also you dont maintain your caches then they will get archived.

 

but they jumped on the bandwagon to get the cache archived so they could place her own multicache/puzzle cache because they could!

 

Regardless of how it happened, what did happen is that the reviewer gave the cache owner a longer period to respond than the owners entire caching career, back in August. The end result is that these "bullies" probably did the caching community a service by getting it archived and placing a cache that can now be found. I'm sure that your reviewer is wise to all of their so called shenanigans. The fact is, the cache was reported. It had multiple DNFs following a long string of finds. The CO was active for a little over a week, found 11 caches and placed 1 and never came back. Despite this, the reviewer still gave them three weeks to respond, and they didn't.

[+sparklefingers]

 

On another note - norfolk12s poor posting of a cache by not displaying that it required a certain tool - I received a message on facebook last night from mimozakon which revealed that the norfolk had been insulting me and my parenting on a geocaching facebook group which also got some other cachers involved.

 

I am beyond disapointed. Ive never known someone like this to be so rude to people they dont even know.

 

I'd be reporting the caching group to Facebook. (as long as it's not the wiltshire cachers cause it's not us there nothing like that in our group)

[+sparklefingers]

<major snip>

It all seems a little weird that that person that logged the needs archive is the child of the new cache owner.

So what? I've posted NAs on caches that the CO wasn't maintaining so I could place a new cache in that spot. Bottom line is if someone isn't maintaining their cache it needs to go. The only odd thing is that the new cache hider didn't post their own NA but again it shouldn't matter who posts one on a cache that needs it.

 

that I'm saying it weird because it is. on the same day that same cacher (who doesn't live in the area) logged it as found and then back dated it to so far back she found it before it was even there.

 

on the other note i do understand that if the cache is being maintained then it needs to go, but i find another thing weird that they claim the floods washed away the first cache... well the second cache was in the same area for months before the floods how did it stay there when the other was washed away?

[+tazmyers]

 

On another note - norfolk12s poor posting of a cache by not displaying that it required a certain tool - I received a message on facebook last night from mimozakon which revealed that the norfolk had been insulting me and my parenting on a geocaching facebook group which also got some other cachers involved.

 

I am beyond disapointed. Ive never known someone like this to be so rude to people they dont even know.

 

I'd be reporting the caching group to Facebook. (as long as it's not the wiltshire cachers cause it's not us there nothing like that in our group)

 

they didnt like it when they added me to the group and then saw what i had to say they removed the post. but this is what my freind copied and pasted me before it went.

 

grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!! why!! are some people so blooming arrogant in their logs

no one asks you to go and search for them... in the rain/cold with your kids!!

rant over !!

 

3Maslankas Calm down and have a sherry m'dear.....

Best days are nasty weather days....I try to put a weather report in a log when its bad just to let the CO that British weather won't stop me!!! Put the log link up that has made you mad...

 

norfolk12 it was because they had to wait to download a QR reader.. And I hadn't put that on the cache page .{. but had stated that a special tool was needed!! } so how comes they found the bonus which is on a QR ?

Edited March 12, 2013 by tazmyers

[+sparklefingers]

Facebook keeps data, even if it has now been deleted. (like this place, you think its been deleted and gone but i'll come back to bite yah)

 

maybe block edit and block their names.

[+NeverSummer]

Here's the thing...there's nothing anyone on the forums can do. You can let GS know about the situation, as well as the local reviewer, then put the whole family on your ignore list and cache elsewhere. I don't see any other choice for you--it's too bad, but all you can do is move on and cache elsewhere.

After reading through this thread, I'd simply say that this is the key.

 

There is a new trend in this forum topic to air one's grievances about specific geocachers who become a thorn in one's side. The problem with this is that there is little we can do.

 

I don't know if it is because cachers want the sympathies of someone else in the game, and they think that by posting about issues here they will find that sympathy or support? If you have a concern about a specific cacher, let them know. If it gets nasty, let Groundspeak know (contact@geocaching.com). From there, coming to the forums and airing these grievances does little more than clutter this topic with angst.

 

I'm sorry about being up on a soapbox here, but it is a trend I really wish to see end.

[+OZ2CPU]

Come on, qr codes are now so normal, same as you also always bring a pen, you should try to travel !

Lets say to a french speakning area,

Then we understand your pain and problems..

I too vote for archive caches no one care for. Better for the game.

Edited March 12, 2013 by OZ2CPU

[+tazmyers]

Here's the thing...there's nothing anyone on the forums can do. You can let GS know about the situation, as well as the local reviewer, then put the whole family on your ignore list and cache elsewhere. I don't see any other choice for you--it's too bad, but all you can do is move on and cache elsewhere.

After reading through this thread, I'd simply say that this is the key.

 

There is a new trend in this forum topic to air one's grievances about specific geocachers who become a thorn in one's side. The problem with this is that there is little we can do.

 

I don't know if it is because cachers want the sympathies of someone else in the game, and they think that by posting about issues here they will find that sympathy or support? If you have a concern about a specific cacher, let them know. If it gets nasty, let Groundspeak know (contact@geocaching.com). From there, coming to the forums and airing these grievances does little more than clutter this topic with angst.

 

I'm sorry about being up on a soapbox here, but it is a trend I really wish to see end.

 

How does this even effect you??

 

There is no need for your soap box. There is no need for your opinion in the way that you have given it.

 

I have asked for the thread to be removed and i am waiting. then it will be gone.

 

As for me airing my problems on here, i am not. I genuinely concerned that this specific cacher is doing more harm then good to anyone on the caching scene.

 

Some people on here understand. if you dont nor see the point on it please dont add to it. it isnt wanted or required.

[+tazmyers]

Come on, qr codes are now so normal, same as you also always bring a pen, you should try to travel !

Lets say to a french speakning area,

Then we understand your pain and problems..

I too vote for archive caches no one care for. Better for the game.

 

QR codes are required to state on a published cache that you need one.

 

Ive discussed this with the reviewer and she never did it, she made her changes after my log was placed.

[Keystone]

Here's the thing...there's nothing anyone on the forums can do. You can let GS know about the situation, as well as the local reviewer, then put the whole family on your ignore list and cache elsewhere. I don't see any other choice for you--it's too bad, but all you can do is move on and cache elsewhere.

After reading through this thread, I'd simply say that this is the key.

 

There is a new trend in this forum topic to air one's grievances about specific geocachers who become a thorn in one's side. The problem with this is that there is little we can do.

 

I don't know if it is because cachers want the sympathies of someone else in the game, and they think that by posting about issues here they will find that sympathy or support? If you have a concern about a specific cacher, let them know. If it gets nasty, let Groundspeak know (contact@geocaching.com). From there, coming to the forums and airing these grievances does little more than clutter this topic with angst.

 

I'm sorry about being up on a soapbox here, but it is a trend I really wish to see end.

 

How does this even effect you??

 

There is no need for your soap box. There is no need for your opinion in the way that you have given it.

 

I have asked for the thread to be removed and i am waiting. then it will be gone.

 

As for me airing my problems on here, i am not. I genuinely concerned that this specific cacher is doing more harm then good to anyone on the caching scene.

 

Some people on here understand. if you dont nor see the point on it please dont add to it. it isnt wanted or required.

This post reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how forums work, so I am closing the thread. Don't start another one on this particular subject.

 

Also, forum threads normally aren't removed (with obvious exceptions like spam threads). The words are yours to own.