+oregone Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 I went to this cache yesterday and i'm not sure i get it. If it's a virtual, then what's the point? If it's a micro, then how come people keep logging finds if they can't find it? The cache owner hasn't logged on sice october, so should this be archived? By the way, you'll notice i logged a find on his other micro/virtual 'placed' a mile away. Let me know if i'm being hypocritical by logging it as a find. all rights reserved, all wrongs reversed Quote Link to comment
+sparklehorse Posted January 25, 2003 Share Posted January 25, 2003 I'd email the owner first. Looks like there was a micro there at one time, there's even a picture of it with the first log. Who knows if it's still there or not, nobody seems to care. Too funny. NOTE TO SELF: Avoid all caches that state: "THIS REGURIES THINKING" --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message has been edited to fit your TV screen. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote Link to comment
+Zzzoey & illDRIVEuNav Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 We decided not to even go to this one on our recent coastal trip because it seemed pretty poorly planned... We were so busy hitting well-maintained and well-planned caches by Robinhood that it just didn't seem worth our time. It never ceases to amaze us how some people attempt to place caches before they really figure out what the whole thing's about. Quote Link to comment
+Seth! Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 Wow. That's a list of bogus finds if ever there was one. I suspect that ROCKETMANDANE changed the icon to 'virtual' after it was approved. It would not be approved in its present form. It is a micro cache and if you don't find it, you shouldn't be logging it! This one will be archived if the owner cannot be reached. Quote Link to comment
+Seattle Seekers Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 According to the description, there IS an actual cache. Therefore, (in my opinion anyway) the logs should have been "DNF's" and should be deleted. The owner should make sure the cache is still there and if not it needs to be replaced or archived. Quote Link to comment
+slinger91 Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 since October 18th. He maybe done with geocaching. If he doesn't answer e-mails, or check on his cache in the next couple of months, I'd say it's history. "If I knew how thirsty I was going to be this morning, I would have drank more last night." Quote Link to comment
+bigeddy Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 It appears that a year and a half ago Rocketmandane dropped off 3 film canisters with toothpicks in them and called them caches. I did one of them, Lost Cache, against my better judgement. Heck, it was a 10-minute walk from where we were camping. I eventually found it and emailed the requested "proof" but never got a reply. I'd archive all of them. So, what do you call a cache that has no log to sign? Virtual? Traditional? Other? Quote Link to comment
John E Cache Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 This cache is much the same. You are supposed to leave a stamp because there is no log book. I hunted down and steamed off a stamp from Sweden, but it was a waste of time. At least the people who logged this cache "found" it though. Quote Link to comment
+pdxmarathonman Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 I happen to know the cacher who owns the cache mentioned by John E Cache. If you hunt a cache and can't find it you owe it to the owner to log it as a no-find (I didn't see one posted). He has replacements at the ready. UPDATE: I checked some older logs on the cache and see that J.E.C. found it back on 12/8/02. ?!? [This message was edited by pdxmarathonman on January 26, 2003 at 09:07 PM.] Quote Link to comment
John E Cache Posted January 26, 2003 Share Posted January 26, 2003 quote:Originally posted by pdxmarathonman:I happen to know the cacher who owns the cache mentioned by John E Cache. If you hunt a cache and can't find it you owe it to the owner to log it as a no-find (I didn't see one posted). He has replacements at the ready. UPDATE: I checked some older logs on the cache and see that J.E.C. found it back on 12/8/02. ?!? [This message was edited by pdxmarathonman on January 26, 2003 at 09:07 PM.] OK. My post was poorly written. The cache wasn't a waste of time. I thought it was kind of clever. I was just diappointed that I went to the trouble getting a stamp for the cache and it wasn't necessary. After the latest logs, I guess I don't see the point of the cache. Anyone can log it. I did point out that people who logged did actually find the cache, unlike Oegone's example. Quote Link to comment
+pdxmarathonman Posted January 27, 2003 Share Posted January 27, 2003 quote: I was just disappointed that I went to the trouble getting a stamp for the cache and it wasn't necessary Don't let the fact that some others don't participate in a way that the owner of the cache specified ruin your fun! I would say you should feel proud to have made the effort. Some folks even went so far as to create their own stamp. If it was a puzzle cache, you would have been forced to make some extra effort. You made the effort of your own free will. Good for you! Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted January 27, 2003 Share Posted January 27, 2003 So there is a cache, and it's following the new advice of "put any cache there if you can instead of making yet another virtual" Looks like a good cache and a bunch of dorks logging finds they didn't earn. Perhaps the owner should start deleting logs. I don't see a problem here. There are other caches out there that are similar and don't even claim to exist for the great view. Wherever you go there you are. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.