Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Doc_musketeers

How to deal with negligent CO

305 posts in this topic

(I tried searching for similar threads- I'm sure they exist, so please direct me!)

we have a local CO who has numerous caches near our home including a couple of extensive multi caches and multi-stage mystery caches with years worth of DNF's on one or more stages. Many of the logs plead for the CO to check out the caches, with no response.  Very few have actual NM logs. Our team has even personally messaged the CO about a particular cache over two months ago and they agreed it needed checked but the only change has been a few more DNF's. The caches are inventive and I think we are all afraid to call a Reviewer's attention to the situation because we keep hoping the CO will step up and don't want to see these caches archived. But they are also occupying valuable swathes of geocache real estate and are very frustrating.

we are even considering offering to adopt at least one cache ... and thinking about posting an NM if not NA on some of the others. what's the proper etiquette here? Besides wanting to be respectful to the CO themselves, we don't want to come off as the "tattletale" of our community. Advice or links?

Edited by Doc_musketeers
0

Share this post


Link to post

No NMs, place one.  Lots of NMs and no reaction from the CO, log an NA.  You can email the Reviewer if no one has the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the inactive CO by placing an NA...

"Inventive" or not, if they're not being maintained, they need to go bye-bye.  If the CO isn't responding to fix them, they probably won't show to allow adoption either...

3

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like the days of a community volunteer  doing a clean sweep of their review area are long gone. What a joke the health score is if it's not used. :(

I'm seeing abandoned caches flagged with NA being ignored by the volunteers, things have really got bad. I know geocaching is in a decline, but what can players do?

1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

No NMs, place one.  Lots of NMs and no reaction from the CO, log an NA.  You can email the Reviewer if no one has the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the inactive CO by placing an NA...

"Inventive" or not, if they're not being maintained, they need to go bye-bye.  If the CO isn't responding to fix them, they probably won't show to allow adoption either...

Good points ... perhaps emailing the Reviewer might be the most neutral move, as well as matching our relative newbie level of "fortitude."

0

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Manville Possum said:

Looks like the days of a community volunteer  doing a clean sweep of their review area are long gone. What a joke the health score is if it's not used. :(

I'm seeing abandoned caches flagged with NA being ignored by the volunteers, things have really got bad. I know geocaching is in a decline, but what can players do?

Our team doesn't have much experience to compare with that of long-time cachers ... but our area still seems pretty active to us. For example: We submitted a new hide around 5:30 last night, it was published around 10:30 and the FTF was logged at 0430 this morning!! We've seen Reviewers issue timely warnings after a string of DNF's and follow through with archiving when there wasn't a response. At least in our area I've been very impressed by our Reviewers. I'm not familiar with the health score ... 

In our case it might be that a respected veteran player, maybe even a mentor to some, has become less and less involved. We've come on the scene and we only see the cumulative result. I sense that for the local community, calling a Reviewer's attention to the situation might feel the same as taking away an aging parent's driver's license. A bit like betrayal and ushering in the End of an Era.

i guess I'm hoping for more of a "how" discussion rather than just "what." 

Edited by Doc_musketeers
0

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

i guess I'm hoping for more of a "how" discussion rather than just "what." 

 

Log your DNF's and post NM's and NA's accordingly. It's all a player can do. I have really got discouraged because the game has changed so much.

0

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Doc_musketeers said:

we have a local CO who has numerous caches near our home including a couple of extensive multi caches and multi-stage mystery caches with years worth of DNF's on one or more stages

Sorry, but I couldn't find a CO who match your description. Maybe the constant flow of "Found it" logs hides the real problem from reviewers?

1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, arisoft said:

Sorry, but I couldn't find a CO who match your description. Maybe the constant flow of "Found it" logs hides the real problem from reviewers?

Could be.  Just finished up a 100 mile radius sweep around the OP's apparent Home Location for Disabled and Needs Maintenance log entries.  Let me know if I missed anything.

4

Share this post


Link to post

Hmm, coincidentally (or not) I awoke to see a list of emails showing a reviewer had temporarily disabled a number of languishing caches on my watchlist, including one of those I was specifically discussing. **edit: a second one I had in mind was also disabled, it just wasn't on my watchlist!**

6 hours ago, arisoft said:

Sorry, but I couldn't find a CO who match your description. Maybe the constant flow of "Found it" logs hides the real problem from reviewers?

And yes, one of the caches that I'd personally love to see maintained because it draws people to some local art had a list of DNFs. We logged our DNF and described our search and fear that it was gone. The problem is that the following day a cacher claimed a Find on it and the CO posted a note saying apparently it was still there. The cacher posting that "find" only cached for two days ever and logged 6 "finds" all with very odd online logs. I happened to revisit three of their supposed finds and they didn't sign any of them. It was this info that we messaged the owner about months ago. Since then there's only been another DNF logged. 

I think too one problem is that players don't log their DNFs. We figure for every DNF logged there's two or three more that didn't log! Granted, if we visit a cache site and get muggled out or just don't end up with adequate search time, we might wait to log a DNF. But if we've searched, we admit it. But I've seen caches that had fairly regular finds in the past but then start logging only infrequent DNF's. Maybe only a couple, but if there's months in between it makes us hesitant to go out of our way to hunt it. We own a couple low difficulty hides close to our home and strive to check up and post notes even after a single DNF for just that reason.

Edited by Doc_musketeers
Updated info
3

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Our team doesn't have much experience to compare with that of long-time cachers ... but our area still seems pretty active to us. For example: We submitted a new hide around 5:30 last night, it was published around 10:30 and the FTF was logged at 0430 this morning!! We've seen Reviewers issue timely warnings after a string of DNF's and follow through with archiving when there wasn't a response. At least in our area I've been very impressed by our Reviewers. I'm not familiar with the health score ... 

In our case it might be that a respected veteran player, maybe even a mentor to some, has become less and less involved. We've come on the scene and we only see the cumulative result. I sense that for the local community, calling a Reviewer's attention to the situation might feel the same as taking away an aging parent's driver's license. A bit like betrayal and ushering in the End of an Era.

i guess I'm hoping for more of a "how" discussion rather than just "what." 

Any  "respected veteran player" would view your NM as a positive thing.  Most cache owners take great pride in the condition of their caches and rely on other cachers to let them know when somethings wrong.  This is the same for reviewers. 

In fact a veteran cacher, who could no longer maintain their hides, would archive them long before they ever started to rot away. 

Any one who'd criticize another player for posting a legitimate NM isn't a real geocacher in my book. 

Take a hike out there and see for yourself.   If the cache is in disrepair post a Needs Maintenance.  If it already has an unanswered NM on it post a Needs Archived.

You've done your part, your local reviewer will take it from there.   

4

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Nomex said:

Could be.  Just finished up a 100 mile radius sweep around the OP's apparent Home Location for Disabled and Needs Maintenance log entries.  Let me know if I missed anything.

Good morning! Thanks for your hard work, and for being attentive even before the issue was personally raised to you. Now I feel guilty "talking about you behind your back"- glad I was saying nice things.

1

Share this post


Link to post

Oh my god...why is there such fear of posting NMs and NAs?  There is no such thing as a sacred cache or CO and I really wish people would stop pretending there is.    

0

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

Oh my god...why is there such fear of posting NMs and NAs?  There is no such thing as a sacred cache or CO and I really wish people would stop pretending there is.    

I agree ... In one of the cases I'm looking at, one of the caches (now temporarily disabled) was part of a series that each held a clue and a piece of coordinates for a final stage. We've only gone after one of those caches because we could see there was a piece missing. We hadn't personally searched for that cache but could see DNF logs clearly showing the cache was in distress. One other caching team did log a single NM and when you read the DNF logs and notes you see reports from previous finders that it's no longer there.

so I don't know if it's a "fear" of posting an NM or NA, more that cachers are hoping the CO will see the situation before a Reviewer has to archive a piece of a larger puzzle you're already invested in.

0

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

so I don't know if it's a "fear" of posting an NM or NA, more that cachers are hoping the CO will see the situation before a Reviewer has to archive a piece of a larger puzzle you're already invested in.

One or two DNFs with a mention like that I can understand.  Multiple mentions, though...if the CO has not responded to the first two, it's time for a NM log.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, J Grouchy said:

One or two DNFs with a mention like that I can understand.  Multiple mentions, though...if the CO has not responded to the first two, it's time for a NM log.  

Yeah, and I have to admit that in our area a single NM isn't that much of a red flag. Our area is extremely wet so a large proportion of caches have some sort of note or NM about wet log, etc. some of them seem to be almost seasonal ocurances and locals just do our best, but that makes it harder for a Reviewer to catch the difference between a damp log sheet in December vs a missing cache!

0

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

... In one of the cases I'm looking at, one of the caches (now temporarily disabled) was part of a series that each held a clue and a piece of coordinates for a final stage. We've only gone after one of those caches because we could see there was a piece missing. We hadn't personally searched for that cache but could see DNF logs clearly showing the cache was in distress. One other caching team did log a single NM and when you read the DNF logs and notes you see reports from previous finders that it's no longer there.

so I don't know if it's a "fear" of posting an NM or NA, more that cachers are hoping the CO will see the situation before a Reviewer has to archive a piece of a larger puzzle you're already invested in.

An inactive CO already ruins folks chances of completing a series if the requirements to finish have issues.  We're finally seeing missing-stage multis going bye-bye here.  Those who have problems entering simple log actions on a cache (for whatever reason) needing help often leave the "hassles" to another.  Tag, you're it.  :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Wow. For those who feel "Reviewers aren't what they used to be..." I gotta say if they were any more "on it" then Nomex it'd be frightening. Besides always being quick to review and publish, our Reviewer caught this thread and temporarily disabled some of the caches that inspired my question. I did NOT contact them. Not sure if there's some mechanism to alert them to posts from cachers in their area or if they are simply watching the forum for such situations but I'm impressed.. 

I'll also admit that I checked to make sure there wasn't a dark van with antennas and a geocaching logo parked outside my house. ;-)

1

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Not sure if there's some mechanism to alert them to posts from cachers in their area or if they are simply watching the forum for such situations but I'm impressed.. 

I'll also admit that I checked to make sure there wasn't a dark van with antennas and a geocaching logo parked outside my house. ;-)

A few Reviewers read the forums.  All or most the Mods are Reviewers too.  They have their own, private area here as well.  I'd bet that one simply sent an email with a "hey, you might be interested in this one..." to another.   We see it every once-in-a-while when someone badmouths a Reviewer ("He won't publish my cache !"),  and find  by that Reviewer that any issue was on the Poster's end all along.     :D

Edited by cerberus1
splllelling
1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Yeah, and I have to admit that in our area a single NM isn't that much of a red flag. Our area is extremely wet so a large proportion of caches have some sort of note or NM about wet log, etc. some of them seem to be almost seasonal ocurances and locals just do our best, but that makes it harder for a Reviewer to catch the difference between a damp log sheet in December vs a missing cache!

It's very important to use the correct log and document in your log exactly what the issues are. 

To me it's ok to replace a wet log with a dry one but in most cases a wet log indicates a bigger problem,  one that will/should require the owners attention.   If you don't have a spare log or simply don't want to replace it, posting a NM is totally reasonable. 

Either way I'd disable the cache until it could be fixed and make sure my reviewer is aware of what my plans are.

If people are logging there experiences correctly, owners are maintaining their caches properly and everyone is communicating with their reviewers none of this should be a mystery to anybody.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

An inactive CO already ruins folks chances of completing a series if the requirements to finish have issues.  We're finally seeing missing-stage multis going bye-bye here.  Those who have problems entering simple log actions on a cache (for whatever reason) needing help often leave the "hassles" to another.  Tag, you're it.  :)

Yep. I actually reread the posts on the caches in question and you can see how this happens. An occasional NM but mostly comments within a DNF post or even a note. A cumulative cry for help when you read it but not enough to flag it for a Reviewer. Add to that one or two fake finds and it's frustration city.

0

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

It's very important to use the correct log and document in your log exactly what the issues are. 

To me it's ok to replace a wet log with a dry one but in most cases a wet log indicates a bigger problem,  one that will/should require the owners attention.   If you don't have a spare log or simply don't want to replace it, posting a NM is totally reasonable. 

Either way I'd disable the cache until it could be fixed and make sure my reviewer is aware of what my plans are.

If people are logging there experiences correctly, owners are maintaining their caches properly and everyone is communicating with their reviewers none of this should be a mystery to anybody.

 

I'd guesstimate that less than 1/2 the "wet log" notes and NM reflect an actual issue with the cache container. It doesn't matter how waterproof it is or if it's rite in the rain paper ... the second you open the cache around here you've introduced moisture. If it tain't rainin' it's foggy... 

but your point about responsive logging is spot on!

0

Share this post


Link to post

So this all raises a side question:

one of the nearby multi's I was griping about is one I never bothered searching for because it was obvious from the activity that it was incomplete. I didn't post an NM or anything else because I hadn't personally seen the situation.

Would it be wrong to presumptuously have posted an NM? Should I have gone and searched for the obviously nonexistent cache out of existential determination? Would the more appropriate step in that situation be to alert a Reviewer?

0

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

I'd guesstimate that less than 1/2 the "wet log" notes and NM reflect an actual issue with the cache container. It doesn't matter how waterproof it is or if it's rite in the rain paper ... the second you open the cache around here you've introduced moisture. If it tain't rainin' it's foggy... 

but your point about responsive logging is spot on!

I hear ya.   I live up in the north east so my caches see the gambit when it comes to weather.  

I'm sure your local reviewer is aware of your particular situation and makes allowances when they can.

It's not the number of NMs that would concern me. It's how cache owners respond to them that matters.  

1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

So this all raises a side question:

one of the nearby multi's I was griping about is one I never bothered searching for because it was obvious from the activity that it was incomplete. I didn't post an NM or anything else because I hadn't personally seen the situation.

Would it be wrong to presumptuously have posted an NM? Should I have gone and searched for the obviously nonexistent cache out of existential determination? Would the more appropriate step in that situation be to alert a Reviewer?

Oooooh.  Now your opening up a big ole can of worms. 

Personally I won't post a NM unless I've searched for the cache and witnessed the particular issue for myself.  

Edited by justintim1999
spelling
1

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Oooooh.  Now your opening up a big ole can of worms. 

Personally I won't post a NM unless I've searched for the cache and witnessed the particular issue for myself.  

Yeah...at least give it an effort and, if unable to find one of the stages, post a DNF and a NM, mentioning previous logs stating one of the stages is likely missing.

1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Would it be wrong to presumptuously have posted an NM? Should I have gone and searched for the obviously nonexistent cache out of existential determination? Would the more appropriate step in that situation be to alert a Reviewer?

It is wrong but used sometimes. In the worst case, your hearsay-based information may turn out to be wrong. Contacting CO is the best start. Contacting reviewer is always possible.

1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Oooooh.  Now your opening up a bog ole can of worms. 

Personally I won't post a NM unless I've searched for the cache and witnessed the particular issue for myself.  

Yep. And that raises the issue of when to simply post a DNF vs assuming you searched well enough and are good enough to presume you didn't find it because it wasn't there and posting NM. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I hear ya.   I live up in the north east so my caches see the gambit when it comes to weather.  

I'm sure your local reviewer is aware of your particular situation and makes allowances when they can.

It's not the number of NMs that would concern me. It's how cache owners respond to them that matters.  

You do what you think you need to do. Many will tell you, oh no you can never do that without actually visiting the cache. It depends on your level of involvement with the community. If you're really invested, know what is going on with the different hiders and finders, you can make quite an educated guess about caches.

2

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, arisoft said:

It is wrong but used sometimes. In the worst case, your hearsay-based information may turn out to be wrong. Contacting CO is the best start. Contacting reviewer is always possible.

That's my instinct. In individual cache situations I have contacted the CO directly. But Based partially on my experiences with Nomex's actions this morning, it seems that when it's more of a pattern with a cache or series vs my personal experience, it's actually most fair and neutral to contact a Reviewer and ask them to look it over. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

... one of the nearby multi's I was griping about is one I never bothered searching for because it was obvious from the activity that it was incomplete. I didn't post an NM or anything else because I hadn't personally seen the situation.

Would it be wrong to presumptuously have posted an NM? Should I have gone and searched for the obviously nonexistent cache out of existential determination? Would the more appropriate step in that situation be to alert a Reviewer?

I won't log a NM on a cache I haven't been to.  You could be wrong, and now instead of helpful, you're a buttinsky.  We went to a cache that had quite a few "numbers" cachers leaving DNFs and NMs claiming it's not there, and I found the cache in a couple minutes.  :)

A couple years ago one left a Write Note on our lengthy paddle-to after a group accessed it.  Stated he would have gone earlier but wasn't sure it was still there.  Well, he never emailed me (I pass by it around every-other week), and said just that on the cache pageI'd exhaust other options first (email the CO, attempt it...) before writing a log on something I knew nada about. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I won't log a NM on a cache I haven't been to.  You could be wrong, and now instead of helpful, you're a buttinsky.  We went to a cache that had quite a few "numbers" cachers leaving DNFs and NMs claiming it's not there, and I found the cache in a couple minutes.  :)

A couple years ago one left a Write Note on our lengthy paddle-to after a group accessed it.  Stated he would have gone earlier but wasn't sure it was still there.  Well, he never emailed me (I pass by it around every-other week), and said just that on the cache pageI'd exhaust other options first (email the CO, attempt it...) before writing a log on something I knew nada about. 

Our concern exactly, both as searchers and owners. Like I mentioned earlier, we are new enough and most our caches are close enough that we run out the door to check every DNF, lol. That's obviously not possible with distant caches or a CO with a large amount of hides, but one of the caches I was referring to actually had a note either in a NM post or just before or after saying "I wish CO would check on this." How can a CO not respond to that? We'd emailed them about another cache already so I was hesitant to call them out personally on another cache I wasn't even going to bother hunting. That's why now I'm thinking that would be a good situation to simply mention it to a Reviewer.

also, let's say the local community knows the cacher in question, maybe they are having some temporary difficulty and that's why other cachers "in the know" aren't being overly quick to post an NA. Hopefully a Reviewer could gain the insight that I simply wouldn't have. I'm not going to search for something that isn't there, I'm not going to pretend I did, and I'm not always going to challenge a CO, but I do agree we all have a responsibility to keep this game active. And a frustrated first time cacher is unlikely to continue. Not finding a difficulty 5 is one thing. Realizing you spent hours looking for a cache that hasn't been maintained makes it look like a dying game.

1

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

it's actually most fair and neutral to contact a Reviewer and ask them to look it over. 

It depends on situation. If I see guideline violation, I willl contact to reviewer instead of CO. If I am just worrying my capabilities to find the cache, I will contact to CO. If I have tried to find the cache and found nothing I will post DNF and if I found broken cache I will post NM.

0

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, arisoft said:

It depends on situation. If I see guideline violation, I willl contact to reviewer instead of CO. If I am just worrying my capabilities to find the cache, I will contact to CO. If I have tried to find the cache and found nothing I will post DNF and if I found broken cache I will post NM.

Those are good guidelines. I guess what our discussion has been is what to do when just posting another DNF is unlikely to make a difference. And when there's no way for a cacher's personal experience to prove anything? When does a pattern of apparent lack of maintenance rise to a level where it could be a violation of guidelines? When is it more appropriate to let a Reviewer make the next move rather than go on a personal crusade "against" a CO?

0

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Those are good guidelines. I guess what our discussion has been is what to do when just posting another DNF is unlikely to make a difference.

Posting a DNF rarely makes any difference. When many players post DNF it sometimes makes difference. In this case it seems that you've decided beforehand that you will not find the cache. Then you just press the ignore button and you don't have to worry more if you are not willing to consult the CO about your concerns.

26 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

When is it more appropriate to let a Reviewer make the next move rather than go on a personal crusade "against" a CO?

It is always appropriate. I have seen some stupid personal crusades. There is no need for such actions.

0

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Those are good guidelines. I guess what our discussion has been is what to do when just posting another DNF is unlikely to make a difference. And when there's no way for a cacher's personal experience to prove anything? When does a pattern of apparent lack of maintenance rise to a level where it could be a violation of guidelines? When is it more appropriate to let a Reviewer make the next move rather than go on a personal crusade "against" a CO?

That's all personal preference.   If a cache already has two dnf's I'll usually add mine to the list.   If the cache has three or four without a response from the cache owner I'll take a look at the logs and the dates and decide if I'll post a NM.    If I find a cache in need of maintenance I'll typically post a NM regardless of what was previously posted  unless I notice the owner fixed the cache but didn't post an Owners Maintenance Log.  In that case I'll send them an e-mail reminder to post the OML.

1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Yep. And that raises the issue of when to simply post a DNF vs assuming you searched well enough and are good enough to presume you didn't find it because it wasn't there and posting NM. 

No issue here since a DNF isn't saying that the cache is gone or in trouble. It's used in those situations when a person, for what ever reason, DID NOT FIND a cache. Matters not what a cacher's experience is. Of course, it can help a CO and future finders if good information is included in the log. Something like, bees were guarding the cache, the bridge was out, trail closed, searched but ran out of time, or even, searched well but just couldn't locate, etc,,, is always good information to include in the log.

0

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Mudfrog said:

No issue here since a DNF isn't saying that the cache is gone or in trouble. It's used in those situations when a person, for what ever reason, DID NOT FIND a cache. Matters not what a cacher's experience is. Of course, it can help a CO and future finders if good information is included in the log. Something like, bees were guarding the cache, the bridge was out, trail closed, searched but ran out of time, or even, searched well but just couldn't locate, etc,,, is always good information to include in the log.

Totally agree about including plenty of info in a log. In fact any post claiming to be from our team that is less than 50 words should be immediately reported! Someone must have hacked our account. 

The quoted section wasn't so much a personal question, more an observation. Some here commented on the cacher's responsibility to report situations, including logging NM when a cache appears to be missing. I was simply noting that an individual cacher might not feel personally justified to post a NM instead of just a DNF, which can lead to the cache's condition being ignored.

Heres the actual example:

This cache had a reliable Find posted June of 2016. In July a team posted a DNF and noted that someone who had found the cache before confirmed to them that is was missing. In November 2016 another DNF. In June 2017 we posted a DNF and a long log detailing how we'd searched and were hoping someone would check it. The following day someone posted a "find" that I'm 99.9% positive was fake or at least confused since the same cacher posted a few other finds that day but never signed at least the 3 physical logs that I subsequently checked. When we noticed that, around October, I emailed the CO to warn them about that last claimed Find. They said they needed to check it ... but it's only accrued 2 more DNFs with no assurances from the CO.

I know a few of the other cachers that posted DNFs and even noted their suspicions that the cache was gone. They are responsible players and don't just ignore a troubled cache. But at what point should a cacher feel justified or even "obligated" as some have put it, to log an NM instead of just a DNF or alert a Reviewer? Especially when it involves suspicion of an erroneous or fake find? I sorta know what I would do after hashing this out, I was just acknowledging that it's not always clear from previous logs and personal experience and I understand why cachers might hesitate to be the ones raise the alarm.

0

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

I was simply noting that an individual cacher might not feel personally justified to post a NM instead of just a DNF, which can lead to the cache's condition being ignored.

DNFs are not ignored. If the CO ignores them, then someone else will notice them. For example, you have noticed those DNFs and acted as required by not trying to find the cache. There is no special need to hurry anything as long as situation is clear to everyone. Reviewer will disable the cache if it is sure that it is missing or damaged. Every player could do the same decision by reading log entries.

0

Share this post


Link to post

In context, I've been addressing this previous comment of yours:

2 hours ago, arisoft said:

Posting a DNF rarely makes any difference. When many players post DNF it sometimes makes difference. 

And the issue is not so much "should I personally bother to search for this cache?" as much as "If this cache appears to be missing and the CO hasn't done anything in a considerable time, should I take action for the sake of the community." Again the caches that made me ask these questions weren't just a single nano stuck behind a random roadsign. One of these caches should lead locals and visitors to a wonderful piece of art. Another is a multi that basically commandeers an entire cemetery and its surrounding area. These are spots that beg to have caches. As your comment above acknowledged, DNFs didn't call attention to the situation, sometimes for years. Ironically my posting this question got the attention of the Reviewer of the area who took action. I've contemplated offering to adopt the other cache near the artwork, but don't want to be "pushy" with the CO. Which, as you agreed to, came come off as a silly personal crusade.

most of my original question has already been resolved by Nomex and Ive left a post to push another issue forward as well, so now it's more a philosophical debate, which is a bit silly even for geocachers ;-)

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm also regretting my choice of the word "negligent" in the Thread title. The caches may appear neglected but I didn't intend to pass judgement on the CO, only the situation

0

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Totally agree about including plenty of info in a log. In fact any post claiming to be from our team that is less than 50 words should be immediately reported! Someone must have hacked our account. 

The quoted section wasn't so much a personal question, more an observation. Some here commented on the cacher's responsibility to report situations, including logging NM when a cache appears to be missing. I was simply noting that an individual cacher might not feel personally justified to post a NM instead of just a DNF, which can lead to the cache's condition being ignored.

Heres the actual example:

This cache had a reliable Find posted June of 2016. In July a team posted a DNF and noted that someone who had found the cache before confirmed to them that is was missing. In November 2016 another DNF. In June 2017 we posted a DNF and a long log detailing how we'd searched and were hoping someone would check it. The following day someone posted a "find" that I'm 99.9% positive was fake or at least confused since the same cacher posted a few other finds that day but never signed at least the 3 physical logs that I subsequently checked. When we noticed that, around October, I emailed the CO to warn them about that last claimed Find. They said they needed to check it ... but it's only accrued 2 more DNFs with no assurances from the CO.

I know a few of the other cachers that posted DNFs and even noted their suspicions that the cache was gone. They are responsible players and don't just ignore a troubled cache. But at what point should a cacher feel justified or even "obligated" as some have put it, to log an NM instead of just a DNF or alert a Reviewer? Especially when it involves suspicion of an erroneous or fake find? I sorta know what I would do after hashing this out, I was just acknowledging that it's not always clear from previous logs and personal experience and I understand why cachers might hesitate to be the ones raise the alarm.

This all boils down to an unresponsive and inattentive cache owner.   A simple visit and owners maintenance log would solve everything. 

I normally don't read in-depth into the condition of caches.  I'll post my experience and move on but it seems like you have an interest in this particular cache so here's what I'd do.  I'd check up on the cache if only to satisfy myself it's missing,  then I'd post a needs archived and explain to the reviewer everything you've listed above.   

I can see how this could slip by a reviewer but since you've done all the leg work why not give that information to your reviewer and see what they think?  There's no need to justify or explain your actions.  The cache owners non-involvement has already opened that door.

1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

This all boils down to an unresponsive and inattentive cache owner.   A simple visit and owners maintenance log would solve everything. 

I normally don't read in-depth into the condition of caches.  I'll post my experience and move on but it seems like you have an interest in this particular cache so here's what I'd do.  I'd check up on the cache if only to satisfy myself it's missing,  then I'd post a needs archived and explain to the reviewer everything you've listed above.   

I can see how this could slip by a reviewer but since you've done all the leg work why not give that information to your reviewer and see what they think?  There's no need to justify or explain your actions.  The cache owners non-involvement has already opened that door.

Upvote! I fully agree, especially after all this discussion. I think your concise list of steps makes the most sense. It's always just a fine line between overstepping in the CO vs. letting the situation continue unchanged. I guess another question underlying all this is: what's worse? Pestering the CO or tattling to the Reviewer? lol 

what a game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

This all boils down to an unresponsive and inattentive cache owner.

No, it all boils down to a community with no interest in cache maintenance. Cache owners get unresponsive and inattentive. It's just part of the game. Get used to it. It isn't a problem until the community doesn't do anything except gripe.

To the OP: yes, you most certainly should have posted an NM when you saw a problem and decided not to try to look for the cache. That's The Perfect time to stop worrying about "seeing it for yourself". The fact that you didn't go look for it in itself means it needs maintenance. The problem was precisely that no one looked for the cache, so no one thought they could post an NM or an NA, so NOTHING EVER HAPPENED. And no matter what arisoft says, it was your fault. Not the CO, who could be dead for all we know. Certainly not Nomex, although he went out of his way to fix up your problem for you, a very typical wonderful reviewer jumping in to clean up caches that the community never should have left to fester so long. It wasn't "everyone else" that didn't post NMs or NAs. You are the one that detected the problem and didn't do anything about it. You are "everyone else".

The best approach is to take action. Don't just complain and wait for it to suddenly get right. The someone-else's-job attitude is what I think is wrong with geocaching today.

0

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

I'm also regretting my choice of the word "negligent" in the Thread title. The caches may appear neglected but I didn't intend to pass judgement on the CO, only the situation

 

8 minutes ago, Doc_musketeers said:

Upvote! I fully agree, especially after all this discussion. I think your concise list of steps makes the most sense. It's always just a fine line between overstepping in the CO vs. letting the situation continue unchanged. I guess another question underlying all this is: what's worse? Pestering the CO or tattling to the Reviewer? lol 

what a game.

Don't beat yourself up too bad by using the word negligent.   Most of these type of issues are perpetuated by negligent cache owners.   

You shouldn't have to pester an active CO.  In fact from the scenario you've laid out most responsive owners would have already picked up on the discrepancy's and  have fixed the problem by now.   It's always nice to try to handle these types of situations "In house".   I'm quite sure reviewers would appreciate the reduced workload. On the flip side that's what reviewers are there for, to keep the game healthy and fun and they rely on us to help them accomplish that.  

1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, dprovan said:

No, it all boils down to a community with no interest in cache maintenance. Cache owners get unresponsive and inattentive. It's just part of the game. Get used to it. It isn't a problem until the community doesn't do anything except gripe.

To the OP: yes, you most certainly should have posted an NM when you saw a problem and decided not to try to look for the cache. That's The Perfect time to stop worrying about "seeing it for yourself". The fact that you didn't go look for it in itself means it needs maintenance. The problem was precisely that no one looked for the cache, so no one thought they could post an NM or an NA, so NOTHING EVER HAPPENED. And no matter what arisoft says, it was your fault. Not the CO, who could be dead for all we know. Certainly not Nomex, although he went out of his way to fix up your problem for you, a very typical wonderful reviewer jumping in to clean up caches that the community never should have left to fester so long. It wasn't "everyone else" that didn't post NMs or NAs. You are the one that detected the problem and didn't do anything about it. You are "everyone else".

The best approach is to take action. Don't just complain and wait for it to suddenly get right. The someone-else's-job attitude is what I think is wrong with geocaching today.

No.  I'm part of my caching community and I take a great interest in cache maintenance.   I don't accept that unresponsive and inattentive cache owners are "part of the game" and I'm never getting used to that idea.   

Do your maintenance, disable your caches until you can or archive them.  It's that simple.

Don't blame me or my community for your crappy caches.  We had nothing to do with them.  

1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, dprovan said:

No, it all boils down to a community with no interest in cache maintenance. Cache owners get unresponsive and inattentive. It's just part of the game. Get used to it. It isn't a problem until the community doesn't do anything except gripe.

To the OP: yes, you most certainly should have posted an NM when you saw a problem and decided not to try to look for the cache. That's The Perfect time to stop worrying about "seeing it for yourself". The fact that you didn't go look for it in itself means it needs maintenance. The problem was precisely that no one looked for the cache, so no one thought they could post an NM or an NA, so NOTHING EVER HAPPENED. And no matter what arisoft says, it was your fault. Not the CO, who could be dead for all we know. Certainly not Nomex, although he went out of his way to fix up your problem for you, a very typical wonderful reviewer jumping in to clean up caches that the community never should have left to fester so long. It wasn't "everyone else" that didn't post NMs or NAs. You are the one that detected the problem and didn't do anything about it. You are "everyone else".

The best approach is to take action. Don't just complain and wait for it to suddenly get right. The someone-else's-job attitude is what I think is wrong with geocaching today.

Hmm. Well, most living COs in our area are responsive, hence my dilemma. I'm not sure how I can simultaneously just "get used to it" which implies it's beyond my control, while also somehow taking personal blame for the situation. Additionally, I did message the CO, so they were alive last time I knew. And this whole thread was HOW to solve the problem, not if I should. I didn't "wait around for Nomex to fix my problems" I asked the community whether I should continue trying to work with the CO or call it to Nomex' attention. Numerous other posters bristled at the idea of posting anything on a cache they hadn't personally searched for, and they had good supporting arguments. Hence my question "which" not "why should I bother."

Frankly Blame rarely solves issues. Action does. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I don't accept that unresponsive and inattentive cache owners are "part of the game" and I'm never getting used to that idea.   

People die.

People get busy with more important things.

People decide that other activities are more interesting.

And they don't always clean up their caches beforehand. Unresponsive and inattentive cache owners have always been part of the game, and will continue to be part of the game. Refusing to accept this basic truth won't change it.

The question is, what do we do about it?

2

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, niraD said:

People die.

People get busy with more important things.

People decide that other activities are more interesting.

And they don't always clean up their caches beforehand. Unresponsive and inattentive cache owners have always been part of the game, and will continue to be part of the game. Refusing to accept this basic truth won't change it.

The question is, what do we do about it?

Yep.  A good friend had a heart attack.  Guess what ... caching wasn't the first concern at the time.  :)

The other 2/3rds called and found out the circumstances (I emailed, calling him an slacker earlier.  Oops.  :D ) then while they were in for bypasses and stuff, we took care of their maintenance that was definitely needed.  No issues now that they're back on their feet.

Edited by cerberus1
addifications
1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, niraD said:

People die.

People get busy with more important things.

People decide that other activities are more interesting.

And they don't always clean up their caches beforehand. Unresponsive and inattentive cache owners have always been part of the game, and will continue to be part of the game. Refusing to accept this basic truth won't change it.

The question is, what do we do about it?

Exactly! It's not a matter of blame. And when it comes to responsibility, a cacher should log their DNFs. They should report obvious issues. As Nomex and Arisoft mentioned about looking at a 100 mile radius, these caches weren't obvious. How often do we even look at the cache owners name? Our team has 75 finds. We are just figuring out who's who locally. We only noticed it because these caches are so close to us. One of the problems even involved what appeared to be a false find. Is the average cacher supposed to play detective on every cache they can't find? That would be an impossible responsibility. But when we DO stumble upon something, we need to do something. Dprovan mentioned relying on the already overworked volunteer Reviewers. That was indeed part of the question. How far do we go trying to settle something "in house" and is it better to flag within the log or alert a Reviewer to address the situation. That is what they have the authority to do, after all

0

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Doc_musketeers said:

"If this cache appears to be missing and the CO hasn't done anything in a considerable time, should I take action for the sake of the community."

That's how I see it. 

1

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4