Who are / is.......

[+elephantman]

the cacher(s) known as "The Vulture Squadron"? And why have they taken upon themselves to police caches? ie they / she / he appear to be searching geocaching.com for caches with several dnfs or needs maintenance logs and then requesting the cache to be archived....I just dont get it.....

[+HEADLANDERS]

It is a strange way to spends one's time I agree but looking at it positively isn't helping by taking away some of the workload from Reviewers so that they can more rapidly deal with new cache publications?.

[+cerberus1]

It is a strange way to spends one's time I agree but looking at it positively isn't helping by taking away some of the workload from Reviewers so that they can more rapidly deal with new cache publications?.

No.

Requesting caches be archived actually creates more of a workload for the Reviewer.

They then have to take the time to be sure the reason given is sound.

- Someone placing NA logs on caches they never visited probably isn't a sound reason and now the Reviewer has to take the extra time to sort things out to make a decision.

 

A couple of DNFs doesn't neccessarily mean it's not there.

We hit one a few Months ago. Five DNFs in a river gorge placed the same day by newbies with smartphones. We found it in about ten minutes with a GPSr.

I can't count the times we've seen hides that had a need maintenance attribute added, to find no problem existed.

People are putting NM for logs full, when there's another side to the paper and some are putting NM on them simply because they can't find it.

- Guess they feel that with their super powers of observation, it can't be there.

DNF would be an insult to these people.

[+L0ne.R]

the cacher(s) known as "The Vulture Squadron"? And why have they taken upon themselves to police caches? ie they / she / he appear to be searching geocaching.com for caches with several dnfs or needs maintenance logs and then requesting the cache to be archived....I just dont get it.....

 

Any of these NAs unwarranted? Got examples?

 

Here's an example that I can see warrants reviewer's attention (NA) - 3 DNFs in a row on a D rating under 3 stars with no response from the owner over a long period of time (3 months or more), followed by at least one NM.

[+Bear and Ragged]

It's not a requirement to log your finds on the site...

 

It takes a Needs Archived log for you to post "As I'm planning a trip to the hills in the very near future, the cache will be checked then." and you post it on the same day as the NA is posted.

 

Could you not have posted that soon after the Needs Maintenance log was posted?

That would at least show you are keeping an eye on the cache.

[+cerberus1]

Back from the Post and see a few beat me to it...

 

Two sides to the coin thing, you do seem a bit more than nonchalant about maintenance of hides.

It's possible that someone's keeping an eye, hoping you improve your maintenance responsibilities.

Seeing you aren't, maybe they decided to push you a bit to step-up your game.

 

The part that bugs me though is if they believe in what they're doing, they shouldn't hide behind a sock.

Hiding your identity seems more like being a troublemaker than offering help.

[+elephantman]

It's not a requirement to log your finds on the site...

 

It takes a Needs Archived log for you to post "As I'm planning a trip to the hills in the very near future, the cache will be checked then." and you post it on the same day as the NA is posted.

 

Could you not have posted that soon after the Needs Maintenance log was posted?

That would at least show you are keeping an eye on the cache.

 

I do keep an eye on my caches, I have issues with people that take the time to post a NM log but fail to actually say what the problem is, the fact is that they appear not to have visited the cache site so how can they even say it needs maintenance?

 

Back from the Post and see a few beat me to it...

 

Two sides to the coin thing, you do seem a bit more than nonchalant about maintenance of hides.

It's possible that someone's keeping an eye, hoping you improve your maintenance responsibilities.

Seeing you aren't, maybe they decided to push you a bit to step-up your game.

 

The part that bugs me though is if they believe in what they're doing, they shouldn't hide behind a sock.

Hiding your identity seems more like being a troublemaker than offering help.

[/quote

 

I "seem a bit more than nonchalant" who gave you the right to decide if I'm nonchalant or not? You do not know me OR my circumstances. Of the caches I own, 3 have NM logs, these will be addressed when I can, and if someone is keeping an eye, why not just email me directly instead of hiding behind a sock? I'm not the only cache owner around my home town that has had NM and NA logs posted by "The Vulture Squadron", I'm just the cache owner that wants to know why.

My original point was and still is..... who are these people and why do they do this?

[I!]

the cacher(s) known as "The Vulture Squadron"? And why have they taken upon themselves to police caches? ie they / she / he appear to be searching geocaching.com for caches with several dnfs or needs maintenance logs and then requesting the cache to be archived....I just dont get it.....

Perhaps they despair of lazy COs. Have they seen Watchful yet, I wonder?

 

Let's have a pact. I'll find some glue to repair my NM cache; you get a move on and deal with your backlog.

[Blue Square Thing]

People are putting NM for logs full, when there's another side to the paper and some are putting NM on them simply because they can't find it.

- Guess they feel that with their super powers of observation, it can't be there.

DNF would be an insult to these people.

 

I imagine that one reason for that might be that the maintenance has been done but the attribute hasn't been removed by the cache owner.

 

This might be because the maintenance is done by someone else - someone carrying around logs for example or even changing the container. It also appears to happen because there are cache owners who don't seem to know that they have to log a maintenance visit to remove the attribute. I can think of examples in this area where this certainly appears to be the case, for example.

[nobby.nobbs]

Without specific examples it's very hard to comment.

 

Why are they using a sock puppet? Probably because they want to be able to post needs archive on caches they feel need to be archived without having someone accuse them of being cache police. At the end of the day we all have the option to post a NA or NM log whenever we want and no one should be brow beaten into not doing so. There are some spoof or poorly chosen examples of both logs but they are nearly always easy to clear up by the reviewer and the CO, the vast majority are on caches that have fallen into disrepair and needs work doing on them.

 

I've got a separate thread talking about cachers volunteering to clear up cache containers that have been abandoned by their owners and have subsequently been archived. This isn't cache policing or anything designed to upset people but as a way to help the hobby by removing the litter.

In this case, if the people are placing these logs on caches that are in need of maintenance then I can't really see the problem, IF they are posting them out of spite or to cause trouble then I can see your issue.

 

Someone has been planning this for a while as that account has been active since 2009 and vultures clean up dead carcases.

[+Bear and Ragged]

the cacher(s) known as "The Vulture Squadron"? And why have they taken upon themselves to police caches? ie they / she / he appear to be searching geocaching.com for caches with several dnfs or needs maintenance logs and then requesting the cache to be archived....I just dont get it.....

Perhaps they despair of lazy COs. Have they seen Watchful yet, I wonder?

 

Let's have a pact. I'll find some glue to repair my NM cache; you get a move on and deal with your backlog.

 

Write note

29/Mar/2012

 

Passed by with the hounds this afternoon, the black handled digging implement has disappeared...

 

Guideline violation?

Needs Archived called for...

Or are you going to Archive the cache yourself to save a reviewer the hassle?

[+elephantman]

the cacher(s) known as "The Vulture Squadron"? And why have they taken upon themselves to police caches? ie they / she / he appear to be searching geocaching.com for caches with several dnfs or needs maintenance logs and then requesting the cache to be archived....I just dont get it.....

Perhaps they despair of lazy COs. Have they seen Watchful yet, I wonder?

 

Let's have a pact. I'll find some glue to repair my NM cache; you get a move on and deal with your backlog.

 

Write note

29/Mar/2012

 

Passed by with the hounds this afternoon, the black handled digging implement has disappeared...

 

Guideline violation?

Needs Archived called for...

Or are you going to Archive the cache yourself to save a reviewer the hassle?

 

If you were aware of where this cache actually is you would know that since the cache placement there has been a problem with the sand that has drifted up, on to and over the location, the cache fulfilled ALL the guidelines when placed. You will also have noticed the notes I have placed on the cache page explaining why I disabled it. And no I will not be archiving the cache either.

[team tisri]

I "seem a bit more than nonchalant" who gave you the right to decide if I'm nonchalant or not? You do not know me OR my circumstances. Of the caches I own, 3 have NM logs, these will be addressed when I can, and if someone is keeping an eye, why not just email me directly instead of hiding behind a sock? I'm not the only cache owner around my home town that has had NM and NA logs posted by "The Vulture Squadron", I'm just the cache owner that wants to know why.

My original point was and still is..... who are these people and why do they do this?

 

As a generic observation your circumstances aren't relevant if you've got caches that need maintenance that you haven't done yet. If a cache needs maintenance and you can't get to it (and most of us do other things besides geocaching) you can always disable the cache or post a note to the cache so people know what's going on.

 

I vaguely recall a cache owner posting a while back about some of their caches that they had let fall into disrepair - it turned out that they had had something like a major family illness combined with a house move and a job change, so it was entirely understandable that a sandwich box in the woods got dropped down the list of priorities. But they weren't in a place where they did nothing about their caches but sprung into action when someone posted NA.

 

I haven't looked at your caches in particular so this is also intended as a generic observation, but it irritates me when a cache owner doesn't respond to numerous DNFs and numerous NMs but springs into action the minute NA is logged. It does rather suggest they couldn't be bothered to fix their cache until the threat of reviewer action appeared.

 

Why do people use sock puppets? Probably because they've had abuse from cache owners in the past who accuse them of being the cache police?

[+L0ne.R]

I "seem a bit more than nonchalant" who gave you the right to decide if I'm nonchalant or not? You do not know me OR my circumstances. Of the caches I own, 3 have NM logs, these will be addressed when I can, and if someone is keeping an eye, why not just email me directly instead of hiding behind a sock? I'm not the only cache owner around my home town that has had NM and NA logs posted by "The Vulture Squadron", I'm just the cache owner that wants to know why.

My original point was and still is..... who are these people and why do they do this?

 

As a generic observation your circumstances aren't relevant if you've got caches that need maintenance that you haven't done yet. If a cache needs maintenance and you can't get to it (and most of us do other things besides geocaching) you can always disable the cache or post a note to the cache so people know what's going on.

 

I vaguely recall a cache owner posting a while back about some of their caches that they had let fall into disrepair - it turned out that they had had something like a major family illness combined with a house move and a job change, so it was entirely understandable that a sandwich box in the woods got dropped down the list of priorities. But they weren't in a place where they did nothing about their caches but sprung into action when someone posted NA.

 

I haven't looked at your caches in particular so this is also intended as a generic observation, but it irritates me when a cache owner doesn't respond to numerous DNFs and numerous NMs but springs into action the minute NA is logged. It does rather suggest they couldn't be bothered to fix their cache until the threat of reviewer action appeared.

 

Why do people use sock puppets? Probably because they've had abuse from cache owners in the past who accuse them of being the cache police?

 

Yes, I get why. I put an NA on a cache that had an active owner and got a very angry response and a geocide at the same time. He hadn't responded to 3 DNFs and 3 NMs in 10 months. He responded within minutes to my NA log. Very angry. He immediately archived the cache and the rest of his 14 cache hides. Thankfully our local reviewer stepped in and told him that my request for action was reasonable based on the previous logs and lack of response.

 

It has made me a little hesitant to post an NA on a cache owned by an active owner.

 

Other reasons to create a sock puppet account might be fear of retaliation, or awkwardness at events when meeting up with COs.

[I!]

If you were aware of where this cache actually is you would know that since the cache placement there has been a problem with the sand that has drifted up, on to and over the location, the cache fulfilled ALL the guidelines when placed. You will also have noticed the notes I have placed on the cache page explaining why I disabled it. And no I will not be archiving the cache either.

You were made aware of the need to relocate the cache on 16 July 2012. On 14 October 2012, you disabled the listing. Prompted twice by the reviewer to repair or replace it, you've done nothing. You may not need to archive the listing: you're on course to have it done for you.

[+Team Noodles]

I "seem a bit more than nonchalant" who gave you the right to decide if I'm nonchalant or not? You do not know me OR my circumstances. Of the caches I own, 3 have NM logs, these will be addressed when I can, and if someone is keeping an eye, why not just email me directly instead of hiding behind a sock? I'm not the only cache owner around my home town that has had NM and NA logs posted by "The Vulture Squadron", I'm just the cache owner that wants to know why.

My original point was and still is..... who are these people and why do they do this?

 

If you can find the time to find caches, which you have been doing consistently, you can find time to do more then just write notes about what maintenance you intend to do in the future.

 

That's one thing that I never quite understand:"I'll replace when I have time/can blah blah blah.." and then people go out caching for the weekend???

 

I thought it was maintenance first, then caching, oh well...

Edited May 5, 2013 by Team Noodles

[+MartyBartfast]

As to why the person is using a Sock Puppet account to log the NM then I don't know, but I know other cachers have been pilloried for posting NA logs so if they're not up for a fight then I understand why they chose to use a Sock Puppet to do it.

 

As for their actions, I think they're absolutely correct to do it. You have one cache in particular which is way out in the hills and not particularly close to any other caches and would require a considerable effort to go look for it. I would be EXTREMELY annoyed if I had downloaded this active cache to my GPS, made the effort to go look for it and only then discovered that it's apparently been missing for almost a year. Perhaps the Vulture is planning coming to the area soon so posted the NM to get it confirmed that the cache was still there before making the trip, I think that NM should have had some response from you, even if only to say you wouldn't be able to check it for a while (which is understandable considering where it is), but to ignore the NM log completely just suggests you're not going to bother. Personally I would have preferred you temp disabled it on receipt of the NM until you are able to check it.

 

I had a similar experience recently, with a cache which was admittedly only 100m off the road I was cycling along but the cache was listed as active and had downloaded to my GPS so I went for a look. It was only after wasting a good while looking (for a nano) that I went to look at previous logs and discovered that it's been been confirmed as missing for over 4 months. I posted an NM on it, which was ignored so a couple of weeks later posted an NA, and only then did the CO bother to temp disable it saying they would replace it.

 

Sometimes the softly softly approach doesn't work.

[team tisri]

I had a similar experience recently, with a cache which was admittedly only 100m off the road I was cycling along but the cache was listed as active and had downloaded to my GPS so I went for a look. It was only after wasting a good while looking (for a nano) that I went to look at previous logs and discovered that it's been been confirmed as missing for over 4 months. I posted an NM on it, which was ignored so a couple of weeks later posted an NA, and only then did the CO bother to temp disable it saying they would replace it.

 

Sometimes the softly softly approach doesn't work.

 

I hunted for a multi a while back with a group of people and none of us could find it. One of the people in the group had previously found it and confirmed it had gone. A deluge of DNFs on the cache and a couple of NMs from the people who posted to say it had definitely gone had no effect. Several weeks later I posted NA on it, and the very same day the cache owner wrote a maintenance log saying they had replaced it.

 

Shame they couldn't have bothered to replace it at any other point during those weeks. As you say, sometimes it needs the threat of reviewer action to get owners to look after their caches.

[+cerberus1]

I "seem a bit more than nonchalant" who gave you the right to decide if I'm nonchalant or not? You do not know me OR my circumstances. Of the caches I own, 3 have NM logs, these will be addressed when I can, and if someone is keeping an eye, why not just email me directly instead of hiding behind a sock? I'm not the only cache owner around my home town that has had NM and NA logs posted by "The Vulture Squadron", I'm just the cache owner that wants to know why.

My original point was and still is..... who are these people and why do they do this?

Sorry you didn't like my use of the word nonchalant.

I was actually in a good mood and you didn't get a normal response from me.

When you have to wait for Reviewers before actions taken and you still find the time to cache, but not fix hides (one since 6/12), what would you call it?

- I think that's a little more than lackadaisical.

Thank you though. In the future I'll be reminded to go with indifferent, unconcerned, careless, or negligent.