+GDad Souter Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 I'm relatively new to Geocaching (10 months and 314 caches) so go easy with me. This is my first posting too. I also expect this topic to have been covered before but, as I say, I'm new to this game. Thoroughly enjoying the experience apart from one thing. Read on. When I first looked at the map as a newbie I couldn't believe how many caches were available. Trouble is, as I started to visit sites, I realised that a very large number of caches don't match the description, are damaged or have soggy logs. Not at all the experience I was expecting. I then realised, looking a little closer, that the owners of these caches gave up caching years ago. There are whole areas around where I live where caches have been sprinkled like confetti and left to rot. Most cachers are happy to live with a soggy log or inaccurate description, and will even replace a container or log, thus perpetuating the situation of a cache without an owner. If someone doesn't find a cache they are unlikely to log a maintenance or archive request unless there have been a string of previous DNFs. The sequence to remove an orphan cache seems to require months of cachers finding a poor quality cache, followed by a string of DNFs and then input from the local reviewer. A poor experience for a lot of people. Groundspeak seem to have made a lot of effort to improve the experience for cachers with a cache page providing lots of helpful information including terrain, difficulty, cache size, attributes, favourites etc. Why then, is there not a way to try and maintain this original high standard. Perhaps COs should be required to check their caches every so often with caches removed automatically if they are not checked or the owner gives up caching. If we don't want to be quite so Draconian then providing additional information on the cache page such as when the CO last logged on might be helpful. Or give cachers the option to flag the cache as a bad experience. If we had the opposite of favourites a cache could come to the attention of a reviewer if it had ten hits, or whatever. I look forward to hearing what other people make of this, or hearing about what has been tried before. Quote Link to comment
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.