What do you think of this cache?

[+tallglenn]

I was looking through my recent finds/DNFs and noticed a NA by a 30-find cacher. They complained that people were photologging instead of DNFing. I read the description (which I don't do 100% of the time) and it said photologs were ok. I went back and changed my DNF to a Found. Several hours later I had second thoughts and was going to change my Found back to a DNF. The NA has been deleted and the description has been changed. The "photologs are ok" is gone; now it says if you sign one of the cars nearby you can claim a find. I don't remember it being a 4.5 when I looked for it. Oh- also, the CO admits it is a vacation placement. Should I change my Found to a DNF, or just delete the whole thing and forget all about it? Thanx in advance for your advice.

[+colleda]

I was looking through my recent finds/DNFs and noticed a NA by a 30-find cacher. They complained that people were photologging instead of DNFing. I read the description (which I don't do 100% of the time) and it said photologs were ok. I went back and changed my DNF to a Found. Several hours later I had second thoughts and was going to change my Found back to a DNF. The NA has been deleted and the description has been changed. The "photologs are ok" is gone; now it says if you sign one of the cars nearby you can claim a find. I don't remember it being a 4.5 when I looked for it. Oh- also, the CO admits it is a vacation placement. Should I change my Found to a DNF, or just delete the whole thing and forget all about it? Thanx in advance for your advice.

I came across one in India a few months ago where the CO asked for photologs on a missing vacation cache. It's now archived. I reckon a reviewer will be on his case soon as deleting the NA doesn't take it off the reviewers list.

BTW you should change your log back to DNF to reflect correct history.

[+colleda]

If its this one it looks as though the CO is pushing the envelope. What they/he/she is really saying is don't bother looking for it, just log it anyway, because it wont be deleted and the log wont be checked.

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCGN58_carhenge-sacred-tourist-trap

[+Manville Possum]

Well, if you did not find it then you should log DNF or not log it at all.

 

The CO posted

Those who want to find a container have a goal to reach for, while those who are satisfied with just enjoying the beauty of Carhenge can still log a find without needing to put in this extra effort.

, which sounds like no logging requirements at all, then the cache should be archived for failure to meet guidelines. It's not a virtual.

[+Touchstone]

I think they call those Tradvirtuals, but in my neck of the woods, we call them Archived.

[+narcissa]

Just another cache owner who thinks they can make up their own rules. Glad someone called them on it.

[+colleda]

"Commercial" cache?

[+Manville Possum]

I was looking through my recent finds/DNFs and noticed a NA by a 30-find cacher. They complained that people were photologging instead of DNFing.

 

That person did the correct action.

[+tallglenn]

Ok. Thanx for your replies. I will entertain a few more opinions, but right now I am thinking I will just delete my log. There is something wonky going on with the cache and I don't need any Area-51 karma following me around...

[+geodarts]

I wish I had the dilemma. I have been trying to convince my wife to make this a vacation destination . . . .

[+tallglenn]

I wish I had the dilemma. I have been trying to convince my wife to make this a vacation destination . . . .

 

Wellll, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "destination". It was more of a diversion for us...BTW, there is a free campground with electric hookups in Alliance. And a second geocache at Carhenge.

[+cerberus1]

I think they call those Tradvirtuals, but in my neck of the woods, we call them Archived.

+1

[+dprovan]

Should I change my Found to a DNF, or just delete the whole thing and forget all about it?

Me, I'd file a DNF, but just deleting everything and forgetting about it is also reasonable.

 

That's my general advice, and it sounds like this is a flat out vacation cache with the CO playing games with it on top of that, so it applies in spades in this case. But I have to admit, just a few months ago I logged a photocache or two while traveling in South America in countries that had few caches, and the ones I logged struck me as being sincerely maintained by locals that just had found it impossible to keep a real cache in place. It wasn't as if I needed the caches to score the country souvenir, but I admit I liked having an excuse to log the cache, but underlying my personal motives was a desire to reward the CO's efforts even though back home where geocaching is well established, I would have suggested the cache be archived.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Should I change my Found to a DNF, or just delete the whole thing and forget all about it?

Me, I'd file a DNF, but just deleting everything and forgetting about it is also reasonable.

 

That's my general advice, and it sounds like this is a flat out vacation cache with the CO playing games with it on top of that, so it applies in spades in this case. But I have to admit, just a few months ago I logged a photocache or two while traveling in South America in countries that had few caches, and the ones I logged struck me as being sincerely maintained by locals that just had found it impossible to keep a real cache in place. It wasn't as if I needed the caches to score the country souvenir, but I admit I liked having an excuse to log the cache, but underlying my personal motives was a desire to reward the CO's efforts even though back home where geocaching is well established, I would have suggested the cache be archived.

 

I couple of years ago I posted about a cache that I had logged (but since removed the Found it log) that was *not* a vacation cache, was in a spot that was all about the location and the photographic view opportunity from the spot, and was in a touristy location with visitors from all over the world, and was *temporarily* missing and the CO allowed photologs, but there were several people here that insisted that I wasn't playing game right because out of over 1000 finds I had posted a found it log on a cache when I hadn't signed the log sheet.

 

[+dprovan]

I couple of years ago I posted about a cache that I had logged (but since removed the Found it log) that was *not* a vacation cache, was in a spot that was all about the location and the photographic view opportunity from the spot, and was in a touristy location with visitors from all over the world, and was *temporarily* missing and the CO allowed photologs, but there were several people here that insisted that I wasn't playing game right because out of over 1000 finds I had posted a found it log on a cache when I hadn't signed the log sheet.

I subscribe to that logic, but in very special cases I feel free to make an exception. If anyone tells me I'm not playing the game right, I'd have to agree, yet I would still let my find stand (unless they convinced me otherwise through an argument I hadn't considered).

 

It's not as if I do it enough to impact my numbers.