Sled Cache missing or not?

[+Team Kuebbing]

The following is the last log for the Sled Cache in middle of nowhere NY:

March 11 by PAWINGERS (102 found)

Wow, what a cache. Well, actually we didn't find the cache because it wasn't there, or at least not where the picture showed it to be. I suspect it fell and blew away since the wind was blowing about a gazzillion miles per hour. I mean to tell you it was cold and it was blowing like crazy. We were staying in Old Forge on a bit of a snowmobiling getaway and decided to try for this one while cruising across Stillwater. We left Noridgewok and traveled the length of Stillwater and cruised right past this island. When we got to Stillwater I pulled out the GPS and discovered it was 1.4 miles back out on the ice on an island. We headed back out and the coords took us right to the island just as it was described. We found the birdhouse ruins or maybe it was a sign, but no cache. We dug all over until the wind took it's toll on us and we had to surrender. I mean it was cold and it was windy, must have been 300 degrees below zero. We did however decide to play in the drifts before we headed for shore. Thanks for the fun but I believe the cache is gone.

Today I posted:

April 30 by Team Kuebbing (213 found)

You can [edit], [delete] or [permanently encrypt] this log entry.

The last person to find this cache didn't actually find it. He says he saw where it should have been but no cache. Since he was awarded credit for a find are we to assume that the cache is indeed missing. If the cache is missing it should be archived. A maintenence visit is certainly in order by the cache's owner.

What do you think about this?

[Bluehook]

Kuebbing> Since I have already addressed this with you via email I'm wondering why you would post it here as well? If you have any further questions kindly direct them at the email address I provided. There is no need to uselessly scroll the forums. Thanks.

[+NJ Admin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Kuebbing:

The last person to find this cache didn't actually find it. He says he saw where it should have been but no cache. Since he was awarded credit for a find are we to assume that the cache is indeed missing. If the cache is missing it should be archived. A maintenence visit is certainly in order by the cache's owner.

What do you think about this?[/quote

 

QUOTE]Originally posted by Bluehook:

Kuebbing> Since I have already addressed this with you via email I'm wondering why you would post it here as well? If you have any further questions kindly direct them at the email address I provided. There is no need to uselessly scroll the forums. Thanks.

---

I didn't think Kuebbing's post was useless at all. Seems like pretty valid questions to me, and I would love to hear the answer too.

[+The Leprechauns]

In most cases, I wouldn't run right out and check on my cache after every single "not-found" log, especially in the winter when the cache might be covered with snow, or especially if the post is from a newbie.

 

But in this case, the first finder posted a true "spoiler" picture, showing the cache in its hiding place. The next seeker has over 100 finds (well, by their definition of "find", anyways), and states that they located the sign/birdhouse shown in the picture, behind which the cache was placed. But no cache.

 

This is a maintenance issue, and good cache maintenance habits are a proper topic for discussion in the forums.

 

If this were my cache:

 

1. I would go out and check on the cache. Recognizing that the location is remote, and I might not be able to get there for awhile, like until I put my boat in the lake on Memorial Day weekend, then I would either temporarily disable the cache, or at least post a note saying "I will check on this cache when I'm at the lake next on May 24th. Until then, hunt at your own risk, it may be missing."

 

2. I would've written a polite e-mail to PAWINGERS, thanking them for their nice log and sharing their disappointment about not finding the cache. I would then suggest that they correct their "found it" log to a "didn't find it" log ("perhaps you clicked on the smiley in error, out of habit, but...."). If the log were not edited in a reasonable amount of time, but the cacher has visited the geocaching.com site, then I would delete the log.

 

Both physical and online cache maintenance are an important part of the responsibilities of placing a geocache.

 

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Some mornings, it just doesn't pay to chew through the leather straps. - Emo Phillips

[dboggny]

I had to comment on this one. The community has always left it up to the cache owner to decide what they will permit and not permit as a find. Apparently, Bluehook has decided, as the cache owner, what a find is for his cache. Further, team kuebbing has questioned that and asked Bluehook for a clarification. Bluehook as answered him in private email. Not liking that answer, team kuebbing has decided to whine in the forums about it. The fact is this, the cache owner decides what they will accept as a find on their cache. Bluehook has decided. If you dont like it, go somewhere else. These kinds of posts are the reason i stopped reading the forums (excepting gpsunits and software and the northeast regional forums). now i have to stop reading northeast forums too? apparently this happens often, read team sandriches log here. i will go back into forum pergatory now. danny

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by NJ Admin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Kuebbing:

The last person to find this cache didn't actually find it. He says he saw where it should have been but no cache. Since he was awarded credit for a find are we to assume that the cache is indeed missing. If the cache is missing it should be archived. A maintenence visit is certainly in order by the cache's owner.

What do you think about this?[/quote

 

QUOTE]Originally posted by Bluehook:

Kuebbing> Since I have already addressed this with you via email I'm wondering why you would post it here as well? If you have any further questions kindly direct them at the email address I provided. There is no need to uselessly scroll the forums. Thanks.

---

I didn't think Kuebbing's post was useless at all. Seems like pretty valid questions to me, and I would love to hear the answer too.

---

 

SR and dboggny.

 

[This message was edited by SR & dboggny on May 03, 2003 at 08:12 AM.]

 

[This message was edited by SR & dboggny on May 03, 2003 at 08:13 AM.]

[+Mopar]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SR & dboggny:

I had to comment on this one. The community has always left it up to the cache owner to decide what they will permit and not permit as a find. Apparently, Bluehook has decided, as the cache owner, what a find is for his cache. Further, team kuebbing has questioned that and asked Bluehook for a clarification. Bluehook as answered him in private email. Not liking that answer, team kuebbing has decided to whine in the forums about it. The fact is this, the cache owner decides what they will accept as a find on their cache. Bluehook has decided. If you dont like it, go somewhere else.

---

I think kuebbing's post was more a question of is the cache there or not, then questioning anyone's logging ethics. Judging by the logs, it sure looks like the cache might be missing.

But since you did bring logging ethics up, if you DID read the other forums, you would see that 90% of the cachers out there do not feel it is ethical to log a find on a cache that is missing, because they in fact, did not find it.

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

[+Team Kuebbing]

Thanks for the input. I got an e-mail from Bluehook saying the cache is ok. I'm renting a canoe this weekend and driving to this remote location to be the 1st one to find it in warmer weather. It's a pretty big time investment to get to this cache for me so I can't apologize for my "whining" but I can say that once a warm weather log gets posted for this cache a lot of other North Country geocachers will make the drive & paddle to find it. I'm not in the forums to piss anyone off, I just hate going out and not finding a cache.

[+Mopar]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Kuebbing:

Thanks for the input. I got an e-mail from Bluehook saying the cache is ok. I'm renting a canoe this weekend and driving to this remote location to be the 1st one to find it in warmer weather. It's a pretty big time investment to get to this cache for me so I can't apologize for my "whining" but I can say that once a warm weather log gets posted for this cache a lot of other North Country geocachers will make the drive & paddle to find it. I'm not in the forums to piss anyone off, I just hate going out and not finding a cache.

---

Hey, I don't blame you. Looking at the log on the cache, I would wonder if it was there or not too. Then, travel a great distance, rent a canoe, and paddle there, only to find that the cache was missing the whole time and the hider knew it was gone and didnt archive the cache...............

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

[+Team Kuebbing]

I just got home from trying to find the Sled Cache. I was mislead. Despite trying to save myself from wasting time on a rural cache that no longer exists, I spent a little over 7 hours today getting ready for, getting to, looking for and returning from where this cache was supposed to be. I'm pretty pissed off right now. Having been e-mailed that the cache was still there I turned the island upside down even though the cache was not in the location it was in the spoiler photo. Pretty lame guy, pretty lame.

[+Wheelygood]

Kuebbing wrote;

I turned the island upside down even though the cache was not in the location it was in the spoiler photo. Pretty lame guy, pretty lame.

________________________________________________

 

If you actually turned the island upside down as in you left the island disturbed by rearranging the terrain then without question there are 2 lame people involved here. Good chance you only hid it better for the next guy while eliminating decoy spots.

 

I certainly can understand your fustration but that doesn't remove your responsibility to leave no trace. I hope you had a good trip, you know saw some nice scenery, wildlife, people, got away from work, etc.

 

Wheelygood

 

I do it wrong until I do it right

[+Team Kuebbing]

Try not to read into my comments. The environment was left the way I found it. It's not hard to "turn it upside down" when the island is less than 28 feet squared. I think you miss the point of my anger. I tried to avoid going to this cache until it's owner could verify it was there. He verified yet the cache was not there.

[+PAWINGERS]

This is amazing, some people need to take a chill pill. I don't even know where to start.

Firstly, we logged a find because the cache owner told us to. Based on the info we gave him, he knew we were in the right spot and it was obvious to him that we put a good bit of effort into visiting a cache that was 400 miles from our home and many miles by snowmobile trail and over a mile out on the ice. Maybe I should have just lied and said we found it but didn't fill out the log book. Instead I took pictures on the island and looged our experience on the site. I also had several e-mail conversations with Bluehook and Team Kuebbing regarding this cache. Bluehook decided to leave it unarchived because he felt it could have blown from it's hiding place and was buried in a snowdrift. I respected his decision and he told us to log a find. If someone has a problem with that, too bad, (here's a quarter, call someone who cares)!! If the site administrator has a problem with us logging a find, I would respect their decision without a seconds hesitation, but I don't look for that to be the case. In fact the NJ administrator is well aware of what went on and he was more concerned about the cache needing checked on. It's pretty obvious they keep a close watch on things but have more to worry about than us logging a find for a missing cache.

We have 103 finds and have notified the administrators about issues regarding "Sled Cache" and "Keep Your Paws Off Our Cache" cache. I feel confident they will handle things fairly. Our other problem cache was "Keep your Paws off Our Cache" cache. We hunted for this one 4 times. On the 4th time we found it scattered about. We cleaned up the site and notified the owner. The logbook wasn't to be found nor was any of the better stuff that was in the cache. Now I suppose some "Big Whiner" is also going to complain about that being logged a find. Again I say, tough, just deal with it! We put a lot of effort into our caches. We travel many miles, hike many miles, survived tick bites, Lymses disease and pitch dark hikes. Out of 103 finds, two were no finds because of missing caches and we enjoyed every minute of it. If us logging a find is going to upset your day, that suits me just fine!

Team Kuebbing should also be able to log a find if he was misled. They certainly deserve it and honestly will it hurt anyone else if they do? Maybe we should have just kept it to ourselves and claimed that we found it and let others look for something that isn't there. Would that be the right thing, I don't think so! I know that Team Kuebbing is now upset that he was told that it was okay but he couldn't find it. I believe him, the island is not that big so it is apparently missing. I'm also not going to sling mud at Bluehook because maybe someone else tampered with it. Team Kuebbing, Bluehook and myself had a few discussions over this cache and they both seem to be good responsible cachers. I wish some people would enjoy this sport for the pure pleasure of it and quit their petty complaining. What really bugs me is when they complain about the administrators of the site. Apparently these whiners don't have the slightest notion what it takes to maintain this site and are too stupid to realize that without their effort our fun would come to a screeching halt. Jeremy and all of the administrators are to be commended. All the cachers that put the caches out and look for others also should take a bow. All the whiners need to take a hike without their GPS.

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

This is amazing, some people need to take a chill pill. Firstly, we logged a find because the cache owner told us to. Based on the info we gave him, he knew we were in the right spot and it was obvious to him that we put a good bit of effort into visiting a cache that was 400 miles from our home and many miles by snowmobile trail and over a mile out on the ice. Maybe I should have just lied and said we found it but didn't fill out the log book

---

 

Hey, if you are so darned concerned about running up numbers that you insist on logging a find on a cache you didn't find, more power to you! You go boy!

 

quote:

---

Team Kuebbing should also be able to log a find if he was misled. They certainly deserve it and honestly will it hurt anyone else if they do? Maybe we should have just kept it to ourselves and claimed that we found it and let others look for something that isn't there.

---

 

It appears to me that Team Kuebbing might have a darn good reason to be ticked off. They were assured by the cache owner that the cache was indeed there and went out of their way to find it. They also seem to have a level of integrity that some other geocachers don't. They hesitate to to log a find for a cache they didn't find. Hmmmm, an interesting concept.

 

The point of this sport is to find caches, not places where they might have been, or where you were pretty sure they were.

 

Yes, we need to chill out. But that includes not being so obsessed about numbers that you insist on posting fake finds because you made a valiant effort to get to the cache.

quote:

---

I respected his decision and he told us to log a find. If someone has a problem with that, too bad, (here's a quarter, call someone who cares)

---

I'm sure you will disagree with me. If so you can call 1-800-CLU-LESS, or better yet the compulsive cheater hotline at 1-800-IMA-CHTR.

 

"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues" -Abraham Lincoln

 

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on May 13, 2003 at 06:36 PM.]

[+PAWINGERS]

Brian,

Why am I not surprised by your comments. If I was so obsessed with the numbers I would be sitting in front of the computer logging finds on the numerous Virtual Caches that really don't even require a hike, you simply have to submit a picture of some significant required thing and you have a find. If you were to check our finds you would notice we don't have these kinds of finds. But I don't expect you did that because you were to anxious to stick your nose into something that you knew very little of the details. If you knew the details, you very well may see things differently. I won't waste my time going into those details because it really doesn't matter whether you like it or not. I neither disagree or agree with you because your opinion and judgements mean nothing to me. I've said all I intend to say relative to this subject on this forum so now would be a good time to get in your two cents without being contradicted or confronted. Happy Caching and thanks for your amusing comments.

[+Mopar]

I personally agree with Brian 110% on the subject of logging a find on a cache you didn't actually find, as does every cacher but one in this current thread. Three pages long, and only one other cacher thinks it's ok to log a find on a cache just because you tried hard.

Still, it's just a game, and the difference between this thread and that one, is here the cache owner is ok with what most other cachers would consider cheating, and since it's his cache, he makes the rules. If both the cache owner and the cache finder are happy, great. The bigger problem is logging a found on a cache thats missing causes people to assume the cache is there. In this case even the cache owner assured the next cache seeker the cache was in place, which seems was a lie. But then, it seems obvious to me the hider is in no position to maintain the cache, nor to actually check on it to make sure it was still there. That's why gc.com no longer allows "vacation" style caches. The least the cache owner could have done was be honest, that he didn't know if it was there or not, and let other people decide if they wanted to go for it or not. Instead, he caused the next person to waste considerable time and money chasing a ghost.

I commend Team Kuebbing for having the ethics to not claim to find something they didn't, just to add a digit to their find count.

Like I posted in that other thread, if you are in this for the fun, and the trip, and the enjoyment of seeking the cache, a DNF or a note works just as well as a find. The ONLY reason I can see to claim you found something that you didn't is to up your numbers, no matter that you claim otherwise.

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

[+Team Kuebbing]

I thank all who posted comments both positive and otherwise. I'm leaving for Afghanistan Monday and may not be able to view the forums anymore for awhile. Good luck caching this summer and keep your eyes open for the 1st Afghanistan cache.

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

I thank all who posted comments both positive and otherwise. I'm leaving for Afghanistan Monday and may not be able to view the forums anymore for awhile. Good luck caching this summer and keep your eyes open for the 1st Afghanistan cache.

---

 

It's safe to assume you aren't going from Ft. Drum to Afghanistan for leisure. It might also be safe to assume you are with the 10th Mountain Division. If so, you are part of a long line of heroes. All I can say is please come home safe and thank you for what you are doing.

 

"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues" -Abraham Lincoln

[Bluehook]

I don't come to this BBS regularly. I would have rather let this thread run it’s course and die out until Mopar decided to manufacture his ridiculous assumptions. The fact is, Kuebbing was advised that the cache was intact as of April 13, a guarantee that it would be there when he decided to seek it did not accompany this advisement, nor was it implied. For Mopar to state that I “caused the next person to waste considerable time and money chasing a ghost” is ludicrous, as if I forced Kuebbing at gunpoint? The location was obviously rugged, remote and vulnerable. Missing and plundered caches are part of this game. I don’t think anyone here can claim that they haven’t had at least one “did not find” or issue a guarantee that any one of their own caches will be obtainable when seeked.

 

Mopar further wrote: “The least the cache owner could have done was be honest…”

“…cache owner assured the next cache seeker the cache was in place, which seems was a lie..” To this and your other un-mentioned assumptions, I take exception. Mopar, you have a big f-ing mouth and if you’d like to meet me in person and call me a liar, face-to-face, then say where by email, post it here or make a cache so everyone can come, but you and I have a score to settle. So until then, keep your asinine postulations to yourself, jo.

 

(Sorry I didn't respond sooner, I was out of town, riding my bicycle from New York City to Washington DC to raise money for charity, the rotten, lying bastard that I am.)

 

[This message was edited by Bluehook on May 14, 2003 at 07:26 PM.]

[+Mopar]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bluehook:

I don't come to this BBS regularly. I would have rather let this thread run it’s course and die out until Mopar decided to manufacture his ridiculous assumptions. The fact is, Kuebbing was advised that the cache was intact as of April 13, a guarantee that it would be there when he decided to seek it did not accompany this advisement, nor was it implied. For Mopar to state that I “caused the next person to waste considerable time and money chasing a ghost” is ludicrous, as if I forced Kuebbing at gunpoint? The location was obviously rugged, remote and vulnerable. Missing and plundered caches are part of this game. I don’t think anyone here can claim that they haven’t had at least one “did not find” or issue a guarantee that any one of their own caches will be obtainable when seeked.

 

Mopar further wrote: “The least the cache owner could have done was be honest…”

“…cache owner assured the next cache seeker the cache was in place, which seems was a lie..” To this and your other un-mentioned assumptions, I take exception. Mopar, you have a big f-ing mouth and if you’d like to meet me in person and call me a liar, face-to-face, then say where by email, post it here or make a cache so everyone can come, but you and I have a score to settle. So until then, keep your asinine postulations to yourself, jo.

 

(Sorry I didn't respond sooner, I was out of town, riding my bicycle from New York City to Washington DC to raise money for charity, the rotten, lying bastard that I am.)

 

[This message was edited by Bluehook on May 14, 2003 at 07:26 PM.]

---

I guess you didn't understand, so I'll spell it out.

Do I PERSONALLY think you drove 300 miles, then dragged a boat to a very remote location just because someone asked you to check on your cache?

NOPE!

 

Do I think someone else went to this "obviously rugged, remote" location and stole the cache in the last month, after it supposedly was fine there all year?

NOPE!

 

Could I be wrong?

YUP!

 

Do I have a right to my opinion anyway?

Hell yea!

 

Do I think someone that wants to pick a fight because other people don't believe something he says needs to grow up and get a life?

Hell Yea!

 

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

[martmann]

I don't understand why the cache hider (Bluehook) would encourage PAWINGERS to log a find after NOT FINDING the cache, if Bluehook had checked the cache afterwards and found it where it should be.

 

It leads me to believe Bluehook never checked on the cache after PAWINGERS failed to find it, (maybe he was to busy picking fights over stupid crap). If that's the case, what an AS*.

 

Encouraging a 'Found It' log when the cache was NOT FOUND and the log said as much, leads others to believe the cache is not there, and Team Kuebbing was smart to ask for verification of the cache's status. And it is fairly obvious he was misled.

 

Before you ask Bluehook, no I will not fight you, you have enough problems.

 

_________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

 

[This message was edited by martmann on May 14, 2003 at 11:52 PM.]

[+Team GPSaxophone]

PAWINGERS searched for the cache on March 11 and couldn't find it, but posted a find anyway

Bluehook advised Keubbing that the cache was intact on April 13th

May 10th, Kuebbing says he just got home from searching for it and couldn't find it

Looks like the cache was there when PAWINGERS were searching since Bluehook 'verified' it was there on April 13th. Looks like PAWINGERS should post a NOT FOUND.

The cache might have been missing on May 10th, but we can't be sure until Bluehook 'verifies' it is still there. Looks like Kuebbing appropriately posted a NOT FOUND for this one.

 

PAWINGERS, what do you gain by posting a FOUND log on this cache? What do you lose by posting a NOT FOUND? It must be about the numbers to you, otherwise you would post a NOT FOUND on this one because you didn't find it. Bluehook said it was there a month after you searched, so YOU DIDN'T FIND IT!!

Now, if Bluehook didn't actually visit the cache site to 'verify' the cache is still there, we can't say for sure that is wasn't. You should still post a NOT FOUND log because you DID NOT FIND IT. Furthermore, Bluehook owes Kuebbing a big apology for giving false information.

 

This cache is a prime example of it doesn't matter how hard you tried, if you didn't find it you should post a NOT FOUND. There are no prizes for having one extra FOUND count on your stats. If you had a great (or terrible) experience, that shouldn't change a NOT FOUND into a FOUND. Like I said earlier, what do you have to gain by posting a FOUND when you didn't find the cache?

 

BTW, here is the cache we're discussing. Appropriately archived. No note from Bluehook saying the cache is there as of April 13th, looks like he lied to Kuebbing.

[enfanta]

quote:

---

Mopar, you have a big f-ing mouth and if you’d like to meet me in person and call me a liar, face-to-face, then say where by email, post it here or make a cache so everyone can come, but you and I have a score to settle.

---

 

Mopar, you've been called out. I don't know if you realize this but as the accused, you have the choice of weapons.

 

May I suggest ammo cans at 15 paces? (You could put bricks in them...)

 

What appears to be coming at you is coming from you.

[+Salvelinus]

<Splash> I'm jumping in!

 

This post should not of gone past SR&dboggny reply. Now its has people ****ed off and hurt.

 

I'll repeat what SR & dboggny said. The issue of a find is between the cache owner and the cache searcher(s).<period emphasis>

 

Those two parties know the situation above all others, and they have worked it out. If you don't like it. Shut up! Why do we continue to have to get all worked up over stupid things that don't even affect you???

 

Caching is done in many ways, for many reasons, by many people, with different passions and interests...I hope is stays that way.

 

And...for the record. The pawingers are class people. Any deformation of their character is totally unwarrented! Shame on those who did

 

Salvelinus

 

"The trail will be long and full of frustrations. Life is a whole and good and evil must be accepted together"

 

Ralph Abele

[martmann]

Salvelinus I think you missed the entire point of this thread, you may want to re-read it. Has very little to do with PAWINGERS posting a find when in actuality they did not find it, they were (going by the posts above, at least before they were edited) encouraged to post a find by the cache owner, (I personally would not have posted a find, but that's me).

 

THE POINT is the irresponsible way that the cache owner led Team Kuebbing to believe the cache was still there, when there was every indication that it wasn't.

 

The false find posted by PAWINGERS just confused the situation.

 

Now as for you telling others to shut up, just exactly who made you a forum cop? Others have opinions that differ from yours, and guess what, they are free to post them. You don't like it? Too bad.

 

_________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)