Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 50
avroair

What Irks you most?

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, baer2006 said:

It irks me when a CO complains about my DNF log (or even outright deletes it), saying that the cache is fine and the DNF messes up the Health Score of their cache. When I don't find a cache, which I actually searched (and be it only 5 minutes), I log a DNF - period. On a high-D cache, a few DNFs shouldn't trigger a CHS warning. And if the CO gets regular DNFs on their low-D hide, they should probably think about their D-rating ;) .

I know that reviewers can see logs COs delete. I wonder if deleting them removes them from the Heath Score. Does someone know?

 

Even more irksome are COs who then aggressively deny they removed the DNF, even after you show them the email saying that they (showing their name) deleted it. Some people are just insane.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Then there are CO's who have caches that are clearly gone for months (CO allows a find eventhough container is gone) don't check/maintain their cache(s) but after logging a DNF and NM just archive the cache(s).

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, on4bam said:

just archive the cache

Ha, ha, yes I have struck that. Mention a problem, such as damp log, and they archive the cache. In fact one then archived every cache they had, even those still in great condition. And I bet they left everyone of the containers littering the countryside.

Then those COs who argue and argue with other geocachers that's all's right with their cache and we are all the ones who have the problem (thinking of one in particular here) who after I explained, carefully, clearly what the problem was multiple times still claimed they didn't understand what I was telling them and I was wrong. (Meanwhile other geocachers were messaging me with their thoughts. "They're insane," one cacher messaged me.) Finally I woke up to what was going on. The cacher wanted the spot of another existing cache and claimed it should be theirs by rights. When the reviewer came in the CO deleted their cache. Shame, I wanted the reviewer to do it. The CO deleting it was sort of an anti-climax.

Same with the armchair loggers and 'placers' of a cache. Finally the reviewer came in and wanted to see a photograph of this cache in situ. The armchair loggers archived their non-existing cache. Another anti-climax. It would have been much more satisfying if the reviewer had archived it. However in this last situation archiving didn't matter for a non-existing cache.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Finally the reviewer came in and wanted to see a photograph of this cache in situ.

 

Nice. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, on4bam said:

Then there are CO's who have caches that are clearly gone for months (CO allows a find eventhough container is gone) don't check/maintain their cache(s) but after logging a DNF and NM just archive the cache(s).

 

Maybe "just archiving" is better than what happened to me once: Situation as you describe (cache missing for months, CO allows "virtual" finds), I made the mistake of not reading the logs before attempting the cache, and in the end logged DNF+NM. One hour later I get verbally crucified in an e-mail from the CO, where he rants about me being a spoil-sport, and that it's now my fault when the cache is archived by a reviewer.

To be fair, he let my DNF+NM stand, and replaced the cache a few weeks later.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, baer2006 said:

It irks me when a CO complains about my DNF log (or even outright deletes it), saying that the cache is fine and the DNF messes up the Health Score of their cache. When I don't find a cache, which I actually searched (and be it only 5 minutes), I log a DNF - period. On a high-D cache, a few DNFs shouldn't trigger a CHS warning. And if the CO gets regular DNFs on their low-D hide, they should probably think about their D-rating ;) .

 

I give my search of a geocache about 20 minutes but usually go beyond that because of my competitive nature. I try to not give a DNF and love revisiting to avenge it. The love of the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, baer2006 said:

Maybe "just archiving" is better than what happened to me once: Situation as you describe (cache missing for months, CO allows "virtual" finds), I made the mistake of not reading the logs before attempting the cache, and in the end logged DNF+NM. One hour later I get verbally crucified in an e-mail from the CO, where he rants about me being a spoil-sport, and that it's now my fault when the cache is archived by a reviewer.

To be fair, he let my DNF+NM stand, and replaced the cache a few weeks later.

Shrug and wear it. The cache needed action and it wasn't your fault. I have had dealings with several like that. There are some aggressive, entitled, rude cachers out there. I gave some examples like that above. Another I have mentioned before. They found someone's lost lunchbox (20 metres from my very easy and obvious hide) and thought this was my cache and logged a find. I checked my cache and found it still there, so politely asked them to please change it to a DNF or note. They refused and said they would return to sign the log. I forgot about it as I went travelling. Three months later I returned and found they hadn't retuned to sign the log or changed their log to DNF. I contacted them again. Up till then the conversation, although frustrating from my end, had been civilised and polite on both ends. They let fly, telling me how impatient I was, etc, etc. I immediately responded and deleted their log. I said a few words back, but not on the scale to match their rant. With his response I seriously worried about his wife and was she suffering abuse. His anger and entitlement were very worrying.

One other I had this issue with, when I checked some time later their account had been locked. I never reported them, but likely someone else who received a similar response, must have. So far, I have never reported any of these.

Edited by Goldenwattle

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I give my search of a geocache about 20 minutes but usually go beyond that because of my competitive nature. I try to not give a DNF and love revisiting to avenge it. The love of the game!

Same competitive nature here. Ive been know to look for over an hr.  Bisons hidden in a dense conglomerate of pine trees, or a large hedgerow comes to mind....Then it will start gnawing the %^$# out of me until I can get back to avenge my apparent self perceived ineptitude. :wacko:

 

Sometimes even on the same day!

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, baer2006 said:

It irks me when a CO complains about my DNF log (or even outright deletes it), saying that the cache is fine and the DNF messes up the Health Score of their cache. When I don't find a cache, which I actually searched (and be it only 5 minutes), I log a DNF - period. On a high-D cache, a few DNFs shouldn't trigger a CHS warning. And if the CO gets regular DNFs on their low-D hide, they should probably think about their D-rating ;) .

 

I see a trend developing here. Once upon a time, if a cache needed some TLC from its owner, someone would log an NM, the CO would thank them for bringing it to their attention and go fix the problem. Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily. So people became scared to log NMs and instead DNF started being used to indicate cache problems, with some tools putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding DNFs in the same way that the red wrench marked caches with outstanding NMs. Then the CHS jumped on the bandwagon too, using some sort of weighted DNF to Find ratio to measure the health of a cache and alert both the CO and the reviewers if it dropped below par.

 

So now that DNF has become the defacto NM, it seems some COs are seeing them as slights on their caches or personal slights and we're being encouraged to only log WNs unless the search at GZ is sufficiently thorough to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the cache is missing. If this trend continues, I expect those tools will start putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding WNs and then what? We'll have suddenly run out of log types for recording anything but a find.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot said:

Same competitive nature here. Ive been know to look for over an hr.  Bisons hidden in a dense conglomerate of pine trees, or a large hedgerow comes to mind....Then it will start gnawing the %^$# out of me until I can get back to avenge my apparent self perceived ineptitude. :wacko:

 

Sometimes even on the same day!

The time I am willing to spend can be influenced by the D rating. I would likely not spend more than a few minutes on a 1.5D, unless there were other reasons; such as it being the only cache I had the chance to find in a country. After a few minutes I walk away and log a DNF. I do go caching at times with a friend though who wants to keep searching, as he seems to feel it's a personal affront if he can't find a cache, in a way I don't. I find that frustrating. I want to move on and he's still searching and occasionally he finds it, but many time it still ends up a lost cause and we have wasted time on it.

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I see a trend developing here. Once upon a time, if a cache needed some TLC from its owner, someone would log an NM, the CO would thank them for bringing it to their attention and go fix the problem. Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily. So people became scared to log NMs and instead DNF started being used to indicate cache problems, with some tools putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding DNFs in the same way that the red wrench marked caches with outstanding NMs. Then the CHS jumped on the bandwagon too, using some sort of weighted DNF to Find ratio to measure the health of a cache and alert both the CO and the reviewers if it dropped below par.

 

So now that DNF has become the defacto NM, it seems some COs are seeing them as slights on their caches or personal slights and we're being encouraged to only log WNs unless the search at GZ is sufficiently thorough to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the cache is missing. If this trend continues, I expect those tools will start putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding WNs and then what? We'll have suddenly run out of log types for recording anything but a find.

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem. With that in mind I still log NMs. If someone gets angry with me for doing that, I see it that they have a problem. That's how I deal with that situation, as I don't want those bullies to stop me from logging future necessary DNFs.

  • Upvote 4
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem. With that in mind I still log NMs. If someone gets angry with me for doing that, I see it that they have a problem. That's how I deal with that situation, as I don't want those bullies to stop me from logging future necessary DNFs.

 

Thankfully the small caching community here is still very much Olde Worlde where NMs and NAs are used and accepted for their intended purpose and DNFs are freely logged for all manner of unsuccessful hunts with no repercussions other than some gentle ribbing at the next event or group outing. I hope that doesn't change.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I thank people when they log a NM for letting me know about the problem.

I totally agree. We hate it when people don't let us know that our cache broken or possibly missing, because then we won't know that our cache needs TLC and the next finder won't get the full experience.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily.

This happened from the start.  There was a well known cacher active in the forums back then (and still quoted now) that took a NM as a personal affront - and said so "loudly" in these forums.  But it has gotten worse since then...

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Thankfully the small caching community here is still very much Olde Worlde where NMs and NAs are used and accepted for their intended purpose and DNFs are freely logged for all manner of unsuccessful hunts with no repercussions other than some gentle ribbing at the next event or group outing. I hope that doesn't change.

NMs and NAs are also still graciously accepted in my much larger, New World caching community. Unfortunately, NAs -- and to a lesser extent, NMs -- are used much less often now that people have learned that reviewers have taken over that responsibility. It irks me that that has changed because of forces from outside the community.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot said:

Same competitive nature here. Ive been know to look for over an hr.  Bisons hidden in a dense conglomerate of pine trees, or a large hedgerow comes to mind....Then it will start gnawing the %^$# out of me until I can get back to avenge my apparent self perceived ineptitude. :wacko:

 

Sometimes even on the same day!

 

Since we can't be in the Olympics, this is the next best thing for people with competitive OCD natures. Geocaching. lol

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I see a trend developing here. Once upon a time, if a cache needed some TLC from its owner, someone would log an NM, the CO would thank them for bringing it to their attention and go fix the problem. Until some COs started seeing NMs as a slight on their caches or a personal slight and reacted angrily. So people became scared to log NMs and instead DNF started being used to indicate cache problems, with some tools putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding DNFs in the same way that the red wrench marked caches with outstanding NMs. Then the CHS jumped on the bandwagon too, using some sort of weighted DNF to Find ratio to measure the health of a cache and alert both the CO and the reviewers if it dropped below par.

 

So now that DNF has become the defacto NM, it seems some COs are seeing them as slights on their caches or personal slights and we're being encouraged to only log WNs unless the search at GZ is sufficiently thorough to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the cache is missing. If this trend continues, I expect those tools will start putting red marks alongside caches with outstanding WNs and then what? We'll have suddenly run out of log types for recording anything but a find.

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

The time I am willing to spend can be influenced by the D rating. I would likely not spend more than a few minutes on a 1.5D, unless there were other reasons; such as it being the only cache I had the chance to find in a country. After a few minutes I walk away and log a DNF. I do go caching at times with a friend though who wants to keep searching, as he seems to feel it's a personal affront if he can't find a cache, in a way I don't. I find that frustrating. I want to move on and he's still searching and occasionally he finds it, but many time it still ends up a lost cause and we have wasted time on it.

 

I never find geocaching a "waste of time". It joins people together, brings out our competitive side, brings families together, and gets us outdoors! 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

My irk is people thinking that geocaching is made for adult fun only.   I have many families with children looking for our caches. It delights me to no end when they find them and log their experiences. To me, that's what geocaching is all about...bringing families together with their children. Finding that one sport to connect with the younger generation. I see them on the bike path searching for our caches, no feeling like it in the world...families doing an activity together...and we helped accomplished that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by HunterandSamuel
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I have many families with children looking for our caches. It delights me to no end when they find them and log their experiences. To me, that's what geocaching is all about...bringing families together with their children. Finding that one sport to connect with the younger generation. I see them on the bike path searching for our caches, no feeling like it in the world...families doing an activity together...and we helped accomplished that.

 

How is this a irk?:lostsignal:

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

Maybe they approached GZ for a cache described as a quick park bench hide and saw this:

Construction-rental-fences.png

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

 

On occasion I've logged an NM with a DNF, if there's good reason to believe the cache really is missing (like a string of previous DNFs on what was previously an easy find, a previous finder has looked for it and is now unable to find it, there's only one possible hiding place that matches the description and/or hint, GZ is no longer accessible, or I've made multiple attempts and really think the CO should check on it). One of the canned NM messages on the new logging page says "The cache might be missing" and the only scenario where that might be used is if the cache can't be found. Note the word might in that NM, it doesn't mean it must be missing, just that there's sufficient grounds to warrant a check by the CO.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

Aren't Did Not Find and Needs Maintenance two separate things?  Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it?  I'm thankful for cachers who let me know of a problem in messaging and give me a chance to fix it. 

NM is the way to let the CO know there is a problem and I am grateful for thoughtful people who log a NM on any cache of mine that needs one, although I do read logs and it rarely gets to that situation. It's responsible and thoughtful of them to take the time to do this.

Why would someone do a NM when they couldn't find it? There are very obvious reasons for that. A string of DNFs on a 1.5D cache for instance. If it's a person who rates all their caches 1.5/2D (I have come upon several who do this) and the cache has the DNFs because it's really a 3/4D, that's tough. They should rate their cache correctly. I place NM after a string of DNFs based on the given rating. For example, I mightn't (very unlikely to) on a 4D, but I would on a 1.5D. The mentioned bench is gone; the tree had been chopped down and removed (although I have found more than one cache that was in a now removed tree placed by the workers by the stump), etc. It can often be obvious that the cache is now missing. You can't find a missing cache. Logging a NM lets others know the situation too, as they can't see private messages. The NM is not only for the CO; it's also a courtesy for other people attempting to find the cache. People who don't like NM logs have this very mistaken idea it's an affront to them. It most certainly isn't; it's to let the CO know there is a problem and to nudge them to fix the problem, which in many cases they should have done so long before this, as a string of DNFs and mentions of problems in logs often testifies to.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, GeocachingGoku said:

Hate it when someone shoots me down on forums. makes me feel useless

 

Forums are for opinions.  This isn't faceboook or similar, where everyone agrees or else.     :)

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Forums are for opinions.  This isn't faceboook or similar, where everyone agrees or else.     :)

I absolutely agree with that.

However I see some seriously snide reply's to some posts. Frequent posters may take it with a grain of salt and even join in with a spirited debate. But to to a newcomer or infrequent visitor to the forums it can be off putting and give a bad impression. Especially to a young person.   

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Forums are for opinions.  This isn't faceboook or similar, where everyone agrees or else.     :)

 

"If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" comes to mind.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GeocachingGoku said:

Hate it when someone shoots me down on forums. makes me feel useless

 

There is no guarantee that anyone will agree with something you post. This applies to anything someone posts, including myself.

Edited by igator210
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Current Irk:

Mud. Its been a wet spring and all the trails are big mud ruts.

Edited by igator210
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

I injured my back the week travel restrictions were eased. I made the mistake of driving to do maintenance on my furthest from home cache and spent the rest of the next day laid out in pain. I'm irked by age related injuries.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, GeocachingGoku said:

Hate it when someone shoots me down on forums. makes me feel useless

 

You're clearly enthusiastic about geocaching and want to talk about it.  That's a great thing.

 

However, you're not an expert at this yet.  While it's ok to share your opinions, I think some of your posts come across as the only way to do things, and not all of them have been what I would consider the preferred technique.

 

I've been at this for over 13 years now and am closing in on 10,000 finds.  I think it's fair to say we have a decent amount of experience at this point.  But at the end of the day, I am just one geocacher, and I don't pretend to have all the answers.  I try to share my experience, opinions, recommendations, or my personal approach as only that, and not as the "right answer."  I don't always remember to do it that way, but that's how I try to approach things: rather than telling someone what to do, I post about what I have done, or what I have seen, or what I think, or what I'd recommend.

 

All in all, this forum is pretty well behaved compared to some other corners of the internet.  And if nothing else, we all have at least one thing in common: we are all interested in geocaching.  So don't lose heart.  But for now, perhaps consider sitting back and doing some more reading, to inform your opinions and experience some more, and asking questions instead of answering them.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 4

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, igator210 said:

There is no guarantee that anyone will agree with something you post. This applies to anything someone posts, including myself.

 

I disagree.

 

:laughing:

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hzoi said:

 

My counter-irk is people thinking that all geocaches need to be child friendly.

 

Not all geocaches are right for my six year old daughter.  Heck, not all geocaches are right even for me, and I'm an adult in reasonably good shape.  My knees start to shake a little if I go ten feet up in a tree, and forget about caches that require climbing gear or rappelling gear.  But that's OK.  Whether I'm caching solo or with my family, it's my responsibility to know the limits and decide whether or not it's appropriate to go for a particular cache.  I do not believe it is the responsibility of all cache owners to cater to my needs.

 

+1

You don't need to "find 'm all". I most places there's enough to go around and we just select caches we want to do and ignore the others. In fact, we prefer more "adult" caches (like solve stuff in advance or on route).

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 5/19/2020 at 5:04 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

My irk is people thinking that geocaching is made for adult fun only.  

 

I don't know of anyone that thinks that. I have never seen anyone post anything that I would infer that from. Where does that statement even come from? Perhaps you could correct me and direct me there.

 

Everything I see indicates that virtually all geocachers believe that the activity, with its ability to allow you to choose how you participate in it, is something that can be enjoyed by everyone. There are caches that range from wheelchair accessible and easy for children to caches that take skill and training such as scuba diving or climbing cliffs.

 

I cached for many years with 2 young sons and now have a granddaughter to take caching. I have no problem finding child friendly  caches. Also a few years back I was 40 feet up a tree. I love the choices.

 

If you somehow feel that geocaching should ONLY be a kid friendly activity, I feel you are incorrect.

Edited by RocTheCacheBox
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

When an owner uses a piece of junk as a container. Something that in no way will keep the contents dry. Then throws a paper scroll in a baggie and calls it a cache. Example, an (old broken)  wicker plant basket. 

 

Irk #2 - It has 12% favorite points

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

When an owner uses a piece of junk as a container. Something that in no way will keep the contents dry. Then throws a paper scroll in a baggie and calls it a cache. Example, an (old broken)  wicker plant basket. 

 

Irk #2 - It has 12% favorite points

 

 

 

 

I understand your first irk but the second has me scratching my head.  Why does someone else's awarding a FP to a particular cache, even if it's a crappy one, irk you?  That's their personal opinion about the cache that they're awarding a FP to, not yours.  In essence, you're judging someone else's judgment values and finding them lacking, based on what YOU think of the cache.  Just because you and I may find nothing redeeming about this particular type of cache doesn't mean that everyone feels the same way about it as we do.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/19/2020 at 7:59 PM, barefootjeff said:

Note the word might in that NM, it doesn't mean it must be missing, just that there's sufficient grounds to warrant a check by the CO.

 

So a better way is saying DNF.  

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said:


I don't know of anyone that thinks that. I have never seen anyone post anything that I would infer that from. Where does that statement even come from?

 

I have. Even geocachers thinking they shouldn't have to warn parents that their cache hides are dangerous for children. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

So a better way is saying DNF.  

 

No, a DNF isn't a report on the cache, it's an account of an unsuccessful attempt at finding it. An NM is a request for the CO to check on the cache, and one of the reasons for that could be strong evidence that the cache might be missing. Each log type has a specific purpose and trying to blur them all together because some people are afraid of or offended by NM/NA defeats that.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, hzoi said:

My counter-irk is people thinking that all geocaches need to be child friendly.

 

No one said that. I'm shocked by the geocache community here not promoting child friendly caching along with "adults" playing also. I think I included the grown adults. My apologies to the adults who were offended. lol

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I have. Even geocachers thinking they shouldn't have to warn parents that their cache hides are dangerous for children. 

 

Huh? How is a CO expected to know the skills, abilities and awareness of surroundings of every potential cacher's children? The best I can do is try to highlight the dangers through attributes (cliffs/falling rocks, dangerous animals, etc.) and in the description, but at the end of the day it's the parents who must decide which caches are suitable for their children and which ones aren't.

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

No, a DNF isn't a report on the cache, it's an account of an unsuccessful attempt at finding it. An NM is a request for the CO to check on the cache, and one of the reasons for that could be strong evidence that the cache might be missing. Each log type has a specific purpose and trying to blur them all together because some people are afraid of or offended by NM/NA defeats that.

 

I think when a cache might possibly be considered missing...a DNF is better than a NM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, HunterandSamuel said:

 

I think when a cache might possibly be considered missing...a DNF is better than a NM. 

 

Are you convinced enough that you want the CO to check on it? If so, log an NM; if not, just log a DNF. The reviewers here won't accept an NA unless there's already an outstanding NM, but if no-one ever logs an NM on a missing cache, how is it ever going to be taken out of play?

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Huh? How is a CO expected to know the skills, abilities and awareness of surroundings of every potential cacher's children? The best I can do is try to highlight the dangers through attributes (cliffs/falling rocks, dangerous animals, etc.) and in the description, but at the end of the day it's the parents who must decide which caches are suitable for their children and which ones aren't.

 

 

I was referring to another case here on this forum where a cache hide was near a railroad track but there was no warning to the parent who brought their children there to find the cache. People here  said that it's up to the parents to see that's it's not a safe place. I disagree. It's up to the cache owner hiding a cache in a dangerous place to say it's not child friendly. 

  • Surprised 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Are you convinced enough that you want the CO to check on it? If so, log an NM; if not, just log a DNF. The reviewers here won't accept an NA unless there's already an outstanding NM, but if no-one ever logs an NM on a missing cache, how is it ever going to be taken out of play?

 

I think a DNF is enough to convince a cache ower to check on it. 

  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, HunterandSamuel said:

 

 

I was referring to another case here on this forum where a cache hide was near a railroad track but there was no warning to the parent who brought their children there to find the cache. People here  said that it's up to the parents to see that's it's not a safe place. I disagree. It's up to the cache owner hiding a cache in a dangerous place to say it's not child friendly. 

 

What do you consider a child? A 3-year-old? A 15-year-old? What's safe for one might be unsafe for the other. Even two kids of the same age can have vastly different abilities to cope with dangers. A 12-year-old with lots of outdoor experience would likely be fine at most of my caches, which are often close to cliff edges and in bushland where snakes are commonplace, but one who's spent those 12 years living in suburbia and playing video games would likely not be. I can point out those things, but I can't decide whether they will be dangerous to your child.

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, barefootjeff said:

What do you consider a child? A 3-year-old? A 15-year-old?

 

 

Whoosh. Does it matter? Did it go over your head? In this case it was a small child. I think a three year old. Are you satisfied now? 

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

 

Barefoot, I know you are trying to be the big guy representing all the regulars here and I really like your pictures of your bare feet, but geocaching isn't about just you adults. It's also about bringing families together and children learning about geocaching and the fun this treasure hunting brings. And during this time of the coronavirus and staying at home quarantine, it has become a great activity for families to do together. 

  • Funny 2
  • Surprised 1

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 50

×
×
  • Create New...