+coachstahly Posted December 15, 2018 Share Posted December 15, 2018 22 hours ago, Mudfrog said: As per usual, bad behavior is being defended. It doesn't matter the age of the cache owner, he should be responsible for the cache he placed. Sure, there is the slight chance the CO is incapacitated in some way but it's more likely he or she has simply chosen to ignore the problem. No, no, no, no, no. No one is defending the lack of maintenance on the part of the CO or the local maintainer. They're calling out someone who assumed the CO was lying because they don't believe a local maintainer was actually in place. That's the behavior that's "bad". I would make an assumption that everyone who has replied recently is in complete agreement with everything you say past the bolded part above, as well as what LOne.R has stated regarding the lack of maintenance on the part of the CO or local maintainer. I know I do. The lack of action on the CO's part goes directly against the expectations outlined in the guidelines. They should NOT be given a free pass and I don't see anyone actually supporting their lack of maintenance. 8 hours ago, Mudfrog said: Bad person, no! A person that probably doesn't want to take care of his geocaching business, yes! So a person who, for whatever reason, chooses not to maintain their caches is a bad person? So my good friend, who is a police officer, has withdrawn from regular interaction with the game. He archived some of his caches that were most likely in trouble when he stopped playing regularly and adopted out many others but he left many out that didn't have issues at the time. Two years later, many are in disrepair and he's letting the reviewer determine the fate. According to you, that makes him a bad person. He's one of the nicest guys I know, he's got a family he adores, a job that requires him to put his life on the line in service to the community, political views opposite of mine, and I value him as a good person and a good friend. NONE of these things excuse his inaction regarding maintenance of his caches but I will never call him a bad person because he has chosen to disregard the guidelines that state what is expected of him as a CO. I've raised the point with him but it's all for naught. I absolutely wish and think he should do something about it but I don't think any less of him because of it. I certainly view him as an example of a CO that other COs shouldn't emulate but to make the claim he's a bad person because he doesn't do what is expected of him goes too far, IMO. 8 hours ago, Mudfrog said: You're right, if the cache is in trouble, it's in trouble,,, and this is where the owner of said cache needs to step up. Unfortunately, there are too many COs that just don't care. NMs, and even NAs, can stare them in the face with no action taken. The CHS does sometimes help when this occurs. I'm in complete agreement with the sentiment you express here. Please don't get me wrong. I just don't believe that someone who doesn't do what is expected (not required, expected) is therefore assumed to be a bad person. Action should be taken to address caches with NM/NA logs. In the case of inaction, the CHS can help, but so can other COs who post NM logs on those caches, followed up by the subsequent NA logs. 1 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.