Right cache, wrong container.

[+sbell111]

It all comes to the conclusion, that throwdowns are a bad idea and simply should not be done.

 

I may use this line in other discussions as well...

My kind of person!!!! Lets start an Anti-Throwdown movement!!!!

 

I agree a local cacher in my town no longer maintains his caches he had two other cachers placing throw downs so he could keep them on line and stop other hiders from hiding in the area. If you can't check your own caches then archive them don't get others to replace them.

If there is an agreement between the cache owner and the person placing the replacement container, that that isn't a 'throwdown'. It's maintenance.

[+Team Microdot]

It all comes to the conclusion, that throwdowns are a bad idea and simply should not be done.

 

I may use this line in other discussions as well...

My kind of person!!!! Lets start an Anti-Throwdown movement!!!!

 

I agree a local cacher in my town no longer maintains his caches he had two other cachers placing throw downs so he could keep them on line and stop other hiders from hiding in the area. If you can't check your own caches then archive them don't get others to replace them.

If there is an agreement between the cache owner and the person placing the replacement container, that that isn't a 'throwdown'. It's maintenance.

 

Not really.

 

A cache owner who perpetually allows the next person along who discovers the cache missing to throw down a new one can't realistically claim to be maintaining anything at all.

[+narcissa]

If there is an agreement between the cache owner and the person placing the replacement container, that that isn't a 'throwdown'. It's maintenance.

 

Agreed. Lots of geocachers work in cooperation with each other like this.

[+Team Microdot]

If there is an agreement between the cache owner and the person placing the replacement container, that that isn't a 'throwdown'. It's maintenance.

 

Agreed. Lots of geocachers work in cooperation with each other like this.

 

Providing throw-downers with a perfect excuse for their throw-downs - it's not a throw down, it's community maintenance.

[+narcissa]

If there is an agreement between the cache owner and the person placing the replacement container, that that isn't a 'throwdown'. It's maintenance.

 

Agreed. Lots of geocachers work in cooperation with each other like this.

 

Providing throw-downers with a perfect excuse for their throw-downs - it's not a throw down, it's community maintenance.

 

They can use that as an excuse if they wish, and I'm sure that they do.

 

I'm not particularly concerned that the threat of your misplaced disapproval will stop good geocachers from saving each other trips by performing agreed-upon maintenance on each other's caches.

[+Team Microdot]

I'm not particularly concerned that the threat of your misplaced disapproval will stop good geocachers from saving each other trips by performing agreed-upon maintenance on each other's caches.

 

Nor should you be, given that no such threat was made.

 

I'm not really the threatening sort

[+NYPaddleCacher]

a geocache is a container that was placed for the purpose of being found by others.

 

That could describe a throwdown. I think that one of the reasons many have disagreed with a draconian approach towards cache ownership is that from a cache seekers perspective, some times it's virtually impossible to tell the difference between "a" container and "the" container. Once someone has found "a" container, that based on all information from the cache description, appears to be "the" container, they're not going to continue searching for "the" container at that location.

 

It seems to me, that if this is truly worrisome to a cache owner there are two things that can be done.

 

1. Use a container that is distinctive so there is no possibility that someone searching for it will mistake it from a throwdown.

2. Make sure that you perform maintenance frequently enough to ensure that there are no throwdowns at the cache location.

 

 

[+narcissa]

It seems to me, that if this is truly worrisome to a cache owner there are two things that can be done.

 

1. Use a container that is distinctive so there is no possibility that someone searching for it will mistake it from a throwdown.

2. Make sure that you perform maintenance frequently enough to ensure that there are no throwdowns at the cache location.

 

I suspect that in many cases, throwdowns are the result of distinctive, well-camouflaged containers. So what, if we don't specify the exact nature of the camo, and some jerk puts a white pill bottle in plain sight, we're supposed to accept bogus finds on a difficulty 4 cache?

 

I don't think so.

 

I agree that maintenance is very important, particularly if you are an unfortunate soul whose caches appear on the intro app.

[+jellis]

It's happened to mine many times. I have one it's fake faceplate. Someone I guess couldn't find it and put a hide-a-key right under the cache. Or when I put black nano on a black bench and someone put a 35mm in the tree above it. It happens. I just try to read into the logs to see if it goes from difficult to easy or ask a finder what they found if I think it has changed.

Edited September 26, 2014 by jellis

[+BAMBOOZLE]

a geocache is a container that was placed for the purpose of being found by others.

 

That could describe a throwdown. I think that one of the reasons many have disagreed with a draconian approach towards cache ownership is that from a cache seekers perspective, some times it's virtually impossible to tell the difference between "a" container and "the" container. Once someone has found "a" container, that based on all information from the cache description, appears to be "the" container, they're not going to continue searching for "the" container at that location.

 

It seems to me, that if this is truly worrisome to a cache owner there are two things that can be done.

 

1. Use a container that is distinctive so there is no possibility that someone searching for it will mistake it from a throwdown.

2. Make sure that you perform maintenance frequently enough to ensure that there are no throwdowns at the cache location.

 

Agreed, especially #2.On my caches I've " thrown down " more on my own caches ( cache moved by finders ) than others have....in fact in my area its a non problem and lately its become rare for someone to even add a dry log.