Just Replace the Log

[+Sagefox]

Why, just this weekend up pops another chance to help out.

 

There are some responsibilities that go along with removing a temporary log.

[+Team Microdot]

Why, just this weekend up pops another chance to help out.

 

There are some responsibilities that go along with removing a temporary log.

 

Was the cache still a broken glass jar, seemingly abandoned by the CO?

[+Sagefox]

Was the cache still a broken glass jar, seemingly abandoned by the CO?

No. It is a nice sized watertight squarish plastic jar, pretzels maybe, fully camo-taped, in great condition, seemingly replaced by someone other than the CO though it could be the CO. There is a photo of it on the cache page.

[+L0ne.R]

Why, just this weekend up pops another chance to help out.

 

There are some responsibilities that go along with removing a temporary log.

 

Was the cache still a broken glass jar, seemingly abandoned by the CO?

 

I noticed that too. Looking into it further, back in 2010 it was a ziploc throwaway container and this photo was captioned "Cracked, Wet, and Funky":

 

 

The owner's last OM was July 2013. Each time he replaced the cache it was with another leaky container: ziplock container, dollar store snap lock, glass mayonnaise jar. The leopard duct tape encased nut jar mysteriously appeared sometime after August 21 2015, but there has been no OM or note from the cache owner since 2013.

 

Propping up this listing shows a disregard for for responsible cache ownership.

[+Sagefox]

I noticed that too. Looking into it further, back in 2010 it was a ziploc throwaway container and this photo was captioned "Cracked, Wet, and Funky":

 

Yes, one could search through the photos to find the worst possible if one wanted to make a case against the absent owner. If I had found the container in your posted photo I would have posted a NM.

 

But here, someone chose to add regular sized container and took the time to make it nice. Not exactly a prop-up throw-down. It's held up well through one of our wettest falls on record and it is in a very nice location. The cache is now probably in the best condition it's ever been in.

 

Here is a pic that actually represents the current condition.

 

 

Propping up this listing shows a disregard for responsible cache ownership.

 

No, it shows that people care about this one particular cache and want to keep it alive.

 

If the situation gets to be irresponsible in the future, likely inevitable, then NM/NA will take care of it but, for now, folks get to keep their archive cannons holstered and go on about the business of having fun caching.

[+noncentric]

I noticed that too. Looking into it further, back in 2010 it was a ziploc throwaway container and this photo was captioned "Cracked, Wet, and Funky":

 

Yes, one could search through the photos to find the worst possible if one wanted to make a case against the absent owner. If I had found the container in your posted photo I would have posted a NM.

 

But here, someone chose to add regular sized container and took the time to make it nice. Not exactly a prop-up throw-down. It's held up well through one of our wettest falls on record and it is in a very nice location. The cache is now probably in the best condition it's ever been in.

 

Here is a pic that actually represents the current condition.

 

 

It looks like the cache's condition is relatively unchanged from the 10/14/2015 photo that was posted by another finder. I remember the location of this cache, which I found at the end of February. It was a nice spot.

[+boothie103]

You can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear. If it needs maintenance of any form, post a needs maintenance. It can not get any easier. Just do it for the sake of the game!

[+Inmountains]

"You can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear. If it needs maintenance of any form, post a needs maintenance. It can not get any easier. Just do it for the sake of the game! "

 

Actually, you can throw away the pigs ear and replace it with a silk purse. It can not get any easier, just do it for the sake of the game. If the cache is a really neat location and you find a damaged container, AND the CO is unable to replace it, then replace it. I started caching in Colorado and live in California. I have a few great caches but there is no way I can maintain them, so I have encouraged other's to REPLACE the container if it gets damaged since it sees temperatures that range from -25F to 100F. Also, my mother had some wonderful caches and I do my best to maintain them since she DIED in 2010. I was still in Colorado when she passed away so I encouraged other's to replace her damaged caches until I could move to CA and maintain them myself.

 

In a PERFECT world, ALL Cache Owner's would maintain their caches. BUT, REAL LIFE takes place and we need to make adjustments. Maybe a CO is a military member and got deployed overseas for a year. It would be an HONOR to replace her/his cache IF it needed it. Maybe a CO has had a horrible injury or debilitating illness. The list goes on and on. To "NEVER REPLACE" or "ALWAYS REPLACE" is an attribute of the DARK SIDE, dealing in absolutes. Use the Force, my young padawan, aka COMMON SENSE!!!

[+L0ne.R]

1450309736[/url]' post='5553843']

"You can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear. If it needs maintenance of any form, post a needs maintenance. It can not get any easier. Just do it for the sake of the game! "

 

Actually, you can throw away the pigs ear and replace it with a silk purse. It can not get any easier, just do it for the sake of the game. If the cache is a really neat location and you find a damaged container, AND the CO is unable to replace it, then replace it. I started caching in Colorado and live in California. I have a few great caches but there is no way I can maintain them, so I have encouraged other's to REPLACE the container if it gets damaged since it sees temperatures that range from -25F to 100F. Also, my mother had some wonderful caches and I do my best to maintain them since she DIED in 2010. I was still in Colorado when she passed away so I encouraged other's to replace her damaged caches until I could move to CA and maintain them myself.

 

In a PERFECT world, ALL Cache Owner's would maintain their caches. BUT, REAL LIFE takes place and we need to make adjustments. Maybe a CO is a military member and got deployed overseas for a year. It would be an HONOR to replace her/his cache IF it needed it. Maybe a CO has had a horrible injury or debilitating illness. The list goes on and on. To "NEVER REPLACE" or "ALWAYS REPLACE" is an attribute of the DARK SIDE, dealing in absolutes. Use the Force, my young padawan, aka COMMON SENSE!!!

.

If it's a nice area, someone else might enjoy cache ownership at that spot.

Edited December 17, 2015 by L0ne.R

[+Inmountains]

loNE.r, I agree, IN A PERFECT WORLD. IF the CO would archive the cache, then it opens the area up for a new cache. But what if the CO can't archive the cache for reasons unknown (like being dead) Waiting for a Moderator/Cache Reviewer to archive a cache can take a LONG time. Totally replacing an entire cache is not something I have done very much, maybe less than a dozen times. But fixing a cache with duct tape, glue or bailing wire AND letting the CO know it needs maintenance, is something I have done many, many times.

[+niraD]

But what if the CO can't archive the cache for reasons unknown (like being dead) Waiting for a Moderator/Cache Reviewer to archive a cache can take a LONG time.

It can take an even LONGER time if no one bothers to post NM or NA logs...

[+Sagefox]

I think this game is still more experimental than institutional.

 

In this topic we are looking at essentially two different ways of handling caches found in need of maintenance other than ignoring them. (This is a separate condition from replacing a container that appears to be missing.)

 

One premise is that if the cache needs a new log or other maintenance the finders should not do any work unless first contacting the owner and should post a Needs Maintenance log if they, the finders, don't correct the problem and that this procedure should be followed in nearly all cases. This more on the institutional side.

 

The other is that some folks choose to do a bit maintenance on the spot usually without contacting anyone when the conditions seem to warrant an action. This is typically done, to coin a phrase often used in the forum old days, "in the spirit of geocaching". It's done on a case-by-case basis depending on several factors. This is more of an experimental approach because there is no set policy by the finders to take action or not or how often they will do so. NMs and NAs may, or may not be posted if this cacher does not do maintenance.

 

These two methods will continue for as long as the game goes on because most geocachers don't read the forums and it certainly will never be resolved here anyway. Whenever this topic comes up many of us jump back in because it seems that the readers, new to the forums, should hear both sides and make their own decisions.

 

I don't see anything wrong with either method and have done my share of both. In 14 years of geocaching I have posted over 60 NAs and all but a few were archived a short time later because the COs never responded. The key is in reading the situation and assuming what will happen next.

 

When I do maintenance on a cache that I know is doomed I am not concerned about its future. It will be weeded out eventually, just not the day I visit and decide to do something. Time will work it all out.

[+J Grouchy]

When I do maintenance on a cache that I know is doomed I am not concerned about its future.

 

Sounds to me like you don't care if subsequent finders have an unpleasant experience, just as long as you get your smilie and the knowledge you put off its inevitable death a little longer.

[+L0ne.R]

Did any of you who don't prop up caches, start off propping caches then changed your mind?

[+hzoi]

Maybe a CO is a military member and got deployed overseas for a year. It would be an HONOR to replace her/his cache IF it needed it.

I appreciate the sentiment, but as a military cacher, I would remind other military cachers to make arrangements to maintain, adopt, or archive caches prior to deployment or PCS (moving) and not just pull up stakes and rely on the goodwill of other cachers.

 

Did any of you who don't prop up caches, start off propping caches then changed your mind?

 

I did, especially when I was in Charlottesville, Virginia, for a year. There were not many caches around, and many had been placed by students who later left without archiving them. So I did a lot of propping up, knowing that I wasn't able to hide many caches due to my not staying in the community long. Part of my reasoning was to do good for the other cachers around, but part of it was selfish, i.e., by replacing a crappy cache, I could log a find. Which is why I will replace logs these days (if I have one, and if it is full or missing, not if it is mush from a bad container because mine will turn to mush as well) but not caches.

Edited December 17, 2015 by hzoi

[+Mudfrog]

I have a few great caches but there is no way I can maintain them, so I have encouraged other's to REPLACE the container if it gets damaged

 

I agree, IN A PERFECT WORLD. IF the CO would archive the cache, then it opens the area up for a new cache.

Some contradictions here i'd say.

 

 

Did any of you who don't prop up caches, start off propping caches then changed your mind?

Yes. I've tried to help keep a few nicer caches going after their owners quit or moved off. I really thought i was doing my good deed but it was all for naught. Time would get in the way or i'd forget to check and they would end up becoming trash after a bit. It would have been better if the caches had been adopted out or archived by their owners in the first place.

[+Inmountains]

Mudfrog, no contradiction. I have some GREAT caches back in Colorado where I used to live, one of them cost me over $100.00 to create. But I moved to CA after the death of my mother so I encourage others to insert a new log if it needs it. PLUS, I have been back twice in the five years since I left, so I do inspect it when I am there. PLUS, I was the ONLY cacher in that town, so who would I be opening the area up to?

 

On a side note, congrats to MudFrog and Team Sagefox, cachers who started way back in THE Renaissance Era of Geocaching. Although I didn't log a cache until August, 2002, I have been caching since September, 2000. Weren't THOSE THE DAYS!!! Driving 60 miles, one way, just to find ONE cache! Printing out 4 pages per cache!

[+Sagefox]

When I do maintenance on a cache that I know is doomed I am not concerned about its future.

 

Sounds to me like you don't care if subsequent finders have an unpleasant experience, just as long as you get your smilie and the knowledge you put off its inevitable death a little longer.

That is an oddly illogical take and it's curious to me why you chose that item out of the entire post.

 

Because I did maintenance subsequent finders will have a better experience than I did, be it slightly better because of a new log or much better because I cleaned out the mess. I don't know why this point is so hard to get across.

 

If all I was after was a smiley why would I even consider doing any maintenance?

[+J Grouchy]

When I do maintenance on a cache that I know is doomed I am not concerned about its future.

 

Sounds to me like you don't care if subsequent finders have an unpleasant experience, just as long as you get your smilie and the knowledge you put off its inevitable death a little longer.

That is an oddly illogical take and it's curious to me why you chose that item out of the entire post.

 

Because I did maintenance subsequent finders will have a better experience than I did, be it slightly better because of a new log or much better because I cleaned out the mess. I don't know why this point is so hard to get across.

 

If all I was after was a smiley why would I even consider doing any maintenance?

 

Maybe the next finder...or next five finders will have a better experience. Problem is, the cache is more than likely a failure at a basic level (bad container, exposed location, etc.), so it will eventually return to its pre-fixed state. Using your own words, I don't know why this point is so hard to get across...

[+L0ne.R]

If all I was after was a smiley why would I even consider doing any maintenance?

 

I think, for the most part, people who leave a new logsheet in a soaked moldy cache do it because they don't feel they can count it as a smiley unless they sign a log.

 

If you found this, what would you do?

 

 

[+dprovan]

Did any of you who don't prop up caches, start off propping caches then changed your mind?

Well, I admit I never went so far as to do what anyone would consider propping up a cache, but I did start out thinking I could help out by fixing up caches, although that never amounted to more than replacing a wet log or adding a baggie. But with experience, I realized that many of the problems I ran into had already been "fixed up", and the fixing up hadn't really do any good. Once that dawned on me, I stopped doing anything beyond adding paper if I couldn't sign the existing log.

 

I think, for the most part, people who leave a new logsheet in a soaked moldy cache do it because they don't feel they can count it as a smiley unless they sign a log.

Yep, that's me. I admit frankly that the reason I put a new logsheet (which, in my case, is a page torn out of my notepad) is so I can sign it, and it's only incidental that others after me can also sign it.

 

I don't mind people adding a log, I only mind when they do it but don't post an NM about the overall problem that required them replacing the log. Replacing a full log doesn't require an NM, but replacing a soggy log implies that the cache makes logs soggy, and that needs to be fixed.

[+Sagefox]

If you found this, what would you do?

I already told you what I would do in post #105. I don't think you read my posts in total based on your responses to them.

[+Sagefox]

Maybe the next finder...or next five finders will have a better experience. Problem is, the cache is more than likely a failure at a basic level (bad container, exposed location, etc.), so it will eventually return to its pre-fixed state. Using your own words, I don't know why this point is so hard to get across...

Using my own words from the rest of the paragraph you previously quoted from my post #112, "It will be weeded out eventually, just not the day I visit and decide to do something. Time will work it all out."

 

What is the hurry?

 

Do we have an obligation to hasten a cache's demise simply because we suspect (or even know) it is a failure at a basic level?

 

Can you show me that there is any actual harm done in letting the cache live five finders longer?

[+Team Microdot]

Can you show me that there is any actual harm done in letting the cache live five finders longer?

 

That would really depend on how long it took for those five finders to come along - if the container is already inadequate to keep the contents dry.

 

It would also depend on the finders.

 

Newbies finding a junky cache might quickly come to the conclusion that this is the standard they can expect from future caches and decide to invest their time doing something else and thus miss out on many great experiences. Or they might think that it's OK to put out junky caches and start putting them out themselves.

 

In terms of harm this would admittedly be small - nobody would be likely to die or break a leg or anything like that but I'd say that the game would be harmed and the reputation of geocachers in general.

[+fizzymagic]

Propping up this listing shows a disregard for for responsible cache ownership.

 

Maybe you have forgotten, but I asked you very nicely for an example from your own caches that demonstrates "responsible cache ownership."

 

I'd really love to see how you walk the walk you impose on others.

[+Colonial Cats]

Propping up this listing shows a disregard for for responsible cache ownership.

 

Maybe you have forgotten, but I asked you very nicely for an example from your own caches that demonstrates "responsible cache ownership."

 

I'd really love to see how you walk the walk you impose on others.

You obviously agree that the best defense is a good offense. Lone.R owes you nothing; no example and no explanation. You should respond to the topic only and not disparage posters.

[+fizzymagic]

Lone.R owes you nothing; no example and no explanation. You should respond to the topic only and not disparage posters.

 

I am not disparaging anyone. I am asking for an example to show how it should be done. How is that disparaging? I am trying to counter some truly disturbing negativity here.

 

Lone.R owes me nothing; however, her position would be a lot more defensible if she could lead by example.

 

Cache owners have generously hidden caches for us to find.

 

There is incessant complaining in the forums about how those hides are not up to the seekers' standards, and labeling of those cache owners as not "responsible" owners. To my mind, that is like getting a Christmas present and complaining it is not wrapped in nice enough paper.

 

Clearly, several on this forum disagree; they feel entitled to high-quality caches at no cost to themselves. I believe that such people should be prepared to back up their position with evidence that they themselves live up to the standards they set for others.

[+Team Microdot]

There is incessant complaining in the forums about how those hides are not up to the seekers' standards, and labeling of those cache owners as not "responsible" owners. To my mind, that is like getting a Christmas present and complaining it is not wrapped in nice enough paper.

 

To my mind we are talking about dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements. If that's your idea of Christmas, you have my sympathy.

 

Clearly, several on this forum disagree; they feel entitled to high-quality caches at no cost to themselves. I believe that such people should be prepared to back up their position with evidence that they themselves live up to the standards they set for others.

 

And yet you seem to have chosen to attempt interrogate a single individual rather than your several

[+noncentric]

There is incessant complaining in the forums about how those hides are not up to the seekers' standards, and labeling of those cache owners as not "responsible" owners. To my mind, that is like getting a Christmas present and complaining it is not wrapped in nice enough paper.

 

To my mind we are talking about dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements. If that's your idea of Christmas, you have my sympathy.

I thought this thread was talking about log sheets. It didn't take long (dozen posts) for the discussion to move to cache containers, "junk caches", and "negligent cache ownership". I've added (not replaced) waterproof log sheets in a handful of caches, so apparently I'm guilty of enabling the aforementioned "negligent cache ownership".

 

Clearly, several on this forum disagree; they feel entitled to high-quality caches at no cost to themselves. I believe that such people should be prepared to back up their position with evidence that they themselves live up to the standards they set for others.

 

And yet you seem to have chosen to attempt interrogate a single individual rather than your several

I'm guessing this is related to how several people's hides are viewable from their profiles, but a single individual's hides are not viewable. Personally, I find it distasteful that someone says 95% of CO's lack pride in cache ownership (post #22) while concealing their own hide history.

[+J Grouchy]

Maybe the next finder...or next five finders will have a better experience. Problem is, the cache is more than likely a failure at a basic level (bad container, exposed location, etc.), so it will eventually return to its pre-fixed state. Using your own words, I don't know why this point is so hard to get across...

Using my own words from the rest of the paragraph you previously quoted from my post #112, "It will be weeded out eventually, just not the day I visit and decide to do something. Time will work it all out."

 

What is the hurry?

 

Do we have an obligation to hasten a cache's demise simply because we suspect (or even know) it is a failure at a basic level?

 

Can you show me that there is any actual harm done in letting the cache live five finders longer?

 

Don't confuse "hastening" with "letting it go". Hastening its demise would be actively trying to make it go away. I advocate letting it die a natural death...as opposed to prolonging its life unnaturally, which is what you seem to enjoy doing.

 

Harm? Who said that would harm anything? Certainly not me. I question the premise that its actually helping anything at all.

[+Team Microdot]

There is incessant complaining in the forums about how those hides are not up to the seekers' standards, and labeling of those cache owners as not "responsible" owners. To my mind, that is like getting a Christmas present and complaining it is not wrapped in nice enough paper.

 

To my mind we are talking about dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements. If that's your idea of Christmas, you have my sympathy.

I thought this thread was talking about log sheets. It didn't take long (dozen posts) for the discussion to move to cache containers, "junk caches", and "negligent cache ownership". I've added (not replaced) waterproof log sheets in a handful of caches, so apparently I'm guilty of enabling the aforementioned "negligent cache ownership".

 

Which means the discussion has had a broader context than the OP for most of the thread. Unsurprising really, to me at least, that a thread relating to replacing logs for others has evolved into related areas such as why those logs might need replacing and the implications - good and bad - of replacing them.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Long thread but two thoughts :

1. Pro...adding a log will keep a cache going and enhance the experience of future finders.

2. Con...adding a log keeps a dilapidated cache in play and encourages lax maintenance by CO's.

 

I'm in the first group but I have news for you.....both are true. I think we need to take our pick and let it go. Problem is on this forum if you advocate #1 you get hammered.

[knowschad]

Lone.R owes you nothing; no example and no explanation. You should respond to the topic only and not disparage posters.

 

I am not disparaging anyone. I am asking for an example to show how it should be done.

 

Please provide an example of an example that you would actually accept. It seems to me that you are merely baiting, and that you wouldn't accept any example she or anyone else could provide.

[+J Grouchy]

Long thread but two thoughts :

1. Pro...adding a log will keep a cache going and enhance the experience of future finders.

2. Con...adding a log keeps a dilapidated cache in play and encourages lax maintenance by CO's.

 

I'm in the first group but I have news for you.....both are true. I think we need to take our pick and let it go. Problem is on this forum if you advocate #1 you get hammered.

 

Problem is you rarely know if the CO will do proper maintenance...and quite often #1 and #2 end up being the same, enhancing the experience only up to a point.

[+niraD]

Did any of you who don't prop up caches, start off propping caches then changed your mind?

I'm currently somewhere in the middle. I still carry weatherproof log sheets and other maintenance supplies with me, but I no longer try to fix up every cache I encounter. It's a judgement call, but I try to make sure I'm doing a favor for an active cache owner, rather than propping up an abandoned cache.

[+KC2WI]

If a find a cache I log it whether or not I can sign the log. Not my fault if the log is full or wet or the container is broken, full of water, rusted shut or anything else. CO is responsible for maintenance.

 

However if I can perform reasonably simple maintenance I usually do it and notify the CO. If it is minor I just note it when I log the find. If the cache really needs maintenance I post a NM.

 

A slightly damp cache might just be so because someone failed to properly close it or found/opened/signed when it was raining. A cache full of water probably means the container needs replacing and that is a CO responsibility.

 

If I replace a log that is so wet that it would make the container and/or any replacement log wet, then I take the old log and send a note to the CO and offer to send them the old log or a scan of it. I have never had any CO respond.

 

Being a CO, I know that sometimes it may take a while to do cache maintenance. In the grand scheme of life, this is only a game and not very important. However if after a reasonable time a CO doesn't respond to NM or even just info in 'found it' entries, then the cache should be archived. If it is popular enough that the geocaching community is keeping it alive, then there should be someone willing to take over the cache. If the CO doesn't respond to NM or a request to adopt the cache, then the reviewer should be willing to respond to another geocacher who is requesting that the cache be archived so he/she can place a replacement in the same spot to keep the cache alive.

Edited December 18, 2015 by KC2WI

[+fizzymagic]

Lone.R owes you nothing; no example and no explanation. You should respond to the topic only and not disparage posters.

 

I am not disparaging anyone. I am asking for an example to show how it should be done.

 

Please provide an example of an example that you would actually accept. It seems to me that you are merely baiting, and that you wouldn't accept any example she or anyone else could provide.

 

I would accept any example. None has been forthcoming.

[+Viajero Perdido]

<aside>

Hey, my cache is famous! (It was called Below High Tide, which may hint at the maintenance challenges it faced...)

 

Anyway, the cacher who took the picture posted a Found It plus an NM, and I replaced the container and contents shortly thereafter. Pretty much the way it should work, if you ask me.

</aside>

[knowschad]

Lone.R owes you nothing; no example and no explanation. You should respond to the topic only and not disparage posters.

 

I am not disparaging anyone. I am asking for an example to show how it should be done.

 

Please provide an example of an example that you would actually accept. It seems to me that you are merely baiting, and that you wouldn't accept any example she or anyone else could provide.

 

I would accept any example. None has been forthcoming.

Perhaps because people do not feel the need to convince you of what the validity of their experience as much as you seem to need it.

[+The Jester]

I'm not sure you've actually read or understood the thread properly - or you've got the wrong end of the stick somewhere.

And you will always go to the "stinking geolitter" level anytime someone mentions helping a fellow cacher. Did you read his post? A wet log does NOT equate to a bad cache/stinking geolitter/stinking boxes of rubbish. It can happen with a perfectly good ammo can when someone closes something in the seal. And the first person who finds with a wet log in a cache can help by drying the log, adding a dry sheet or such, since the CO has no idea that there is a wet log - until that find is posted.

 

Will I? Are you sure about that? Your mind-reading skills must be pretty sharp

I guess my mind reading was pretty sharp:

To my mind we are talking about dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements. If that's your idea of Christmas, you have my sympathy.

[+fizzymagic]

Perhaps because people do not feel the need to convince you of what the validity of their experience as much as you seem to need it.

 

I have asked you politely in the past to please refrain from personal attacks. In light of this quite personal attack, I ask again.

[+GeoBain]

Long thread but two thoughts :

1. Pro...adding a log will keep a cache going and enhance the experience of future finders.

2. Con...adding a log keeps a dilapidated cache in play and encourages lax maintenance by CO's.

 

I'm in the first group but I have news for you.....both are true. I think we need to take our pick and let it go. Problem is on this forum if you advocate #1 you get hammered.

 

This is the crux of the issue, in a succinct statement.

 

Don't worry about the forums. Choose your path and as long as you sleep well at night, so be it.

[+GeoBain]

Perhaps because people do not feel the need to convince you of what the validity of their experience as much as you seem to need it.

 

I have asked you politely in the past to please refrain from personal attacks. In light of this quite personal attack, I ask again.

 

I do not see the personal attack, personally.

 

But I will say that just because someone has not hidden a cache (even though the lack of hides under a particular user account proves nothing), this does not invalidate one's opinion on what proper cache maintenance should look like.

[Dulce-Joy]

Perhaps because people do not feel the need to convince you of what the validity of their experience as much as you seem to need it.

 

I have asked you politely in the past to please refrain from personal attacks. In light of this quite personal attack, I ask again.

 

I do not see the personal attack, personally.

 

But I will say that just because someone has not hidden a cache (even though the lack of hides under a particular user account proves nothing), this does not invalidate one's opinion on what proper cache maintenance should look like.

+1

[Boomhawr]

HAHA. 1 of the caches I'm about to go hunt for today had a DNF asking the CO to check and see if it's still there. The next log (not from the CO) said, "Placed a temporary cache until the CO can make a permanent replacement".

[+boothie103]

I would love to add a vitriolic post concerning this issue, but if I did, I know I would get banned from this site. So all I am going to say is if the cache is broken in any way, especially if you find one of mine broken, please post a NM. So please grow to maturity and learn that a NM is on the same level as pest control!

[knowschad]

Perhaps because people do not feel the need to convince you of what the validity of their experience as much as you seem to need it.

 

I have asked you politely in the past to please refrain from personal attacks. In light of this quite personal attack, I ask again.

 

That was not a personal attack. I'm sorry you see it that way because I was simply saying that people don't have to always prove to someone else why they feel the way they do. Not being able to feeling the need to prove it to someone else's satisfaction doesn't make their opinion wrong.

Edited December 19, 2015 by knowschad

[+fizzymagic]

Not being able to feeling the need to prove it to someone else's satisfaction doesn't make their opinion wrong.

 

In a normal discussion (remember, this is a discussion, not a posting of random opinions) smearing a large group of cache owners with a judgement such as "they are not responsible cache owners" generally requires some support.

 

In particular, denigrating a group for not meeting someone's standards, in a normal discussion, would entail some demonstration that the person doing the criticism would meet the same standards they set for others.

 

We are not talking about the validity of someone's experience. At least I am not. I am discussing the validity of someone's smearing of a wide group of cachers.

[+niraD]

I would accept any example. None has been forthcoming.

When was the last time L0ne.R replied to any of your posts?

 

If you're on someone's ignored users list, then a reply may not be forthcoming.

[+Team Microdot]

I'm not sure you've actually read or understood the thread properly - or you've got the wrong end of the stick somewhere.

And you will always go to the "stinking geolitter" level anytime someone mentions helping a fellow cacher. Did you read his post? A wet log does NOT equate to a bad cache/stinking geolitter/stinking boxes of rubbish. It can happen with a perfectly good ammo can when someone closes something in the seal. And the first person who finds with a wet log in a cache can help by drying the log, adding a dry sheet or such, since the CO has no idea that there is a wet log - until that find is posted.

 

Will I? Are you sure about that? Your mind-reading skills must be pretty sharp

I guess my mind reading was pretty sharp:

To my mind we are talking about dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements. If that's your idea of Christmas, you have my sympathy.

 

Well, no, actually I was merely referring to previous posts and photographs by others which illustrated dilapidated boxes of rubbish abandoned to the elements as a means to highlight that the discussion had moved on and broadened.

 

I wouldn't class this particular example is good evidence of the veracity of your mind-reading skills.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Team Microdot