Jump to content

Jumping the gun


hzoi
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

So I'm checking my email, minding my own business, and I see this "Needs Archived" log on one of our caches.

 

Looked for this one a few weeks ago, but did not find. Since everyone else said it was easy maybe it should be checked.

 

4169b874-2669-4afe-b1a8-6f64a7bbd2a0.jpg

 

Seriously?

Edited by hzoi
Link to comment

There's a lot of inconsistency in how folks request an owner check. I see these requests go in every type of log (found it, DNF, notes, NM and NA). Of those, I suppose the 'Needs Maintenance' is most appropriate, although often even that seems inappropriate when all you want is the owner to verify it's still there. I'd suggest a new log type like 'Verify' or something, but I could see that easily being abused and used in place of DNF logs.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Link to comment

You looked for it, you didn't find it = DNF

 

You looked for it, you found it, something was broken/missing = Needs Maintenance

 

You looked for it and there is a parking lot where there used to be a tree = Needs Archive

 

I have a cache with 2 good beacons, one obvious, one not so obvious. The first on (a tree) is so in your face that people don't look beyond it. When they trimmed the tree, everyone logged that it was missing, needed maintenance, needed archiving because the obvious beacon made them assume it was gone.

Link to comment

Sigh

 

Well we have an average amount of finds. Recently we visited a couple of caches.

 

1. Behind post. Coords led to a post on a fence on top of a should high bank in a park. Looked round the back and sure enough there was the hole for a micro. Found by everyone previously. Maybe it's fallen down the back i think. Check all around - nothing to be found. Walk back round and check other posts both sides. Hit item was a sign on the post with the hole. Ok logged a needs maint and apologised. Went off.

 

2. Magnetic nano hidden on and the hint said behind. Coords pointed to a railing. Previous finder "found on the floor and put it back where the hint implied". Spent ages looking around the railings. Both sides. All over the floor. Nowhere to be found. 15 feet out was a street sculpture. It was on one of the figures - behind on its back. Or on its front I guess if you came from the other way.

 

Anywa we logged a needs maint. We couldn't find either and in case 1 it seems missing or moved. In case 2 it could have been anywhere to be honest. However both were found later that day and there after by people with next to no finds lol. Ah well so it goes. But when I logged the NA I knew I would be causing the co work. Hence the apology. We won't be in any hurry to do it again. We cocked up.

 

However recently we've noticed that there are three camps with regard to this.

 

1. Less than 200 finds posting arrogant messages along the lines that the CO need to check out this disgrace. "Needs sorting ASAP please", "I would have thought a. CO with this many finds would look after his better"

 

2. 1400 finds to 4500 finds - logging the cache but mentioning that something needs sorting as part of their log.

 

3. 4500 to high rollers and this is really more the 6000 plus that we see this. Logging a needs maintenance when they could not find it despite it being found the day before. Claiming as part of the nm log that it's clearly gone missing. And THEN ... chasing it up weeks later ... Any news on this one yet. Followed by another log of the same nature a couple of weeks later. And then logging a snotty NA

 

However we have had a certain American trawling the logs round here in Cornwall Uk for nm logs that have gone on a bit and logging a NA on it. Which is cross continent cache policing and worse. The reviewer just went ahead and did it.

Link to comment

Rarely go for the type, so my success rate for 1.5 or lower micro thingies is wanting.

DNF is par with finds now I think.

One time though, conned by CJ (that day of the year stat thing...), I went for one which seen later (log at home), another with over 10,000 finds posted an NM with a DNF.

- It was at the first place I looked.

I didn't let her forget I found it for a week. :laughing:

Link to comment

I agree that shaking your fist and cocking your head with a Seth Meyers/Amy Pohleresque "Really?!" is warranted.

 

From there, meh. Go check on the cache real quickly (maybe it needs a swag reboot or a new logsheet while you're there anyway), and then post a OM log (if it is still there) sticking it to the previous logger.

 

I'll be honest, when this kind of thing happens, going to find your cache in place but unfound by a person like you've described feels really good when you post a "Went to check, and the cache is right where it should be, and can be found. Refreshed the swag and checked the log. Please be mindful when you log a NA for a cache you can't find."

 

Next time that cacher checks on the cache (they most certainly will after posting a NA...it's like rubbernecking on the freeway) they'll see your log and you'll have nuked their NA log from space. :laughing:

Link to comment

I think the OP will recall what myself and another member or two went through a few years ago with a BOT attack on our accounts, and we fought back as cache owners. Things have changed, I don't enjoy being a cache owner because of the way the game has changed. Geocaching hit mainstream and then the phone apps, you can't drop a trackable in a geocache without it going MIA. Weekend wonders and their Noob ways are getting to some of us old timers. :angry: I made my listings PMO, then archived most of them. So yeah, I know how you feel with the NA posted on your cache. It ain't happy, happy, happy, is it? :D

My advice? Go hide a .177 cal pellet tin and describe it as an ammo can and sit at the Tavern and watch all the noobs search for it. :P

Link to comment

Go hide a .177 cal pellet tin and describe it as an ammo can and sit at the Tavern and watch all the noobs search for it. :P

 

Now that's funny right there. I don't care who y'are. :laughing:

And don't think I'm joking. I own a few listings like that. :anibad:

One has a hint that it is magnetic and it is in open space, just a metal sign standing by the roadside. Mark the size not chosen. My last hide was temp disabled by the reviewer after several "experienced" geocachers logged DNF on the cache. I had to post a "meet you there and lead you to it" hint on the cache page before it was found. :laughing:

Link to comment

I'm getting more NA on caches, which when visited at least half of are still there, just a little out of position (a real peeve: when caches migrate, but I digress.)

 

A few years back I went out with a replacement ammo can to maintain a cache the CO gave me permission to maintain. There was a pretty long streak of DNFs and at least one reference to someone setting up a small shrine nearby. As I was looking for a good spot to hide the ammo can I tripped over the original. Still there, just very well covered in leafs.

Link to comment

Sadly, I took part in that kind of thing till I learned my lesson on one particular cache. Why did I feel the need to police things? Don't know.

The cache I refer to is on a power trail and my daughter and I spent a good amount of time searching. When I went to log I found a string of DNF's, and not

Knowing much about cache got furious and logged my DNF along with a "needs archived." Of course, afterwords I decide to scroll the logs and find it is devious hide

that is prone to DNFs. To boot the CO was very good at checking after a string of DNFs only to report, "cache in great shape."

In the end, and after cache was disabled by reviewer, I apologized to CO for the premature and unnecessary action on his cache. He appreciated

My apology. Lesson learned.

Link to comment

Sadly, I took part in that kind of thing till I learned my lesson on one particular cache. Why did I feel the need to police things? Don't know.

The cache I refer to is on a power trail and my daughter and I spent a good amount of time searching. When I went to log I found a string of DNF's, and not

Knowing much about cache got furious and logged my DNF along with a "needs archived." Of course, afterwords I decide to scroll the logs and find it is devious hide

that is prone to DNFs. To boot the CO was very good at checking after a string of DNFs only to report, "cache in great shape."

In the end, and after cache was disabled by reviewer, I apologized to CO for the premature and unnecessary action on his cache. He appreciated

My apology. Lesson learned.

 

Yeah...always a good idea to check for more than just a string of DNFs. Generally if there is a call for maintenance gone unanswered and the CO has not logged onto the site or logged a cache find in a long time, then a NA log isn't out of line. Logging NA doesn't mean it gets archived...only that it gets reviewer attention and may finally lead to action by the CO.

Link to comment

Sigh

 

Well we have an average amount of finds. Recently we visited a couple of caches.

 

1. Behind post. Coords led to a post on a fence on top of a should high bank in a park. Looked round the back and sure enough there was the hole for a micro. Found by everyone previously. Maybe it's fallen down the back i think. Check all around - nothing to be found. Walk back round and check other posts both sides. Hit item was a sign on the post with the hole. Ok logged a needs maint and apologised. Went off.

 

2. Magnetic nano hidden on and the hint said behind. Coords pointed to a railing. Previous finder "found on the floor and put it back where the hint implied". Spent ages looking around the railings. Both sides. All over the floor. Nowhere to be found. 15 feet out was a street sculpture. It was on one of the figures - behind on its back. Or on its front I guess if you came from the other way.

 

Anywa we logged a needs maint. We couldn't find either and in case 1 it seems missing or moved. In case 2 it could have been anywhere to be honest. However both were found later that day and there after by people with next to no finds lol. Ah well so it goes. But when I logged the NA I knew I would be causing the co work. Hence the apology. We won't be in any hurry to do it again. We cocked up.

 

However recently we've noticed that there are three camps with regard to this.

 

1. Less than 200 finds posting arrogant messages along the lines that the CO need to check out this disgrace. "Needs sorting ASAP please", "I would have thought a. CO with this many finds would look after his better"

 

2. 1400 finds to 4500 finds - logging the cache but mentioning that something needs sorting as part of their log.

 

3. 4500 to high rollers and this is really more the 6000 plus that we see this. Logging a needs maintenance when they could not find it despite it being found the day before. Claiming as part of the nm log that it's clearly gone missing. And THEN ... chasing it up weeks later ... Any news on this one yet. Followed by another log of the same nature a couple of weeks later. And then logging a snotty NA

 

However we have had a certain American trawling the logs round here in Cornwall Uk for nm logs that have gone on a bit and logging a NA on it. Which is cross continent cache policing and worse. The reviewer just went ahead and did it.

 

You forgot one.

 

10,000 and up finders-Found it log: "We couldn't find the cache after looking for 30 seconds so we left a replacement."

Link to comment

So I'm checking my email, minding my own business, and I see this "Needs Archived" log on one of our caches.

 

Looked for this one a few weeks ago, but did not find. Since everyone else said it was easy maybe it should be checked.

 

Seriously?

 

A log type certainly shouldn't get anyone upset, especially in this case as there is not much in the content. Yes, he should have posted a DNF, but you are always free to post an Owner Maintenance note saying that the cache is now archived, or something else equally silly.

Link to comment

So I'm checking my email, minding my own business, and I see this "Needs Archived" log on one of our caches.

 

Looked for this one a few weeks ago, but did not find. Since everyone else said it was easy maybe it should be checked.

 

Seriously?

 

A log type certainly shouldn't get anyone upset, especially in this case as there is not much in the content. Yes, he should have posted a DNF, but you are always free to post an Owner Maintenance note saying that the cache is now archived, or something else equally silly.

Humor always goes a long way.

Link to comment

I have a semi evil cache that experience cachers can spot it easily or it may give them a little trouble. But there was some veteran cacher couple who sees the DNFs and couldn't find it and posts their DNF. I checked their profile to see they haven't found too many difficult caches so I ignored it cause I knew it had to be there. They past through again and since I didn't respond they put a NA on it when they still couldn't find it. Okay that was it, I went out there, pulled up to the cache and didn't even have to get out of my car to see it was still there. Just to prove I checked I used my stamp and stamped the log below the last finder. I posted a log saying something like veteran cachers need more experience to find this cache.

Link to comment

I pretty much always assume I am simply not able to find the cache. My most recent DNF, actually FTDNF.

 

"FTDNF. No joy this afternoon for George and Elroy. Felt like we searched every possible hint item so perhaps we just didn't have the right idea, or we were blind today."

 

Turns out the cache was missing, but I think my log did the job without causing any drama. When we were fairly new we would log that we wondered if the cache was still there. Then, as we became just a bit more seasoned, we learned to accept our shortcomings regarding finding caches. We also changed the way we log DNFs. We NEVER post a NM or a NA unless we have personal knowledge the cache is in need of attention.

 

 

Link to comment

Or this one http://coord.info/GC2EXBG which is a sneaky hide but isn't Tupperware ... From an experienced cacher ...

 

Log -

 

Searched for ages for this one. Found remnants of plastic around the GZ so the cache is clearly broken and needs replacing ASAP so I'm claiming a find. TFTC.

 

Followed by a NM log - "Cache container either broken or partly missing - needs maintenance ASAP".

 

However the CO who is a friend (after we had checked it was still there for him) posted a OM log "I'm not sure finding pieces of plastic at a GZ constitutes a find". Very polite I thought.

 

The same logger some months later deleted (correctly) one of our found it's because we had not signed the log. A meter away was a letterbox (other type of cache which is historic to this part if the uk) which we had found. Had we bothered to read the cache page it did say do not claim a find for the nearby letterbox. Ah well we thought no hassle. THEN we read the snotty comments she had out on the cache page ranting about people like us. So she got a crap 'o' gram and I threw the above cache in her face. Clearly she didn't bother to read through previous logs. So she got caught at her own game. Shortly afterwards she tried to irradicate her arrogance by deleting her found it log but she couldn't delete her NM log. And she revisited the site and eventually did find it. Bemoaning how horrified she was. I hope she learned her lesson and pulled her head out her butt. Rude and obnoxious to say the least.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Well said.

 

The CO shouldn't have to check the cache after every DNF. Also, there much too much attitude especially among new cachers that " if I can't find it, there must be a problem."

Link to comment

When we log a NM we are asking a complete stranger to perform a service for us (and the community at large). IMHO that sugests a duty by me as the NM logger to provide a bit more info than just a DNF and NM. For instance, "Searched for 20 minutes, GZ is an empty field with evidence of recent forest clearence. A pile of timper is nearby" If the CO knows the hide was hanging in a pine tree, it's a prety good indication that it's gone. If on the other hand the CO knows it was in the top cap of the construction fence, my log is a pretty good indication that all is likely still well.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Well said.

 

The CO shouldn't have to check the cache after every DNF. Also, there much too much attitude especially among new cachers that " if I can't find it, there must be a problem."

 

Are you kidding? Well said?

Read it again.

Both viewpoints stated in the same posting!

 

New, or one of the first ever players it doesn't matter .... If you can't find a cache LOG A DNF! If you get a series of DNFs, go check on your cache! If you find the cache and it's got problems .. like soaked, or whatever, THEN post a NM.

Link to comment

It's a plain old DNF.

Just delete the log and forget about.

NA isn't a "plain old DNF".

Deleting it means little when a copy already went to a Reviewer.

- Now it's possible they'll have to explain it to the Reviewer who got that log, true or not.

 

I've deleted a hat full of bogus NA logs ( vast majority are by non-premium , newbe cachers.....that's why I now do only PMO caches, it helps a lot )....don't want them on my cache page. Sometimes I check them or someone will find it the next day.

I realize the reviewer gets the bogus NA log and see's the same thing I do....I have received a few notes with words of comfort from reviewers. :)

Link to comment

Lots of new cachers confuse "Needs Archived" for "Needs Maintenance".

 

I would think they know what both mean-but not know when it's appropriate to use each. You find my cache, perhaps run over by heavy equipment(It's happened) and crushed, you would log NM. But if the same cache was owned by someone who hasn't logged in in 3 years, a NA log would be appropriate. Same cache, same problem, different appropriate log types. Or I have a cache at, ay the mall. Security approaches a finder, and says to remove the cache, or the next person would be charged with trespassing. In that case a NA would be appropriate-nothing wrong with the cache, but there is with the location.

 

But a new cacher may see my cache destroyed and think a NA is appropriate. But since I am active I could choose to fix it.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Well said.

 

The CO shouldn't have to check the cache after every DNF. Also, there much too much attitude especially among new cachers that " if I can't find it, there must be a problem."

 

Are you kidding? Well said?

Read it again.

Both viewpoints stated in the same posting!

 

New, or one of the first ever players it doesn't matter .... If you can't find a cache LOG A DNF! If you get a series of DNFs, go check on your cache! If you find the cache and it's got problems .. like soaked, or whatever, THEN post a NM.

 

If it's listed as a 1/1 and it is not readily apparent, accessible from a wheelchair, or the hide has changed, then the cache page needs maintenance to correct it.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

 

Recently, I've see my reviewers archive caches outright after a NA log. This is after looking at the overall picture. I have a feeling that if they saw this particular log, they would simply ignore it. A cache listing with 50 finds followed by 10 DNFs, then a NA, with a CO that hasn't had any activity in a year, POOF, it's gone.

Link to comment

Sadly, I took part in that kind of thing till I learned my lesson on one particular cache. Why did I feel the need to police things? Don't know.

The cache I refer to is on a power trail and my daughter and I spent a good amount of time searching. When I went to log I found a string of DNF's, and not

Knowing much about cache got furious and logged my DNF along with a "needs archived." Of course, afterwords I decide to scroll the logs and find it is devious hide

that is prone to DNFs. To boot the CO was very good at checking after a string of DNFs only to report, "cache in great shape."

In the end, and after cache was disabled by reviewer, I apologized to CO for the premature and unnecessary action on his cache. He appreciated

My apology. Lesson learned.

 

Happy to hear that a lesson was learned there. I have posted many NA logs, but not after reading the cache description and all of the logs, as well as researching the CO's recent and past activity. Almost all of them have been on caches that have been abandoned and not maintained by the CO.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Well said.

 

The CO shouldn't have to check the cache after every DNF. Also, there much too much attitude especially among new cachers that " if I can't find it, there must be a problem."

 

Are you kidding? Well said?

Read it again.

Both viewpoints stated in the same posting!

 

New, or one of the first ever players it doesn't matter .... If you can't find a cache LOG A DNF! If you get a series of DNFs, go check on your cache! If you find the cache and it's got problems .. like soaked, or whatever, THEN post a NM.

First, let's take everything except the first sentence. He says some cachers (especially new) are too quick to post NM. That's the majority of the message. Agreed.

 

Back to the first sentence. He says that only in the case of a 1/1 will he, an experienced cacher, post a NM after a thorough search. I agree with you that NM should be used after seeing the cache. However, there may be limited cases where more than DNF is called for. Slippery slope? Maybe. Post a note? Okay.

 

Suppose the cache is well-known as a tree cache, maybe even with posted photos. You go there, and for 100 meters in every direction trees have been removed. I'd post DNF with a description. I wouldn't criticize a NM post. NA is possibly warranted but a bit extreme.

Link to comment

Go hide a .177 cal pellet tin and describe it as an ammo can and sit at the Tavern and watch all the noobs search for it. :P

 

Now that's funny right there. I don't care who y'are. :laughing:

 

Now why didn't I think of that? Love it! I'm going to make this happen 😎

Great idea. Place the cache just into the woods behind the parking lot behind the tavern. A fine reason to spend the entire weekend in the tavern. Take a taxi home, please. :laughing:

Link to comment

... I have posted many NA logs, but not after reading the cache description and all of the logs, as well as researching the CO's recent and past activity. Almost all of them have been on caches that have been abandoned and not maintained by the CO.

 

You should probably come with attributes ...

 

s-tool-yes.gif

 

just looked at ours ... 2 at half your find count.

Link to comment

Definitely should go in this order:

 

1) DNF

2) Needs Maintenance - if lots of DNFs and it's supposed to be easy and the CO hasn't taken action within a reasonable time

3) Needs Archive - if no response from the CO within a reasonable time, at least 3 months. If it's a chronic offender, I happily post Needs Archive sooner.

Edited by The_Incredibles_
Link to comment

Definitely should go in this order:

 

1) DNF

2) Needs Maintenance - if lots of DNFs and it's supposed to be easy and the CO hasn't taken action within a reasonable time

3) Needs Archive - if no response from the CO within a reasonable time, at least 3 months. If it's a chronic offender, I happily post Needs Archive sooner.

 

I agree.

Link to comment

I always post some sort of a NM log if it is listed as a 1/1 and I can't find it. I have enough experience to expect it to be fairly obvious and to not include walking through a ditch or over gravel. I am, however, amazed at the egos and arrogance of relatively new players who think that any cache he cannot find must not be there and then log a NM or asked that a cache be archived. Some people's moms told them that they are always correct and are good-looking and smart. Sometimes moms go too far. The rules compel me to check on my cache and I think that sometimes this is unreasonable. Incompetence should not require me to act and I think a reviewer should look at the experience of the complaining party and take that into account.

Well said.

 

The CO shouldn't have to check the cache after every DNF. Also, there much too much attitude especially among new cachers that " if I can't find it, there must be a problem."

 

Are you kidding? Well said?

Read it again.

Both viewpoints stated in the same posting!

 

New, or one of the first ever players it doesn't matter .... If you can't find a cache LOG A DNF! If you get a series of DNFs, go check on your cache! If you find the cache and it's got problems .. like soaked, or whatever, THEN post a NM.

First, let's take everything except the first sentence. He says some cachers (especially new) are too quick to post NM. That's the majority of the message. Agreed.

 

Back to the first sentence. He says that only in the case of a 1/1 will he, an experienced cacher, post a NM after a thorough search. I agree with you that NM should be used after seeing the cache. However, there may be limited cases where more than DNF is called for. Slippery slope? Maybe. Post a note? Okay.

 

Suppose the cache is well-known as a tree cache, maybe even with posted photos. You go there, and for 100 meters in every direction trees have been removed. I'd post DNF with a description. I wouldn't criticize a NM post. NA is possibly warranted but a bit extreme.

I am going to have to only consider the first sentence. Really? I consider myself to be a fairly well seasoned cacher after 10+ years. If I can't find a cache I assume it is because I can't find the cache. I don't care if the cache is a 1/1 or a 5/5. If I can't find the cache I have no option other than log a DNF. Anything else is pure speculation unless I have other information regarding the hide and the location. The last example here works for me as additional information.

Link to comment

does it matter much ? if a visitor make a wrong log

as long as the text and intention is clear ?

you the CO will go out and check or fix the cache, and then perform a correct log

that matches your actions.

you can not educate the world, but please try

Link to comment

A cache I visited recently was essentially destroyed. I made note in the log and went back the other day (yesterday maybe?) to rehabilitate it since I live nearby. I wound up finding that the cache had been gotten into again and half the container was now missing, which I wasn't prepared to replace during that visit. Then I went to check on another cache in the area that had been moved when I first found it and learned that it was moved again and the log removed from it. I didnt have a log small enough to fit in it.

 

When I got home, I found myself in a position where I had to log not just my first "Needs Maintenance" but, my first two. As of today, my schedule has changed so getting back to fix these myself just isn't possible in the near future. Worst of all, both those caches were owned by the same person.

 

I've posted DNF's, several times despite having only logged 24 of the caches I've found. I'm fine with that. But having to log "Needs Maintenance" really bothered me since I feel I should have been better prepared to fix them myself - after all, that's the right thing to do, isn't it?

Link to comment

I feel I should have been better prepared to fix them myself - after all, that's the right thing to do, isn't it?

 

As long as you feel that way, my car need a tune up. It's not your responsibility to fix other people's caches. Putting a log in is nice, and I doubt anyone would object to that, but anything more, well it depends. Is the cache old, with an inactive owner, and always in need of something? I'd just let it die-log a need archived. Do you know the owner? I would never do anything more than replace a log for an owner I didn't know. If you replace my whole cache, it's not what I put out now is it? Some will do that.

 

They can't find it, or it's broken, they'll leave, or Throw Down, if you will a cheap replacement cache just so they can log their smiley.

 

And you have to remember, what if what you really found wasn't the cache. Then you "Fix" it and now there's 2, or 3 or 5 caches in that location.

 

Anything like that, log a needs maintenance, and at least give the CO a chance to fix it their way.

Link to comment

Or.. You could have a reviewer who looks for logs like this and then sends a note to the CO saying that unless you do maintenance on the cache he will archive it for you, and then does.. With only a couple of noob dnf's with a "needs maintenance" posting.

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 3
×
×
  • Create New...