Why are people afraid to post NM/NA logs?

[+dprovan]

I'd really appreciate it if those of you who want to argue could do it elsewhere.

 

I posted this thread because I had a genuine query and a lot of people have posted helpful responses. It would be really disappointing to see my thread locked when it could be helpful for others too.

I'm sorry you think your thread's been derailed, but the arguments we're seeing are actually excellent examples that answer your original question: people hesitate to post NMs and NAs because they're afraid they'll get into fights like these. That's why I prefer to focus on how we can avoid such arguments.

 

I was actually expecting you to be annoyed because the thread was derailed from the posting of NMs and NAs to the seemingly unrelated discussion of frequency of check ups, but now I see that that was your doing, so I guess I don't need to worry about that.

[+kunarion]

I'm a bit curious about this. It's become fairly clear that a lot of cachers seem to have a problem with posting NM/NA logs and I don't really understand why. Does anyone have any insight as to why, or has anyone told you the reason they don't want to?

If you are not posting the appropriate NM/NA logs, the you already understand at least some reasons.

 

Every day, the bad containers get worse, and at some point will need NM, but it tends to be a very gradual thing, often over a period of months or years. Cache Owners have individual thresholds for what merits an NM or NA, and insist on their definition with an insane raving and veiled threats ...um... determination. Rather than perform a forensic analysis of a completely soaked, moldy cache container, I add the info to my Found log, as detailed as possible without providing spoilers. Sometimes a cool cache container is literally hanging by its last thread, it's not completely destroyed yet, and it's fine at this moment. So it seriously needs maintenance immediately, but an NM is unacceptable to a CO, since it's fine at this moment.

 

And not too long ago, I added the proper info to my logs as usual, and got email that the CO had a double knee operation this summer, and do I expect him to crawl out there on his elbows and fix the cache for me. I hope you don't mind if you never do understand why people don't post NM logs, because sometimes people just want to Geocache without all the guff.

[+SwineFlew]

I Believe The Lack of friendliness espoused between some pairs of folks participating in their arguments this thread will lead to its demise Indubitably Before The Long-awaited conclusion.

I saw what you did there!!

[MoonPie Mafia]

The last time I posted a NA on a missing cache with several DNF logs within the last year, instead of the volunteer reviewer addressing it the CO posted a armchair maintaince log that they would get around to replacing the cache, as already addressed in a previous armchair maintaince suggesting that the next seeker just replace it with a throwdown. I don't see much point in posting NM or NA if the volunteer reviewer allows armchair maintaince on the cache page.

[+Team Microdot]

The last time I posted a NA on a missing cache with several DNF logs within the last year, instead of the volunteer reviewer addressing it the CO posted a armchair maintaince log that they would get around to replacing the cache, as already addressed in a previous armchair maintaince suggesting that the next seeker just replace it with a throwdown. I don't see much point in posting NM or NA if the volunteer reviewer allows armchair maintaince on the cache page.

 

This might actually be another reason why people save themselves the effort of posting NM/NA - why bother risking the ire of the CO only to have the next 'finder' come along and leave a throw-down anyway?

[+TriciaG]

The last time I posted a NA on a missing cache with several DNF logs within the last year, instead of the volunteer reviewer addressing it the CO posted a armchair maintaince log that they would get around to replacing the cache, as already addressed in a previous armchair maintaince suggesting that the next seeker just replace it with a throwdown. I don't see much point in posting NM or NA if the volunteer reviewer allows armchair maintaince on the cache page.

 

This might actually be another reason why people save themselves the effort of posting NM/NA - why bother risking the ire of the CO only to have the next 'finder' come along and leave a throw-down anyway?

This happened to me. I posted an NA. Someone came along with a throwdown and thought they were doing the community a huge favor. I confess we got into a bit of an argument about it via PM. He got a little personal in his attacks. I could have been extremely polite in my responses, I admit, to try to diffuse the situation rather than preaching at him about the guidelines - but an encounter like that would discourage many people from posting NM/NA logs.

Edited November 9, 2015 by TriciaG

[+justintim1999]

In my player account, I've logged exactly ONE Needs Maintenance, and regretted it. I feel that if the CO is paying attention, they already know the cache needs maintenance, and if they aren't, the log doesn't reach anyone.

 

Actually, in my area, Reviewers are known to pro-actively search using GSAK for caches that have problems and will temp-suspend and give a few weeks for the CO to sort or respond.

 

I really like this system, especially as so many COs leave the game without tidying up after themselves. It all helps to promote a healthy and active hobby that gives a good impression, especially to new cachers.

 

That's it in a nutshell. You post a needs maintenance log to help the responsible cache owner keep their cache in good shape. You also post one to help reviewers weed out caches that are in bad shape and not being taken care of. It is all about keeping the activity healthy and fun.

[+dprovan]

This happened to me. I posted an NA. Someone came along with a throwdown and thought they were doing the community a huge favor. I confess we got into a bit of an argument about it via PM. He got a little personal in his attacks. I could have been extremely polite in my responses, I admit, to try to diffuse the situation rather than preaching at him about the guidelines - but an encounter like that would discourage many people from posting NM/NA logs.

I log NMs and NAs whenever they're needed. And then I forget about it. My job is to report the issue, not to see whether and how it's resolved. That's the CO's job, or the reviewer's job when necessary.

 

I'll let you guys get in fights with the CO and other seekers. Me, I do what I can by posting the info, then I move on. I'd recommend the same attitude to anyone that's worried they couldn't stop themselves from getting into such shouting matches.

[+J Grouchy]

I'm a bit curious about this. It's become fairly clear that a lot of cachers seem to have a problem with posting NM/NA logs and I don't really understand why. Does anyone have any insight as to why, or has anyone told you the reason they don't want to?

If you are not posting the appropriate NM/NA logs, the you already understand at least some reasons.

 

Every day, the bad containers get worse, and at some point will need NM, but it tends to be a very gradual thing, often over a period of months or years. Cache Owners have individual thresholds for what merits an NM or NA, and insist on their definition with an insane raving and veiled threats ...um... determination. Rather than perform a forensic analysis of a completely soaked, moldy cache container, I add the info to my Found log, as detailed as possible without providing spoilers. Sometimes a cool cache container is literally hanging by its last thread, it's not completely destroyed yet, and it's fine at this moment. So it seriously needs maintenance immediately, but an NM is unacceptable to a CO, since it's fine at this moment.

 

And not too long ago, I added the proper info to my logs as usual, and got email that the CO had a double knee operation this summer, and do I expect him to crawl out there on his elbows and fix the cache for me. I hope you don't mind if you never do understand why people don't post NM logs, because sometimes people just want to Geocache without all the guff.

 

I'd rather seriously tick a lazy CO off with an honest NM log than ignore the problem until the condition of the cache ruins or spoils the experience for others. I can ignore curt or sarcastic (or downright abusive) replies. Such reactions often come from a guilty conscience. Plenty of COs take NM logs in the spirit they are intended and don't get all riled up about it.

[+L0ne.R]

The last time I posted a NA on a missing cache with several DNF logs within the last year, instead of the volunteer reviewer addressing it the CO posted a armchair maintaince log that they would get around to replacing the cache, as already addressed in a previous armchair maintaince suggesting that the next seeker just replace it with a throwdown. I don't see much point in posting NM or NA if the volunteer reviewer allows armchair maintaince on the cache page.

 

This might actually be another reason why people save themselves the effort of posting NM/NA - why bother risking the ire of the CO only to have the next 'finder' come along and leave a throw-down anyway?

This happened to me. I posted an NA. Someone came along with a throwdown and thought they were doing the community a huge favor. I confess we got into a bit of an argument about it via PM. He got a little personal in his attacks. I could have been extremely polite in my responses, I admit, to try to diffuse the situation rather than preaching at him about the guidelines - but an encounter like that would discourage many people from posting NM/NA logs.

 

We have a nasty CO here too. Very active on his cache listings but won't go out to fix his caches. Waits for throwdowns. Gets nasty with people who post NMs and NAs. Here's an exchange (there should be a report button for nasty COs):

 

**Cache Owner

Owner Maintenance

Thank you so much for confirming the cache was gone and replacing it, [Throw down cacher]! :-)

**Throw down cacher who needs the find for a challenge cache

20337

Found it

Out on a Challenge run plus a few others. A total of 31 caches today up in the xxxx area.

What a lovely spring day all on my own on those country roads and trails.

I had a spair pill bottle and replaced the missing cache .

TN,LN,SL

This is my 18828 find.

Thanks to [Cache Owner] for placing this cache.

**L0ne R

Didn't find it

Found the 2 symbols of peace (lovely grave marker), and ended up where the hint suggested. Coords were good. Checked attributes for winter friendly and that was there so I assume it would be hanging. Didn't see anything. Checked under rocks anyway. Did not find the cache.

[Hesitant to post an NM, because of previous exchange with Finder1]

**Cache Owner

Write note

October 19 and August 28, 2014 not showing up on your screen? :-)

[Those were Member logs sprinkled among the DNFs that said Found it, nothing about the cache actually being there]

**Finder1

Write note

I did look for it. I didn't search long because the rating is D2 and when checking the logs for help I saw all the last 4 DNFs . Now I see that the DNFs go back to August 1 2014. Before that it was consistently found without trouble. Thanks for responding quickly [Cache Owner]. Looking forward to a return visit.

**Cache Owner

Write note

Deleted Finder1's other last log as it has nothing to do with this cache.

(Needs attention. The cache is likely missing. Rating is D2* and it was consistently found before August 1 2014. Since August there have been 11 DNFs.)

Didn't know the fake geocache police were in town, lol.

**Cache Owner

Write note

Will get it checked on. No idea why Finder1 has anything to do with this cache. Come and look for it and then post your thoughts. It would have been a bit difficult in the winter to find. I will have it checked on for the others who recently have been there and actually looked for it.

**Finder1

Write note

I think this one's gone. It was being found consistently until August 2014. 11 DNFs since August 2014. With a D1 rating it should be a piece of cake to find. Needs attention. Can the cache owner verify that this is still here and in it's proper spot.

Addendum: Oops, meant to log it as Needs Maintenance. But can't change it to NM so changing NA to a Note.

[Posted April 2015 - DNFs go back 8 months]

[+J Grouchy]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

Edited November 9, 2015 by J Grouchy

[+L0ne.R]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

And unfortunately the cache owner also feels that providing a physical cache is irrelevant. I'm sure he would have been happy if everyone just logged a find for visiting the location, and turned the cache into a virtual.

[+Team Microdot]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

[+Manville Possum]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

It appears to me that geocaching is becoming a "Buddy System", community reviewers included. I thought anytime that a NA was posted that it alerted the reviewer and it was looked into, reguardless of if the CO posted "Maintaince" that they would take care of it in a few months.

[+L0ne.R]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

Is there anything that can be done about this trend? Should belligerent cache owners who armchair maintain their caches, intimidate finders, or encourage throwdowns be warned by GS? Maybe have their cache ownership locked for a couple of months so they can't hide more?

[+Team Microdot]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

It appears to me that geocaching is becoming a "Buddy System", community reviewers included. I thought anytime that a NA was posted that it alerted the reviewer and it was looked into, reguardless of if the CO posted "Maintaince" that they would take care of it in a few months.

 

I can only reference our local volunteer reviewer who deals with NA logs in a professional, measured and timely manner

 

Although we have heard from one reviewer in this thread who, using their player account, has posted just one NM log and regretted it which does make me wonder if individual reviewers have individual modus operandi.

[+AustinMN]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

Is there anything that can be done about this trend? Should belligerent cache owners who armchair maintain their caches, intimidate finders, or encourage throwdowns be warned by GS? Maybe have their cache ownership locked for a couple of months so they can't hide more?

 

Don't expect it. My assesment of Groundspeak lately (and maybe it's been like this for a while) is that they also seem to think it is about the numbers...2.7 million hides and counting right on the front page.

[+Mudfrog]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

Is there anything that can be done about this trend? Should belligerent cache owners who armchair maintain their caches, intimidate finders, or encourage throwdowns be warned by GS? Maybe have their cache ownership locked for a couple of months so they can't hide more?

 

I believe that there have been a few caches archived when a reviewer found out that their owners encouraged throwdowns (stated this on the cache page). Armchair maintaining and intimidation can be reported as well. I'm sure this helps at times but then again, i imagine that many times, it turns into a he said-she said type of thing where not a whole lot can be done.

 

What can be done? I admit that i like having my stats but honestly, i'd give them up because i believe alot of these problems would go away if GS's posted public find count went away. Geocaching is no longer a hobby that takes people to an interesting hide and/or location. It's now a game where scoring points is the most important thing.

[+Manville Possum]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

Is there anything that can be done about this trend? Should belligerent cache owners who armchair maintain their caches, intimidate finders, or encourage throwdowns be warned by GS? Maybe have their cache ownership locked for a couple of months so they can't hide more?

 

Don't expect it. My assesment of Groundspeak lately (and maybe it's been like this for a while) is that they also seem to think it is about the numbers...2.7 million hides and counting right on the front page.

 

Exactly, and why risk upsetting a CO with 1200+ hides for armchair maintaince of their missing caches?

[+L0ne.R]

I had a spair [sic] pill bottle and replaced the missing cache.

This is my 18828 find

 

These two sentences right here perfectly illustrate how ridiculous folks who leave throwdowns can be. It also is clear to me that the most important thing to that particular cacher is that number. Not the cache. Not the quality of the hide. Not the location. Not the act of searching and finding. This person finds nothing at all ridiculous about claiming he or she "found" something THEY brought and put down at GZ!

 

This sort of thing is increasingly common and even welcomed by CO's who would rather save themselves a maintenance trip.

 

It's not how I envisaged the activity when I started caching and to me it all seems completely pointless - but I'm almost starting to accept that I might just be in the minority

 

Is there anything that can be done about this trend? Should belligerent cache owners who armchair maintain their caches, intimidate finders, or encourage throwdowns be warned by GS? Maybe have their cache ownership locked for a couple of months so they can't hide more?

 

I believe that there have been a few caches archived when a reviewer found out that their owners encouraged throwdowns (stated this on the cache page). Armchair maintaining and intimidation can be reported as well. I'm sure this helps at times but then again, i imagine that many times, it turns into a he said-she said type of thing where not a whole lot can be done.

 

What can be done? I admit that i like having my stats but honestly, i'd give them up because i believe alot of these problems would go away if GS's posted public find count went away. Geocaching is no longer a hobby that takes people to an interesting hide and/or location. It's now a game where scoring points is the most important thing.

 

I agree. I wish this it were at least an option to keep our find count private. It might at least make people think about what the numbers craze has done to the game and why some cachers don't want to participate.

 

 

 

[+K13]

Given the option, I would gladly hide my find count. Instead, why not make the number of NM and NA logs as the stat displayed? That would certainly get more of them posted, regardless of the CO attitudes.

[+AustinMN]

Given the option, I would gladly hide my find count. Instead, why not make the number of NM and NA logs as the stat displayed? That would certainly get more of them posted, regardless of the CO attitudes.

 

I don't know. It might also result in more CO's getting irate about NM..."why didn't yopu email?"

And it could result in cachers refusing to log NM/NA because they don't want to mess up another cacher's stats.

Edited November 10, 2015 by AustinMN

[+Team Microdot]

Given the option, I would gladly hide my find count. Instead, why not make the number of NM and NA logs as the stat displayed? That would certainly get more of them posted, regardless of the CO attitudes.

 

It just occurred to me that my bold would very much depend on what those stats indicated

 

Are we talking about the number of NM/NA logs posted - or the number of NM/NA logs received by a CO?

 

I think making the latter a highly visible stat would be interesting

[+Team Hugs]

Maybe we're thinking about the 'solution' to this problem backwards.

 

Instead of punishing bad behavior (by both finders and owners), how about rewarding good behavior?

 

Coincidentally, two stories this week from my caching adventures:

• Thursday, I found a cache that was in desperate need of maintenance. A NM log had been made a couple of months earlier, but without much detail. I posted a detailed NM log, describing the problem, along with my primitive attempts to deal with it onsite. (It was a lock-and-lock with two broken latches, hence no longer water-tight, with predictable results.) A day later, the CO disabled the cache, thanking me in the log for my NM log and pledging to fix it "soon".
• Just today (Saturday), I spent close to an hour looking for a cache from one of our local owners who has a penchant for unusual, re-purposed cache containers, in a particularly difficult spot. Eventually had to give up and move on. I logged my DNF when I returned home. The CO went out later that day to check on it (it was only rated a 2/2, so shouldn't have been that hard) and reported that the cache site had been trashed and the container taken. She immediately archived the cache, thanking me for reporting the problem.

Okay, I'm blowing my own horn here a bit. But, dagnabbit, it felt good to know that these COs appreciated my "negative" logs, as it alerted them to issues. It makes me feel a little better about logging NMs/DNFs.

 

I don't know how one rewards good behavior by finders. If cache finders can give favorite points to 10% of their found caches, could cache owners give favorite points to 10% of the logs posted on their caches?

[+DarkZen]

A couple of thoughts from central California.

The reviewers here are great and seem to take the responsibility of NM and NA seriously.

As a dedicated CO myself I post NM logs as needed. I try to do so in as polite a manner as possible. Same for NA. I believe it helps elevate the experience for everyone. If you are going to take up real estate by hosting a cache on it, you need to be prepared to do the work required to maintain it.

 

Regarding the numbers issue, while not a big numbers fan myself, I see the value in having a cachers stats posted. I think I have about 5-600 hides. That's a lot of maintainance. I keep track of the DNFs and NM logs and dedicate at least one weekend a month to just that. If I get a "It's gone" log (happens more than you might think) the first thing I do is check their find number. If they only have 5 finds (for example) I'll wait for another DNF before checking on it. If they have hundreds or more I'll move it up in importance.

 

Of course that's just a general guideline. I've had finders with thousands of finds DNF easy ones too. And I don't put more value in high numbers than low numbers but experience does count when finding.

[+schnuz]

Reading through this and having submitted to it as well, it is a tired old argument, rhetoric garbage and I am surprised the moderators haven't put it to bed. Just post a NM when you think it is needed and COs get over the belief that you are holier than the people finding your cache. You hid for the finder in the first place!

 

I have finally read through the thread at least once, something that I suspect you haven't done thoroughly enough. I may be wrong in that assumption but your post would point to not actually reading some of the evidence put forward as to why cachers in some area's are reluctant to post NM and heaven forbid NA logs on caches which have an issue. I have no such a problem but as highlighted intimidation from certain CO's can be an issue, at least in our area. That would be answering the query directly. If it is such a "tired old argument" then surely it should be created as a sticky post to prevent it from raising again?

 

The serious problem with lack of owner active maintenance should be dealt with at base level. Caches should not be left to deteriorate and rot by those who get exited and leave early on nor even those that continue to cache but can't be bothered to maintain the caches they set. "community maintenance" doesn't actually exist according to the guidelines. That is a nicety between between mates who know the other would perform the required maintenance if required. Unfortunately in our area there are several prolific setters who think "community maintenance" is the norm and not their actual responsibility . If caches are left to "naturally" end their life who will actually go and pick up the geotrash? When I post a NM or NA on a cache I put it on my watchlist for that reason, I go and remove the geolitter. That is because I care about the pastime and reinforces Team Microdot's point about how a cache will magically sort it's self out without human intervention. If a cache is archived all well and good but who goes out and picks up the geolitter? The reviewer who archived it? I don't think so.

 

Happy Caching and trouble free trading.

 

Cheers

 

Schnuz.

 

Hahaarrgghh yeah goin' to PIRATEMANIA 9, not that it's been arranged yet? Be thar or be keel hauled!

The only MEGA PIRATE event in the UK to attend.

 

Hahaarrgghh, be seein' yah thar yah filthy landlubber!

[+schnuz]

Maybe we're thinking about the 'solution' to this problem backwards.

 

Instead of punishing bad behavior (by both finders and owners), how about rewarding good behavior?

 

Coincidentally, two stories this week from my caching adventures:

• Thursday, I found a cache that was in desperate need of maintenance. A NM log had been made a couple of months earlier, but without much detail. I posted a detailed NM log, describing the problem, along with my primitive attempts to deal with it onsite. (It was a lock-and-lock with two broken latches, hence no longer water-tight, with predictable results.) A day later, the CO disabled the cache, thanking me in the log for my NM log and pledging to fix it "soon".
• Just today (Saturday), I spent close to an hour looking for a cache from one of our local owners who has a penchant for unusual, re-purposed cache containers, in a particularly difficult spot. Eventually had to give up and move on. I logged my DNF when I returned home. The CO went out later that day to check on it (it was only rated a 2/2, so shouldn't have been that hard) and reported that the cache site had been trashed and the container taken. She immediately archived the cache, thanking me for reporting the problem.

Okay, I'm blowing my own horn here a bit. But, dagnabbit, it felt good to know that these COs appreciated my "negative" logs, as it alerted them to issues. It makes me feel a little better about logging NMs/DNFs.

 

I don't know how one rewards good behavior by finders. If cache finders can give favorite points to 10% of their found caches, could cache owners give favorite points to 10% of the logs posted on their caches?

 

I know what you mean, I always try to give value for money with my logs.

 

I even briefly tried a mostly cut and paste log for drivebys this year with the thought of trying to remove more from my PQ. That went down like a lead balloon possibly due to me not realising that stating that "I preferred to find caches on a decent team walk and I was only finding it to get rid of it from the PQ" might be deemed criticism . It was all very polite but it would seem that those cache setters would prefer a simple TFTC to an explanation of why I hadn't rushed with bated breath within minutes of it's publication to go and find a poorly placed cache . One drive by even got a favourite point for it's novelty value, something that sits high up on my criteria list and that was the reason for not just putting all drive bys on the ignore list (which would mean a lot of hard work in our area ).

 

I have had a few replies thanking me for my found logs logs but if memory serves me correctly only one note of thanks from what seems to be considered a "negative" log and that wasn't from the local area.

 

DNF's certainly aren't negative, although some CO's seem to feel that they are. A detailed DNF should give the CO enough relevant info for them to know if the cache is likely to still be there or not. There have been times that I have been barking up completely the wrong tree at one point and later gone back and found it no problem with no CO intervention . The cache had been there but at first visit I failed to find it.

 

NM posts shouldn't be seen as negative but an alert to a cache that is under the weather and , as it says on the can, needs maintenance. I admit to having a couple of NM posts on a few of my caches but they are on a longer local dog walk so I rely on honest logs on those, as if . I treat a NM post as an immediate heads up to go and sort the cache out. Would I like to find a cache that is grotty? Not even slightly so I drop any sort of caching plans and go do a maintenance visit. If I can't do it that day then the cache gets disabled with a decent note as to why and when the cache will be looked at. None of which contains "I've got a briar full of Alsbo cherry and a wingback in front of a roaring hearth" .

 

NA posts should perhaps be seen as a negative, but only if no ACTIVE CO action has taken place after a reasonable period of time after a NM post. Of course there may be exceptions but those are my thoughts on cache logs.

 

As a CO I always try to send off a "thank you" message to those who give a detailed log. The mental list sometimes gets a little long though and despite taking notes some may slip through the cracks, real life does take precedence as always, after all it is only a game . Apologies are also usually sent if the cache was missing with the proviso that "you can log it as found as it really wasn't there if you want to". That mostly comes back with a reply of "thanks but I will log a find when I find it" .

 

I do like the idea of favourite points for logs on caches I may be up for a few .

 

Happy caching.

 

Cheers.

 

Schnuz.

 

Hahaarrgghh yeah goin' to PIRATEMANIA 9 (not that it's been arranged yet, more details in the future)? Be thar or be keel hauled!

The only MEGA PIRATE event in the UK to attend?

 

Hahaarrgghh, be seein' yah thar yah filthy landlubber!