Would it be rude?

[+justintim1999]

Understood. But how dose that pertain to the posters question whether or not to be proactive in having an un-maintained cache removed?

In the subtitle, the OP calls them "crappy caches".

after reading the post it seems like they are referring to the condition of the cache and the lack of maintenance not the cache hide in general.

It doesn't matter why they think the cache is crappy, it's still not a good thing to say in the NM. I wasn't really thinking the OP would say anything like that, but someone that doesn't care what other people think might.

 

I agree that any negativity should be left out of the maintenance log. To be honest I've never encountered a needs maintenance log that was unnecessarily critical. If someone notes that the cache is in crappy shape I don't take that as being rude or impolite. After all the cache probably is a mess. Lets say the log read "Cache is a mess. the owner is obviously not maintaining it. Should be archived." I admit that this is a little excessive. A quick look at the maintenance logs may tell a different story. Then again it may accurately describe the cache and the owner.

 

What's wrong with calling out a cache owner who is not maintaining there cache? Why are we so unwilling to do anything about it?

[+bflentje]

Understood. But how dose that pertain to the posters question whether or not to be proactive in having an un-maintained cache removed?

In the subtitle, the OP calls them "crappy caches".

after reading the post it seems like they are referring to the condition of the cache and the lack of maintenance not the cache hide in general.

It doesn't matter why they think the cache is crappy, it's still not a good thing to say in the NM. I wasn't really thinking the OP would say anything like that, but someone that doesn't care what other people think might.

 

Interesting gray area here.. I agree mentioning in a NM that the cache is crappy is mean spirited. But I also believe that you, me, and everyone else in the world don't have a right to live our entire lives not being offended. I say end this thread and talk about something else.

[+dprovan]

Interesting gray area here.. I agree mentioning in a NM that the cache is crappy is mean spirited. But I also believe that you, me, and everyone else in the world don't have a right to live our entire lives not being offended. I say end this thread and talk about something else.

I don't say this because I think people have some innate right to avoid being offended. I say this because offending someone will work against your goal of getting the cache fixed.

 

And it's entirely unnecessary. justintim1999's post immediately before yours says, unless I'm seriously misreading it, that he thinks it's not negative to say a cache is crappy if he thinks it's crappy. But "crappy" has no real meaning except as a negative slur. You should stick to factual statements about the problem that needs to be resolved and leave personal opinions -- such as "crappy" and "not maintaining" -- out of it. They add absolutely no value to the report, yet they run the risk of inciting a negative reaction from the CO.

[+justintim1999]

Interesting gray area here.. I agree mentioning in a NM that the cache is crappy is mean spirited. But I also believe that you, me, and everyone else in the world don't have a right to live our entire lives not being offended. I say end this thread and talk about something else.

I don't say this because I think people have some innate right to avoid being offended. I say this because offending someone will work against your goal of getting the cache fixed.

 

And it's entirely unnecessary. justintim1999's post immediately before yours says, unless I'm seriously misreading it, that he thinks it's not negative to say a cache is crappy if he thinks it's crappy. But "crappy" has no real meaning except as a negative slur. You should stick to factual statements about the problem that needs to be resolved and leave personal opinions -- such as "crappy" and "not maintaining" -- out of it. They add absolutely no value to the report, yet they run the risk of inciting a negative reaction from the CO.

 

Read it again and include the word "shape" after the word "crappy"

 

The use of the word crappy has nothing to do with personal opinion. It a simple word to describe the physical condition of the cache.

 

Good thing I didn't say the cache stinks.....As in literally smells bad.

 

Keeping with the original message I doubt this particular cache owner will be fixing up this cache any time soon so the wording doesn't matter much dose it. Unless they were so enraged by the log they took the time to contact me about it. Then I could ask them why they haven't fixed it up. Maybe there is some value in it.

[+dprovan]

Read it again and include the word "shape" after the word "crappy"

 

The use of the word crappy has nothing to do with personal opinion. It a simple word to describe the physical condition of the cache.

I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong. "Bad shape" is, indeed, as vacuous and unhelpful as "crappy", so I would discourage its use, as well, but "crappy" heaps on disdain and insult.

 

Good thing I didn't say the cache stinks.....As in literally smells bad.

"Stinks" would be similarly insulting and pointless even though, naturally, no one would think you were talking about its odor.

 

Keeping with the original message I doubt this particular cache owner will be fixing up this cache any time soon so the wording doesn't matter much dose it. Unless they were so enraged by the log they took the time to contact me about it. Then I could ask them why they haven't fixed it up. Maybe there is some value in it.

Or the CO could be enraged and conclude that everyone that posts an NM in the future is being similarly insulting no matter how well they word it. Or they can be enraged and post a nasty log to the cache, thus confirming that NMs aren't appreciated to anyone watching. If they delete your log, as enraged people often do, anyone looking at the log will see a tirade without understanding that the NM posted encouraged it, thus suggesting inaccurately that any NM, no matter how well worded, would get the same reaction. All these possible outcomes contribute to impression that NMs aren't worth it.

 

What's more, even though you, of course, would only call a cache "crappy" in a situation where the CO's probably not paying attention, someone less thoughtful will see your log and learn from it that it's a good idea to use the term "crappy" even though they'll use it in inappropriate cases where the CO's active and has a good maintenance record.

 

So those are some of the reasons why it matters.

 

Those seem sufficiently likely to me, but even if you don't think so, the more interesting point is that leaving out derogatory comments costs you nothing unless it's really important to you to describe deficiencies in insulting terms.

[+justintim1999]

Read it again and include the word "shape" after the word "crappy"

 

The use of the word crappy has nothing to do with personal opinion. It a simple word to describe the physical condition of the cache.

I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong. "Bad shape" is, indeed, as vacuous and unhelpful as "crappy", so I would discourage its use, as well, but "crappy" heaps on disdain and insult.

 

Good thing I didn't say the cache stinks.....As in literally smells bad.

"Stinks" would be similarly insulting and pointless even though, naturally, no one would think you were talking about its odor.

 

Keeping with the original message I doubt this particular cache owner will be fixing up this cache any time soon so the wording doesn't matter much dose it. Unless they were so enraged by the log they took the time to contact me about it. Then I could ask them why they haven't fixed it up. Maybe there is some value in it.

Or the CO could be enraged and conclude that everyone that posts an NM in the future is being similarly insulting no matter how well they word it. Or they can be enraged and post a nasty log to the cache, thus confirming that NMs aren't appreciated to anyone watching. If they delete your log, as enraged people often do, anyone looking at the log will see a tirade without understanding that the NM posted encouraged it, thus suggesting inaccurately that any NM, no matter how well worded, would get the same reaction. All these possible outcomes contribute to impression that NMs aren't worth it.

 

What's more, even though you, of course, would only call a cache "crappy" in a situation where the CO's probably not paying attention, someone less thoughtful will see your log and learn from it that it's a good idea to use the term "crappy" even though they'll use it in inappropriate cases where the CO's active and has a good maintenance record.

 

So those are some of the reasons why it matters.

 

Those seem sufficiently likely to me, but even if you don't think so, the more interesting point is that leaving out derogatory comments costs you nothing unless it's really important to you to describe deficiencies in insulting terms.

 

I think we've set a new record for the most mentions of the word "crappy" in one thread.

 

Take a look at my profile, although I'm quite sure you've already have. How many derogatory posts can you find. You probably found none. I don't condone abusive behavior in logs or in life. The purpose of this whole exercise was to illustrate that people are wound to tight. Doesn't it get tiresome sugarcoating the truth as not to offend someone? Again the truth, not opinion.

 

This whole back and forth started when you posted:

 

"This is what bothers me about proposals like this: why do we care about the state of the CO if the cache is in good shape? And if the cache isn't in good shape, why hasn't it gone away through the defined NM/NA process?"

 

I think it's reasonable for a land manager to force periodic contact with someone given permission to use the land, but I don't think it makes sense to take action against an innocent cache listing with no problems simply because of the CO hasn't followed some arbitrary procedure."

 

Here is where I disagree. Every active cache should have someone who is responsible for it. I don't think that it is arbitrary. There are reasons why the land owner/manager could need to contact the cache owner regardless of the condition of the cache.

 

The "Yawn" thing was another factor. I wonder how that was interpreted by LOne R.

 

Regarding the OP's original issue. Start the process of having the cache removed. Your justified in doing so based on your post. (although I would love to take a look a the cache page.) Ignore the people with the pitchforks and torches. Don't be afraid to do what's right.

[+dprovan]

This whole back and forth started when you posted:

...

I thought it started when you said you didn't care about what other people think.

 

Here is where I disagree. Every active cache should have someone who is responsible for it.

I'm fine with someone like the OP having rules the CO has to follow to retain permission. But for GC.com and other cachers, the cache being in good shape should be considered proof that someone is responsible for it.

[+justintim1999]

Nope. It started right where I noted.

 

The first mention of "didn't care" was by LOneR who's point, I think, was that many don't care about the condition of the cache. Owner and finder. My point was not to worry about what others may think about taking the steps to remove an abandoned cache.

 

As far as responsibility goes, what do you do in this case. The land manager/owner has designated the land the cache is on as conservation land and would like the cache to be moved to another location. How about an abutter complains that people are entering their property while looking for the cache, and the land owner/manager would like it removed? Someone complains about a suspicious person snooping around and after finding the container the police would like to speak to the owner. Who do they contact?

 

I'm sure we all could think of many other reasons where the cache owner would need to be reached.

 

I know that the cache could go on forever being fixed and replaced by other cachers thinking their doing something good for the game. I'm guilty of this myself. Cache owner responsibility is the bigger picture here. As is the health and perception of the game.

 

Instead of defending absentee owners we should be:

 

Setting an example by maintaining our own caches well.

Teaching new cachers what's involved in owning a cache.

Not being afraid to take action or speak up when we see something wrong.

[+Auld Pharrrt]

As a cacher who has just recently joined the game and even more recently put out a small number of hides, here's my 2 pennies worth on the subject of poorly maintained caches and crappy enabling etc.

 

1. I am a crappy enabler ... but ONLY if I find a damaged cache, or one that simply needs a little TLC. Why do I do it? Simply because I live in a fairly remote region in the Scottish Highlands and I think poorly maintained caches reflect upon the whole Scottish caching experience. For overseas visitors to come to our country and find garbage is hard for me to accept. So I try to improve that experience by helping out fellow cachers ... I like to think it helps the one who put the hide out and the ones who find it after me, I keep an eye on it if it is close by my home and if it is allowed to fall into a poor state again I will offer to adopt it and log a NM or NA on it, hoping that I/someone might be able to use the location to put out a fresh one of my own sometime in the future.

 

2. As a cache owner, I would appreciate it if people would post a NM log if any problems arise with any of my caches. In fact, I am just about to add this to the descriptions of all my caches. Yes, people are welcome to dry out or replace a wet log and I would be grateful to them for doing so ... I made the mistake of using plastic coated, waterproof paper and picked up on a couple of reports that it was not working well because it was difficult to write on in the rain, also, when I checked the caches I found that people who use the rubber stamps to sign the log (as I always do,) their stamp was turning into just a big smudge of ink. I immediately replaced them with home made paper logs.

 

3. I NEVER replace a cache that I cannot find ... I'm not Sherlock Holmes, it could be that I simply DNF it ... I log it as a DNF and if I'm certain that it is missing I will mention it and why, if there is a number of DNF's or the CO doesn't respond in some way within a reasonable length of time, I'd post a NM or NA ... I recently DNF a cache which appeared to have been placed at the base of a large round fence straining post. There were a number of such posts nearby and I checked every one of them to no avail. However, what stuck out like a sore thumb was the fact that the farmer had replaced one of the posts. The new post was also a gatepost and it was obvious that the old one had been dug out etc. I am pretty darn certain that the cache had been at the base of the original post and had become lost in the process. I logged it as DNF with a note to the CO letting them know that I believed the cache had been removed/destroyed/lost ... If I had found evidence of a badly damaged cache I would have happily replaced it and reported this to the CO so they could check it when convenient.

 

4. If people wanna shoot me down in flames and exercise their right to hold a different opinion from mine, then please feel free to do so, I'm far too old and experienced in life to let it worry me and just because we happen to have different opinions doesn't mean either of us is right, or wrong, it simply means we have differing opinions of how we perceive and play this game.

 

Now, where the &*$% did I put that hard hat?

 

Edit: Typo's and re-phrasing.

Edited November 18, 2015 by Auld Pharrrt

[+dprovan]

As far as responsibility goes, what do you do in this case.

I've said over and over that in this case, the land manager can set whatever rules he wants.

[+justintim1999]

It helps to identify CO's who are no longer in the game and no longer maintaining their caches.

This is what bothers me about proposals like this: why do we care about the state of the CO if the cache is in good shape? And if the cache isn't in good shape, why hasn't it gone away through the defined NM/NA process?

 

I think it's reasonable for a land manager to force periodic contact with someone given permission to use the land, but I don't think it makes sense to take action against an innocent cache listing with no problems simply because of the CO hasn't followed some arbitrary procedure.

 

Good, we agree that the land manager/owner has the right to set the conditions on how their land is used.

In fact this is the key to solving the posters problem.

 

We should care about the state of the CO. I've mentioned a few reasons why already. The cache may, at the moment, be in good shape physically but that won't always be the case. Why wait until the cache goes bad and people stop fixing it up to start the process of archiving a cache an owner has clearly abandoned.

 

The reason why it hasn't gone through the NM/NA process is because other cachers are fixing up the cache, doing the work the cache owner should be doing.

 

In fact the guidelines state " You are responsible for occasional visits to your cache to ensure it is in proper working order, especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.), or posts a Needs Maintenance log. Temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to search for it until you have addressed the problem. You are permitted a reasonable amount of time – generally up to 4 weeks."

 

The ability to contact the cache owner and their ability to address problems is not arbitrary.

 

I posted a possible solution to the posters problem already. The rest of what were talking about here is arbitrary.

[+Dibley68]

As a land manager, you have the right to dictate some rules for caches on your land - like if CO absent for x time, doesn't sort out maintenance issues in x time, the cache will be removed.

 

If a CO doesn't perform timely maintenance or abandons the cache they why not contact the admins and remove it? It's just a plastic container that has been abandoned. It it's on your land, consider it a littered item and rightly keep your property in order! Let the CO whine about it later.

[+jellis]

I'm in your area. Power caching is becoming a real problem. Lots of throw downs. It's really bothering me too. I'm certain I have a bad reputation because I'm quick to post NMs, then NAs. I try to be quick before the power cachers come along and replace the mouldy log in the leaky or replace the missing container (with another carpy container), then abandon what they've thrown down. Please please help clean up the mess and send a message that caches are long term commitments and responsible cache ownership is important for a quality game that satisfies not just the people who only want another smiley. Also quality caches matter. I know that you set a good example. I wish more people would.

Thanks!

Please keep using NM and NA...HATE it when I see repeated "found it" logs stating logbook is soaked and container cracked but not a single NM. As an owner a NM really jumps at me but if I get 30 "found its" over the weekend I may not read them all. But oddly some (although rarely) of the replacements are actually GOOD containers. (which baffles me for other reasons)

If you don't want to get burned up do what I do. Contact the nearest reviewer or the one who published the caches directly and you won't get torched.

[+Auld Pharrrt]

I'm in your area. Power caching is becoming a real problem. Lots of throw downs. It's really bothering me too. I'm certain I have a bad reputation because I'm quick to post NMs, then NAs. I try to be quick before the power cachers come along and replace the mouldy log in the leaky or replace the missing container (with another carpy container), then abandon what they've thrown down. Please please help clean up the mess and send a message that caches are long term commitments and responsible cache ownership is important for a quality game that satisfies not just the people who only want another smiley. Also quality caches matter. I know that you set a good example. I wish more people would.

Thanks!

Please keep using NM and NA...HATE it when I see repeated "found it" logs stating logbook is soaked and container cracked but not a single NM. As an owner a NM really jumps at me but if I get 30 "found its" over the weekend I may not read them all. But oddly some (although rarely) of the replacements are actually GOOD containers. (which baffles me for other reasons)

If you don't want to get burned up do what I do. Contact the nearest reviewer or the one who published the caches directly and you won't get torched.

 

Now, THERE'S a good bit of advice if ever I saw one ... Thanks Jellis, I'll be adopting this technique for future use, not that it bothered me to post NM or NA messages, but this sounds better.

[+jellis]

I'm in your area. Power caching is becoming a real problem. Lots of throw downs. It's really bothering me too. I'm certain I have a bad reputation because I'm quick to post NMs, then NAs. I try to be quick before the power cachers come along and replace the mouldy log in the leaky or replace the missing container (with another carpy container), then abandon what they've thrown down. Please please help clean up the mess and send a message that caches are long term commitments and responsible cache ownership is important for a quality game that satisfies not just the people who only want another smiley. Also quality caches matter. I know that you set a good example. I wish more people would.

Thanks!

Please keep using NM and NA...HATE it when I see repeated "found it" logs stating logbook is soaked and container cracked but not a single NM. As an owner a NM really jumps at me but if I get 30 "found its" over the weekend I may not read them all. But oddly some (although rarely) of the replacements are actually GOOD containers. (which baffles me for other reasons)

If you don't want to get burned up do what I do. Contact the nearest reviewer or the one who published the caches directly and you won't get torched.

 

Now, THERE'S a good bit of advice if ever I saw one ... Thanks Jellis, I'll be adopting this technique for future use, not that it bothered me to post NM or NA messages, but this sounds better.

Your welcome. I've burned so many times even for good reasons.

[+dprovan]

Now, THERE'S a good bit of advice if ever I saw one ... Thanks Jellis, I'll be adopting this technique for future use, not that it bothered me to post NM or NA messages, but this sounds better.

Please reconsider. The rest of us would like to know there's a problem, too. And I really don't like the idea of making the reviewer the bad guy. I'd rather valid criticism come from within the community, and all the more so if the CO is prone to react negatively.

[+Auld Pharrrt]

Now, THERE'S a good bit of advice if ever I saw one ... Thanks Jellis, I'll be adopting this technique for future use, not that it bothered me to post NM or NA messages, but this sounds better.

Please reconsider. The rest of us would like to know there's a problem, too. And I really don't like the idea of making the reviewer the bad guy. I'd rather valid criticism come from within the community, and all the more so if the CO is prone to react negatively.

 

Most of "the rest of us" would find the info in the previous logs anyway ... which would include mine, but with the help of the local reviewer the cache might get some TLC sooner rather than later/never, besides, our local reviewer is also part of the community under a different username and she is very well respected in my opinion, rather than being seen as the bad gal she's seen as caring about the game.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Auld Pharrrt