Jump to content

Encouraging throw downs...


Followers 4

Recommended Posts

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Presumably just one of the behaviours encouraged by the silly series of August souvenirs.

 

I would comment on the law of unintended consequences but it seems anyone could have seen this kind of thing coming. It sometimes seems like Groundspeak really wants to cheapen the game of geocaching to the point everything is a throwdown with no thought to longevity just so they can boast about the large number of caches out there.

Link to comment

 

Presumably just one of the behaviours encouraged by the silly series of August souvenirs.

 

I would comment on the law of unintended consequences but it seems anyone could have seen this kind of thing coming. It sometimes seems like Groundspeak really wants to cheapen the game of geocaching to the point everything is a throwdown with no thought to longevity just so they can boast about the large number of caches out there.

 

Actually I think it's mirroring the power trail "ethic" where this is common and actually encouraged by many PT owners.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

I've seen cache replacement going on here for some time and it is getting progressively more frequent. It is one my biggest peeves. We have several cachers, n00bs and veterans alike, who take it upon themselves to replace any cache they feel is missing and, of course, they take a "find" with them. Sometimes the cache really is gone, sometimes not. There are more than just a few cases where the CO specifically says on the cache page that if you can't find it, it is probably gone so just replace it and take the smiley. In any case, the replacement is almost always a film can or pill bottle tucked under a rock or in a tree root. Sometimes, if we are really lucky, it is a bison tube clipped to a fence wire! Of course, the cache listing may say it is a regular up in a tree or something, but what does that matter as long as the cache is saved at all cost? <_<

Edited by Semper Questio
Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

 

Except for power trails of course.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Thank you. You are a good reviewer IMO, and a great geocacher. :)

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

 

Except for power trails of course.

I'm seeing power trails spring up and being called geoart. I'm still willing to pay extra for a ignore caches by user feature, and that's no joke. :(

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Thank you. You are a good reviewer IMO, and a great geocacher. :)

 

Having met Mr. Keystone I wholeheartedly concur.

 

However, I'll be the voice of dissent and take the flak. I have no problems with " throw downs " ( yet another downer catch word coined by a group I'll call the " negative bunch " )....it is a cache container w/log placed when a geocacher has reason to believe a cache is missing and is attempting to help the CO ( he's already there and the CO might not be for weeks ) and by doing so future seekers may have a cache to find for another couple of years or so. I've had a PVC pipe cache replaced with an ammo can ( pipe was still there)....no big deal, I just picked one up when I was in the area. On one of my harder hides two replacements eventually joined the original which was still there.....again, it didn't really bother me which one folks found ( some found two ). I agree that on high diff. hides no replacement's should be put out as the CO went to a lot of effort to make it a hard hide....can't find it, log a DNF and move on. I feel the vast majority of cache replacements and log replacements are really appreciated by CO's....I know I do. The more we help others the more caches will be in play for all of us to find.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

 

Except for power trails of course.

 

Yup. I've always loved our little "east coast power trail" in Delaware. Heck, it's the very first thing they tell you on the cache page

 

First cache of the series

 

NOTE: there should NOT be any DNF's. Take a few spare micro containers and logs with you. If you find a cache is missing, just replace it (claiming a find) and move on--better for you and much less work for the Commission!

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Thank you. You are a good reviewer IMO, and a great geocacher. :)

 

Having met Mr. Keystone I wholeheartedly concur.

 

However, I'll be the voice of dissent and take the flak. I have no problems with " throw downs " ( yet another downer catch word coined by a group I'll call the " negative bunch " )....it is a cache container w/log placed when a geocacher has reason to believe a cache is missing and is attempting to help the CO ( he's already there and the CO might not be for weeks ) and by doing so future seekers may have a cache to find for another couple of years or so. I've had a PVC pipe cache replaced with an ammo can ( pipe was still there)....no big deal, I just picked one up when I was in the area. On one of my harder hides two replacements eventually joined the original which was still there.....again, it didn't really bother me which one folks found ( some found two ). I agree that on high diff. hides no replacement's should be put out as the CO went to a lot of effort to make it a hard hide....can't find it, log a DNF and move on. I feel the vast majority of cache replacements and log replacements are really appreciated by CO's....I know I do. The more we help others the more caches will be in play for all of us to find.

 

This is the forums, and you might not think so, but in this case, I'm gonna say "the negative bunch" is the majority. For once. :laughing: And I'll add to that, any Groundspeak reviewer I've ever discussed the topic with, or have seen them comment publicly, is vehemently against throwdowns. I know for a fact if someone throws down for a disabled cache in my area, my reviewer will not acknowledge the throwdown as legitimate, and the cache eventually will be archived.

 

I also believe you speak as an active cache owner. Do you know how many abandoned caches there are out there that don't deserve someone to replace the log, or throw down a container? A lot. I'd dare say 1/4 of all caches are placed by people who haven't logged into Geocaching.com in over a year (or much longer in many cases). No data there, just a wild guess. :)

Link to comment

Personally, I am against throwdowns. Maybe it's just me but if I can't find a cache, I don't automatically assume that it's gone missing. Instead I tend to think that that particular cache has gotten the better of me. If I spent a decent time looking for it, I will log it as a DNF and then put it on my watchlist. If someone subsequently finds it after me, then I will sometimes make a second attempt at it.

 

I think the only time a "throwdown" is ok is either if you have contacted the CO and gotten approval or if you have found it in the past and know for certain that it is missing (even then you should probably get the CO's ok first).

Edited by RagnoJr
Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocachin...achemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Thank you. You are a good reviewer IMO, and a great geocacher. :)

 

Having met Mr. Keystone I wholeheartedly concur.

 

However, I'll be the voice of dissent and take the flak. I have no problems with " throw downs " ( yet another downer catch word coined by a group I'll call the " negative bunch " )....it is a cache container w/log placed when a geocacher has reason to believe a cache is missing and is attempting to help the CO ( he's already there and the CO might not be for weeks ) and by doing so future seekers may have a cache to find for another couple of years or so. I've had a PVC pipe cache replaced with an ammo can ( pipe was still there)....no big deal, I just picked one up when I was in the area. On one of my harder hides two replacements eventually joined the original which was still there.....again, it didn't really bother me which one folks found ( some found two ). I agree that on high diff. hides no replacement's should be put out as the CO went to a lot of effort to make it a hard hide....can't find it, log a DNF and move on. I feel the vast majority of cache replacements and log replacements are really appreciated by CO's....I know I do. The more we help others the more caches will be in play for all of us to find.

 

This is the forums, and you might not think so, but in this case, I'm gonna say "the negative bunch" is the majority. For once. :laughing: And I'll add to that, any Groundspeak reviewer I've ever discussed the topic with, or have seen them comment publicly, is vehemently against throwdowns. I know for a fact if someone throws down for a disabled cache in my area, my reviewer will not acknowledge the throwdown as legitimate, and the cache eventually will be archived.

 

I also believe you speak as an active cache owner. Do you know how many abandoned caches there are out there that don't deserve someone to replace the log, or throw down a container? A lot. I'd dare say 1/4 of all caches are placed by people who haven't logged into Geocaching.com in over a year (or much longer in many cases). No data there, just a wild guess. :)

 

I agree. And from what I've seen most throwdowns are crappy cache containers (I'm sure Bamboozle doesn't do this, but this is my observation in my area and several examples I've read about in the forums) - tin candy tin, film canister, recycled leaky food container, dollar store container. And the person who threw it down never goes back to maintain what they left when the reports come in about the wet new log.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

 

Except for power trails of course.

How many people, do you think, already have 31 pre-signed and dated film cans ready to go for tomorrow's start of A Month of Micro-spew? Heck, they won't even have to slow down on they're way by.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Basically he's placing caches and wants others to maintain them for him, and rewards them with a smiley for doing do. Hopefully a trend that doesn't catch on. Why even bother looking? Just toss down a film canister and move on.

 

Can a CO be told to remove that statement from their description? Can the cache be archived because the owner hasn't got a maintenance plan? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#cachemaintenance

Yes. I refuse to publish cache listings that include this statement, on the grounds that it isn't an adequate maintenance plan. Groundspeak confirmed my interpretation of this guideline.

Thank you. You are a good reviewer IMO, and a great geocacher. :)

 

The more we help others the more caches will be in play for all of us to find.

And the more throw downs and caches maintained by the community and not the cache owner, the less others will have a chance of going from seeker to hider, and they may be far better at maintaining their own geocaches and not dependent on the community. But I am guilty of adding a extra log if I find one that is wet or can not be signed, but I do include that in my found log. :)

Link to comment

I think the only time a "throwdown" is ok is either if you have contacted the CO and gotten approval or if you have found it in the past and know for certain that it is missing (even then you should probably get the CO's ok first).

 

But caches frequently migrate over time from their original location, for various reasons... so can you really be certain that it's missing?

Link to comment

GCRL.gif

I've seen a bunch of caches published lately that have this picture right on the description, when you click on the image it takes you to this page that explains how to go about you're throw down. <_< I don't mind helping out and fixing up a cache I've found, but will not throw down.

 

This is what immediately came to mind for me.

There is a whole series here in AZ with this on the cache page (or at least there were...I haven't checked them recently).

 

Similarly, there is at least one other powertrail with a regular size cache at either end containing materials for maintenance of the caches on the powertrail. Grab a few replacement containers and logs as you begin the trail...no need to post a DNF, and no need for the owner to do maintenance...other than restocking the supply caches. :(

Link to comment

I think the only time a "throwdown" is ok is either if you have contacted the CO and gotten approval or if you have found it in the past and know for certain that it is missing (even then you should probably get the CO's ok first).

 

But caches frequently migrate over time from their original location, for various reasons... so can you really be certain that it's missing?

I'm thinking that's why Ragno prefaced his thoughts with the suggestion to contact the owner.

 

I'll go one step further, and say no cache should ever be replaced without the explicit permission of the owner.

Link to comment

I just noticed a cacher who has been placing a bunch of caches lately and all of them have the following line in the text "If it's not there a replacement can be signed, placed, and logged."

 

Another glaring example of the lack of integrity that is becoming widely accepted in this game.

 

www.MessenTools.com-Frutas-static14.gif

 

Thank goodness for a bottomless ingnore pit list.

Link to comment

I think the only time a "throwdown" is ok is either if you have contacted the CO and gotten approval or if you have found it in the past and know for certain that it is missing (even then you should probably get the CO's ok first).

Yep, please ask the CO first.

Can't tell you how many times we've either removed throwdowns or explained to cachers that a hide was moved a few years ago - the reason they didn't find it.

Cachers with another who found it earlier and, "since they knew where it was, it had to be missing".

Nope. Moved.

If they used their GPSr, they'd realize coords were changed too.

Link to comment

Personally, I am against throwdowns. Maybe it's just me but if I can't find a cache, I don't automatically assume that it's gone missing. Instead I tend to think that that particular cache has gotten the better of me. If I spent a decent time looking for it, I will log it as a DNF and then put it on my watchlist. If someone subsequently finds it after me, then I will sometimes make a second attempt at it.

 

I think the only time a "throwdown" is ok is either if you have contacted the CO and gotten approval or if you have found it in the past and know for certain that it is missing (even then you should probably get the CO's ok first).

 

Thank you, I couldn't have said it any better!

 

I would be appreciative for a replacement container,,, if you contact me first or if you had found the cache previously. Otherwise, please don't try to do me any favors. I can't tell ya'll how many times i've gotten dnfs on some of our caches but then found that they were in place when i checked on them. I DO NOT want two cache containers (the one you threwdown is most likely inferior anyway) at my cache site. Just let me know with a dnf log and i'll check into it.

 

And by the way, come on people. Even if you throw down a container, how do you claim a find on a cache you didn't find in the first place? :blink:

Edited by Mudfrog
Link to comment

 

And by the way, come on people. Even if you throw down a container, how do you claim a find on a cache you didn't find in the first place? :blink:

 

This is the crux of the biscuit...people want a smilie, and they think they deserve one for their effort.

If there is a container with a log with their signature on it, who could argue. :unsure:

 

Yes, I know...lame-o-grande, but that is the rationalization.

 

Sadly, rationalization is becoming an increasingly relevant factor in geocaching. :(

Link to comment

 

And by the way, come on people. Even if you throw down a container, how do you claim a find on a cache you didn't find in the first place? :blink:

 

This is the crux of the biscuit...people want a smilie, and they think they deserve one for their effort.

If there is a container with a log with their signature on it, who could argue. :unsure:

 

Yes, I know...lame-o-grande, but that is the rationalization.

 

Sadly, rationalization is becoming an increasingly relevant factor in geocaching. :(

 

The only way I think a throwdown is appropriate is if you find a damaged container. A LockNLock with a cracked lid or something of the such. I haven't had anyone throw down on any of my hides but if I saw one, I wouldn't hesitate to delete the log. You haven't found what I hid. If a cache is missing, log a DNF and tell me and I'll attend to it once I can.

 

For a CO to encourage throwdowns, thats just lazy ownership. If you can't be bothered to maintain your caches, then don't put them out in the first place.

Link to comment

 

And by the way, come on people. Even if you throw down a container, how do you claim a find on a cache you didn't find in the first place? :blink:

 

This is the crux of the biscuit...people want a smilie, and they think they deserve one for their effort.

If there is a container with a log with their signature on it, who could argue. :unsure:

 

Yes, I know...lame-o-grande, but that is the rationalization.

 

Sadly, rationalization is becoming an increasingly relevant factor in geocaching. :(

 

The only way I think a throwdown is appropriate is if you find a damaged container. A LockNLock with a cracked lid or something of the such. I haven't had anyone throw down on any of my hides but if I saw one, I wouldn't hesitate to delete the log. You haven't found what I hid. If a cache is missing, log a DNF and tell me and I'll attend to it once I can.

 

For a CO to encourage throwdowns, thats just lazy ownership. If you can't be bothered to maintain your caches, then don't put them out in the first place.

 

This. One near me was a small glass vial with a screw-top. A cacher found it broken, cleared out the shards and replaced it with a similarly sized container made of plastic. The CO actually went by to do maintenance and decided the new container was working fine so he left it. I still would have asked the CO before placing it, but in that case it worked out better.

Link to comment

 

This. One near me was a small glass vial with a screw-top. A cacher found it broken, cleared out the shards and replaced it with a similarly sized container made of plastic. The CO actually went by to do maintenance and decided the new container was working fine so he left it. I still would have asked the CO before placing it, but in that case it worked out better.

 

That wouldn't be a throwdown.

 

The cacher actually found the cache and did some maintenance for the CO.

 

It's not like he didn't find it.

Link to comment

 

Presumably just one of the behaviours encouraged by the silly series of August souvenirs.

 

I would comment on the law of unintended consequences but it seems anyone could have seen this kind of thing coming. It sometimes seems like Groundspeak really wants to cheapen the game of geocaching to the point everything is a throwdown with no thought to longevity just so they can boast about the large number of caches out there.

 

Actually I think it's mirroring the power trail "ethic" where this is common and actually encouraged by many PT owners.

 

Sure, I just wonder what happened to the old guideline of asking why the cache hider wanted to bring someone to the area and whether it was because the area was interesting or just because there wasn't a cache for 528 feet in any direction.

 

Power trails and other caches where it's just assumed that throwing down a film pot to replace it if you can't find it just seems pointless. If you're just going to figure you can't find it so you'll chuck a film pot in a corner somewhere you might as well just claim a find on it from home. The CO that doesn't care about their cache isn't going to care if people log it from their armchair without actually visiting the place.

Link to comment
I wonder what happened to the old guideline of asking why the cache hider wanted to bring someone to the area and whether it was because the area was interesting or just because there wasn't a cache for 528 feet in any direction.

That was my favorite guideline!

It went away when Groundspeak realized that power trails = $$$

Link to comment
I wonder what happened to the old guideline of asking why the cache hider wanted to bring someone to the area and whether it was because the area was interesting or just because there wasn't a cache for 528 feet in any direction.

That was my favorite guideline!

It went away when Groundspeak realized that power trails = $$$

 

Actually, I think it went away when the reviewers asked for a more concrete reason why a cache couldn't be placed 600 feet from another one.

 

Probably there are plenty of WOW! caches that are only 600 feet apart, and also some cases where the lame guardrail cache preceded what could be a WOW! cache only 600 feet away. In either of these cases the reviewer is left evaluating the WOW! factor to decide if a cache can be squoze in at that location.

 

So now, 528' is the rule, and the rule is 528'.

Perhaps more, but not less.

Five hundred and twenty-eight feet shall be the number of the counting, and thou shalt not stop until 528' (being the number that thou shalt count) be reached.

AMEN.

Link to comment

 

So now, 528' is the rule, and the rule is 528'.

Perhaps more, but not less.

Five hundred and twenty-eight feet shall be the number of the counting, and thou shalt not stop until 528' (being the number that thou shalt count) be reached.

AMEN.

 

... 527' shalt thou not count, excepting that thou then proceed to 528' :D

Link to comment
I wonder what happened to the old guideline of asking why the cache hider wanted to bring someone to the area and whether it was because the area was interesting or just because there wasn't a cache for 528 feet in any direction.

That was my favorite guideline!

It went away when Groundspeak realized that power trails = $$$

 

Actually, I think it went away when the reviewers asked for a more concrete reason why a cache couldn't be placed 600 feet from another one.

 

Probably there are plenty of WOW! caches that are only 600 feet apart, and also some cases where the lame guardrail cache preceded what could be a WOW! cache only 600 feet away. In either of these cases the reviewer is left evaluating the WOW! factor to decide if a cache can be squoze in at that location.

 

So now, 528' is the rule, and the rule is 528'.

Perhaps more, but not less.

Five hundred and twenty-eight feet shall be the number of the counting, and thou shalt not stop until 528' (being the number that thou shalt count) be reached.

AMEN.

 

Perhaps an entry for the cache setter to describe why they think someone might like to visit the area would be useful. If an entry is an obvious copy-and-paste of a previous one it won't be allowed. I can imagine it could be a lot of work to come up with 500 good reasons why someone would be interested in finding a succession of soggy filmpots behind six miles of guard rail.

Link to comment

 

So now, 528' is the rule, and the rule is 528'.

Perhaps more, but not less.

Five hundred and twenty-eight feet shall be the number of the counting, and thou shalt not stop until 528' (being the number that thou shalt count) be reached.

AMEN.

 

... 527' shalt thou not count, excepting that thou then proceed to 528' :D

526 is right out!

Link to comment
I wonder what happened to the old guideline of asking why the cache hider wanted to bring someone to the area and whether it was because the area was interesting or just because there wasn't a cache for 528 feet in any direction.

That was my favorite guideline!

It went away when Groundspeak realized that power trails = $$$

 

It was not a guideline per se, it was just a quote that espoused a philosophy they were trying to encourage. It was introduced to the guidelines the year that the emphasis was to be on quality. It's apparently gone now along with any hint of a focus on quality.

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

I have no qualms with folks replacing missing caches, so long as they have the explicit consent of the owner, given prior to the replacement, use a container which is equal to, or better than the original, and post their efforts as a note, rather than a find. Where issues occur is when someone carries a bag of film cans with them, spitting out a crappy container whenever they failed to find the real cache, and log this spew as a find, usually without mentioning that there was a problem with the cache.

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

 

It's fine to help if the so called helpers know for a fact that the cache is missing. But unless they've found the cache before, or contacted the cache owner, or contacted a previous finder, they really don't know.

 

The gpsr may take you to a spot where you find a lonely piece of velcro. It looks like the logical hiding spot and you would bet big money that the cache was supposed to be there. Well, guess what, it was not the right spot at all. I know because this happened to me a few years back. Of course i did not leave a throwdown, but i did contact the owner to tell him i was sure the cache was missing. He checked and it was in place, about 5 feet from where i found the velcro.

 

I would have caused confusion if i had tried helping by leaving another container. The thing is, even if i would have left a container, i still would not try to claim a find. Duh, i didn't find the cache in the first place...

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

 

It's fine to help if the so called helpers know for a fact that the cache is missing. But unless they've found the cache before, or contacted the cache owner, or contacted a previous finder, they really don't know.

 

The gpsr may take you to a spot where you find a lonely piece of velcro. It looks like the logical hiding spot and you would bet big money that the cache was supposed to be there. Well, guess what, it was not the right spot at all. I know because this happened to me a few years back. Of course i did not leave a throwdown, but i did contact the owner to tell him i was sure the cache was missing. He checked and it was in place, about 5 feet from where i found the velcro.

 

I would have caused confusion if i had tried helping by leaving another container. The thing is, even if i would have left a container, i still would not try to claim a find. Duh, i didn't find the cache in the first place...

 

If it's obvious and the cache owner has given permission to replace that's very different to just assuming it isn't there and dumping a film pot in its place.

 

I remember one micro I did a while back where I'd contacted the owner to confirm I had the right coordinates as it was a bit of a trek from home to get to where it was hidden. He confirmed I was right and said he wasn't 100% sure the cache was still there, but said if I wanted to take a spare film pot with log then if it wasn't I could replace it, get my find and save him a maintenance trip. He said that once I got to GZ with the clue there was only one possible place it could be.

 

Sure enough at GZ there was only one possible hiding spot, although as it happened the cache was still there. Which was just as well, as my backup duplicate was sitting on my bench as I'd forgotten to take it with me.

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

I have no qualms with folks replacing missing caches, so long as they have the explicit consent of the owner, given prior to the replacement, use a container which is equal to, or better than the original, and post their efforts as a note, rather than a find. Where issues occur is when someone carries a bag of film cans with them, spitting out a crappy container whenever they failed to find the real cache, and log this spew as a find, usually without mentioning that there was a problem with the cache.

 

There's a series of caches along a mountain road, maybe 40 in 15 miles, all unique containers with different hid styles. I drove a section of the road three weeks ago and found 15 and DNF'ed one. This one had a previous DNF. Last week, another cacher posted a DNF. I know that the CO's are away, but they will fix it when they get back. Last Saturday, Mr 36K cacher and his friend, Mrs. 24K cacher blow through the area. "We left a 35mm film container to help you out". Anyone that thinks that these two are helping anyone besides themselves to anything other than an additional smiley is seriously deluding themselves.

 

Most cases of throwdowns are new cachers that seriously think that they are helping and power cachers that are intent on totally clearing an area of the map and have to do whatever they can to justify to themselves that it's okay to take a smiley.

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

 

Yeah, there are all sorts of justifications for phony found it logs. Some actually call this nonsense "angel caches", pretending that they are doing the community a favor. The justifications all boil down to one thing, "I was here and I want my smiley regardless if I found any geocache".

 

That's not true in every situation. Sometimes the motive is to simply help the owner. If someone is stealing their caches, why not? it would be nice to simplify and judge every instance as morally wrong, but it doesn't work that way. In many cases you are correct, but not always.

I have no qualms with folks replacing missing caches, so long as they have the explicit consent of the owner, given prior to the replacement, use a container which is equal to, or better than the original, and post their efforts as a note, rather than a find. Where issues occur is when someone carries a bag of film cans with them, spitting out a crappy container whenever they failed to find the real cache, and log this spew as a find, usually without mentioning that there was a problem with the cache.

 

There's a series of caches along a mountain road, maybe 40 in 15 miles, all unique containers with different hid styles. I drove a section of the road three weeks ago and found 15 and DNF'ed one. This one had a previous DNF. Last week, another cacher posted a DNF. I know that the CO's are away, but they will fix it when they get back. Last Saturday, Mr 36K cacher and his friend, Mrs. 24K cacher blow through the area. "We left a 35mm film container to help you out". Anyone that thinks that these two are helping anyone besides themselves to anything other than an additional smiley is seriously deluding themselves.

 

Most cases of throwdowns are new cachers that seriously think that they are helping and power cachers that are intent on totally clearing an area of the map and have to do whatever they can to justify to themselves that it's okay to take a smiley.

Preachin' to the choir, Brother! <_<

Link to comment

Many caches are hidden in places where it would be nearly impossible for a muggle to stumble upon accidentally. In those cases if the cache goes missing, having another geocacher replacing it would discourage the thief who is probably trying to annoy the owner by having them run out and fix it.

I have found the best way to annoy a cache thief is make my listings PMO. :laughing:

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 4
×
×
  • Create New...