Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Theniyaal

Etiquette question regarding the replacement of an abandoned cache

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, K13 said:

 

That's why I put those parts in parentheses. It's not in the Guidelines but it seems to be an acceptable practice, tacitly OKed by the Reviewers in those areas.

 

So whats the difference? Why is something that's not in the guidelines acceptable for a Powertrail, when its not acceptable in all other circumstances? Why do some reviewers allow things to "just slip by" when others come down hard and fast, on the same thing. If its not allowed in the Guidelines, then it shouldn't be allowed, Full Stop. If its allowed, sort of, then change the guidelines to suit, sort of. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

So whats the difference? Why is something that's not in the guidelines acceptable for a Powertrail, when its not acceptable in all other circumstances? Why do some reviewers allow things to "just slip by" when others come down hard and fast, on the same thing. If its not allowed in the Guidelines, then it shouldn't be allowed, Full Stop. If its allowed, sort of, then change the guidelines to suit, sort of. 

Yeah, it doesn't make much sense to me. I'm sure the reviewers know that the community maintenance will occur on powertrails regardless of whether it's in the description or not, but the listing should still meet the guidelines, if only to prevent monkey-see/monkey-do folks from thinking it's acceptable and including it in their non-PT description.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The A-Team said:
2 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

So whats the difference? Why is something that's not in the guidelines acceptable for a Powertrail, when its not acceptable in all other circumstances? Why do some reviewers allow things to "just slip by" when others come down hard and fast, on the same thing. If its not allowed in the Guidelines, then it shouldn't be allowed, Full Stop. If its allowed, sort of, then change the guidelines to suit, sort of. 

Yeah, it doesn't make much sense to me. I'm sure the reviewers know that the community maintenance will occur on powertrails regardless of whether it's in the description or not, but the listing should still meet the guidelines, if only to prevent monkey-see/monkey-do folks from thinking it's acceptable and including it in their non-PT description.

It seems like one of those "nudge nudge, wink wink" situations to me. The owners of a numbers trail can accept and even endorse all sorts of "shortcuts", but they can't actually put many of them in writing on the cache descriptions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:
8 hours ago, K13 said:

 

That's why I put those parts in parentheses. It's not in the Guidelines but it seems to be an acceptable practice, tacitly OKed by the Reviewers in those areas.

 

So whats the difference? Why is something that's not in the guidelines acceptable for a Powertrail, when its not acceptable in all other circumstances? Why do some reviewers allow things to "just slip by" when others come down hard and fast, on the same thing. If its not allowed in the Guidelines, then it shouldn't be allowed, Full Stop. If its allowed, sort of, then change the guidelines to suit, sort of. 

 

That's the issue I was pointing out.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

So whats the difference? Why is something that's not in the guidelines acceptable for a Powertrail, when its not acceptable in all other circumstances?

I assume you didn't really want an answer, but the difference is that expectation on a powertrail are much lower than on an arbitrary cache. For a true powertrail, no one makes any bones about the fact that it was set and is sought in order to find a large number of caches,. No one doing a powertrail cares that there are no redeeming features to the cache such as location, quality, or reliability.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, dprovan said:

I assume you didn't really want an answer, but the difference is that expectation on a powertrail are much lower than on an arbitrary cache. For a true powertrail, no one makes any bones about the fact that it was set and is sought in order to find a large number of caches,. No one doing a powertrail cares that there are no redeeming features to the cache such as location, quality, or reliability.

Actually, I was chasing an answer, because I am a bit embroiled, as are a number of other Aussie's, in a situation where the rules of the game are being strictly interpreted by an official of the game (from overseas, who is doing the job on a temporary basis, while the usual game official is on a holiday) rather that a more laid back, relaxed attitude that us Aussie's tend to use. 

 

So, again I ask, what's the difference. Is a precedent being set here. If a reviewer (or apparently a number of reviewers) can turn a blind eye to Groundspeaks rules of the game for one particular scenario, because it's become "accepted practise"  then why can't this happen in other cases of "accepted practise" which have developed on a regional basis. 

 

It's got to a point where other players are deliberately not following the rules, to avoid situations where the temporary game official starts intervening in an over zealous manner. 

Edited by Bundyrumandcoke

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Actually, I was chasing an answer, because I am a bit embroiled, as are a number of other Aussie's, in a situation where the rules of the game are being strictly interpreted by an official of the game (from overseas, who is doing the job on a temporary basis, while the usual game official is on a holiday) rather that a more laid back, relaxed attitude that us Aussie's tend to use. 

 

So, again I ask, what's the difference. Is a precedent being set here. If a reviewer (or apparently a number of reviewers) can turn a blind eye to Groundspeaks rules of the game for one particular scenario, because it's become "accepted practise"  then why can't this happen in other cases of "accepted practise" which have developed on a regional basis. 

 

It's got to a point where other players are deliberately not following the rules, to avoid situations where the temporary game official starts intervening in an over zealous manner. 

 

Hope your reviewer is not visiting North Korea I hear they have re-education camps....... 

 

Even here some folks would agree with you as this being an accepted practice. All indication I've seen is GS is cracking down on this and trying to improve the overall quality of the game. This is royally ticking of some folks who want to abide by their own code and do what ever they have been doing for the past X number of years. Some have chosen to give up and stop, that is their prerogative.  

 

The examples provided show clearly an abandoned cache, and someone from Australia requesting maintenance. That maintenance is not coming and the cache gets archived. One cache in an semi-urban area is not going to ruin your fun. No big deal. Look at as an opportunity to place a new cache if the location is great and have it maintained.  If you are worried about some remote cache going away, arrange for plans to adopt it out to you or a group account if it is highly valued in the community. Take a look at 

League of Id Cachers they publish and more importantly maintain their caches as a geocaching group in remote locations. 

 

Resistance to change is futile.  I for one have noticed a considerable improvement in cache quality this past year, and am glad for it. Still finding ignored NM & DNF streaks but it is getting much better.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Actually, I was chasing an answer, because I am a bit embroiled, as are a number of other Aussie's, in a situation where the rules of the game are being strictly interpreted by an official of the game (from overseas, who is doing the job on a temporary basis, while the usual game official is on a holiday) rather that a more laid back, relaxed attitude that us Aussie's tend to use. 

 

So, again I ask, what's the difference. Is a precedent being set here. If a reviewer (or apparently a number of reviewers) can turn a blind eye to Groundspeaks rules of the game for one particular scenario, because it's become "accepted practise"  then why can't this happen in other cases of "accepted practise" which have developed on a regional basis. 

 

It's got to a point where other players are deliberately not following the rules, to avoid situations where the temporary game official starts intervening in an over zealous manner. 

If the reviewer to whom you are referring is the one I have seen logging many TDs and I cannot see where this reviewer as in any way "over zealous". The TDs I'm seeing are caches with serious mainteance issues with, in most cases, absentee COs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I got a log a couple of days ago, a found, then a write note, on one of my caches, telling me that it needs attention, and telling me they were not prepared to put in a NM log, due to this particular reviewers "propensity to disable NM caches". The reviewer was specifically named. It seems I am not the only cacher over here who has had some issues. Over zealous, much? 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Well, I got a log a couple of days ago, a found, then a write note, on one of my caches, telling me that it needs attention, and telling me they were not prepared to put in a NM log, due to this particular reviewers "propensity to disable NM caches". The reviewer was specifically named. It seems I am not the only cacher over here who has had some issues. Over zealous, much? 

 

Wouldn't it just be easier and less angsty to go maintain the cache?

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Team Microdot said:
8 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Well, I got a log a couple of days ago, a found, then a write note, on one of my caches, telling me that it needs attention, and telling me they were not prepared to put in a NM log, due to this particular reviewers "propensity to disable NM caches". The reviewer was specifically named. It seems I am not the only cacher over here who has had some issues. Over zealous, much? 

 

Wouldn't it just be easier and less angsty to go maintain the cache?

 

That doesn't seem to have been Bundyrumandcoke's point at all.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
25 minutes ago, niraD said:

That doesn't seem to have been Bundyrumandcoke's point at all.

And?

Non sequitur much?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, niraD said:

Non sequitur much?

 

Not sure what you mean.

 

It seems to me that it would be easier to just maintain the cache than invest all this time getting bent out of shape because your regular reviewer:

 

17 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

can turn a blind eye to Groundspeaks rules of the game for one particular scenario, because it's become "accepted practise"

 

and the temporary reviewer can't - or chooses not to.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

 

Wouldn't it just be easier and less angsty to go maintain the cache?

Seems my response of a couple if hours got lost in Lala land. Maintenance of the cache I mention above is scheduled for the next day or so, plus another, and a third that is currently off line is going back out tomorrow (actually today Now) But you have missed my point entirely. This isn't about maintaining one or more of my own caches, it's about the inconsistency of reviewers applying Groundspeaks rules in their own way, above and beyond variations caused by local law variations. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Seems my response of a couple if hours got lost in Lala land. Maintenance of the cache I mention above is scheduled for the next day or so, plus another, and a third that is currently off line is going back out tomorrow (actually today Now) But you have missed my point entirely. This isn't about maintaining one or more of my own caches, it's about the inconsistency of reviewers applying Groundspeaks rules in their own way, above and beyond variations caused by local law variations. 

 

You assume too much.

 

I didn't miss your point. It was more that I didn't think it was worth investing the effort required to make it - quite apart from indicating to TPTB that your regular local reviewer doesn't seem to follow the guidelines.

 

ETA - what we'll end up with here is the old argument - people like their reviewer to be flexible - right up to the point where that flexibility doesn't suit them - at which point they decry inconsistency.

Edited by Team Microdot
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

it's about the inconsistency of reviewers applying Groundspeaks rules in their own way, above and beyond variations caused by local law variations. 

 

5 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

indicating to TPTB that your regular local reviewer doesn't seem to follow the guidelines.

 

Yep. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

 

Yep. 

Which brings me right back to an earlier point about powertrails. As was said by others, not me, reviewers seem to take a different view to caches in a PT, allowing things to slip by, which are not necessarily completely in line with the rules, because "it's part of a Powertrail" But, each cache in a powertrail is a cache in it's own right, so therefore should have to strictly follow the guidelines as set out or else this apparent flexibility and discretion that the reviewers seem to have, has to be able to be applied across the board. You can't have it both ways. 

Edited by Bundyrumandcoke

Share this post


Link to post

Anyhow, it doesn't really matter anymore. The cache that HAS caused all this angst has been archived by our "friendly" temporary reviewer, and the insitu cache has been offered to local cachers as a gimme. 

Share this post


Link to post

But this got me thinking, I know of at least 2 caches that could have been archived years ago, one placed in 2003, could have been back in 2007 when the local maintainer departed the area, and the other probably a year or so later. Both are still surviving, all these years later by caching community maintenance. And no, I am not stupid enough to name them here, in case someone goes to archive them because, "it's against the rules". 

Edited by Bundyrumandcoke

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:

ETA - what we'll end up with here is the old argument - people like their reviewer to be flexible - right up to the point where that flexibility doesn't suit them - at which point they decry inconsistency.

You seem to think Bundyrumandcoke is complaining, but I see this as just a conversation about some behavior by a reviewer that seems inconsistent or confusing.

 

23 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Which brings me right back to an earlier point about powertrails. As was said by others, not me, reviewers seem to take a different view to caches in a PT, allowing things to slip by, which are not necessarily completely in line with the rules, because "it's part of a Powertrail" But, each cache in a powertrail is a cache in it's own right, so therefore should have to strictly follow the guidelines as set out or else this apparent flexibility and discretion that the reviewers seem to have, has to be able to be applied across the board. You can't have it both ways. 

I'm not sure what your reviewer is doing, but people rarely post DNFs or NMs on powertrails, so there's no reason to expect a reviewer to have any reason to step in. From what I can tell, the reviewer that's changing things in your area is reacting to things in the log, so that's a different kettle of fish. There has been a general tightening up of standards including quicker unilateral action by reviewers, and this might be even more disconcerting when a reviewer with tighter standards steps in and starts acting in an area that has a tradition of looser standards. The best way to find out what's going on and provide feedback is to talk to the reviewer. Maybe he needs some lessons in local standards, or maybe he can give you an update on the newer GS policies. One of the trends I'm seeing is towards more universal standards and ignoring local preferences, and, from what you're saying, that would hit your area particularly hard. Talking it over is the best way to approach issues like that.

 

15 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

But this got me thinking, I know of at least 2 caches that could have been archived years ago, one back in 2007 when the local maintainer departed the area, and the other probably a year or so later. Both are still surviving, all these years later by caching community maintenance. And no, I am not stupid enough to name them here, in case someone goes to archive them because, "it's against the rules". 

I'm no expert or anything, but I think in years past, reviewers were more personally involved with the caches, so in many case they weren't just passively ignoring certain problem caches, they were actively protecting them. I think that's fine. What's important is whether people are enjoying a cache, and I consider the rules just something to help us do that. Recently, I think reviewers are becoming more detached from the community for various reasons, although I think shear volume of caches is the main one. I understand that, too. That makes them more likely to react to a cache that's having a little trouble than they might have back when there were fewer caches, many of which were planted by the reviewers' friends. One mantra the guidelines have always stressed is that there's no such thing as precedent in geocaching. Just because you've seen something somewhere else doesn't mean it will be allowed for you.

Share this post


Link to post

All reviewers are empowered to raise their hand and nominate a new reviewer to help out if they're feeling too busy.  I've done that many times.  The territory I used to cover all on my own is now served by eight volunteers.  Right now, the pace of new cache hides is pretty stable in the USA and Australia.

 

I don't think that this has very much to do with the etiquette question that's the subject of our forum thread here. 

  • Replacing a missing or damaged cache for an owner with their advance permission is always fine.
  • Saying on the cache page that "community maintenance" is encouraged is NOT an adequate maintenance plan, and I won't publish a cache that includes such statements - regardless of whether it's part of a "power trail."
  • "Throwdown" replacements are officially discouraged.
  • A throwdown cache placed after a reviewer has already disabled a missing or damaged cache doesn't solve the underlying issue: the cache lacks an active owner.  I will ignore the throwdown and archive the cache if the owner doesn't act to "accept" the throwdown retroactively.  Many reviewers will do the same.  But, many reviewers are dogs.
Edited by Keystone

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Which brings me right back to an earlier point about powertrails. As was said by others, not me, reviewers seem to take a different view to caches in a PT, allowing things to slip by, which are not necessarily completely in line with the rules, because "it's part of a Powertrail" But, each cache in a powertrail is a cache in it's own right, so therefore should have to strictly follow the guidelines as set out or else this apparent flexibility and discretion that the reviewers seem to have, has to be able to be applied across the board. You can't have it both ways. 

 

I wish that all reviewers treated PTs as they do all other cache types (thankfully that's generally the case where I live, as long as people log DNFs and NMs/NAs).

 

But I get the feeling that you would prefer that all caches be treated like PTs--community maintained. You would not be alone in wanting community-maintenance for all caches listed in the GC database. I expect most of cache owners would love it. The game would become dominated by throwdowns and people would be expected to bring their own container to the posted coordinates to drop if they can't find the cache. No listing would ever be archived. Eventually, all areas will be saturated. No new hides. 

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

So, if shear numbers of caches coming online is an issue, then GS, as the owners of the game, have to step up to the plate and appoint more reviewers. 

I don't think the ratio is the issue. There are millions of active caches all over the world. There's no reason to expect reviewers to be personally involved with every cache under their jurisdiction. That time has passed. Among other things, the kind of thing you're experiencing will always be common, where, for whatever reason, a reviewer has to step in and cover an area he has no personal connection to. Personally, I agree there's a downside to that -- many people think universal consistency is desirable, by the way -- but I accept it as an unavoidable change to a game that's become global whether we like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Keystone said:

 

I don't think that this has very much to do with the etiquette question that's the subject of our forum thread here. 

  • Replacing a missing or damaged cache for an owner with their advance permission is always fine.
  • Saying on the cache page that "community maintenance" is encouraged is NOT an adequate maintenance plan, and I won't publish a cache that includes such statements - regardless of whether it's part of a "power trail."

 

5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

But I get the feeling that you would prefer that all caches be treated like PTs--community maintained. You would not be alone in wanting community-maintenance for all caches listed in the GC database.

 

I will address both these responses together, as they are very similar. 

 

Nothing could be further from the truth. Listing a new cache with the words "Can visiting cachers please maintain the cache for me, please" or similar, is against the rules, and obviously, completely wrong. But that's not the question here. The question originally posed was "Etiquette regarding replacement of abandoned caches", and this is, I believe, what I have been responding to all along. By this, I imagine the question is being asked about an already in place cache container, up and running, published, that for some reason, the owner no longer is maintaining for whatever reason. it could be, they lost interest in playing, they died, moved away, or something else. The rules say, archive. Easy, Simple. 

 

Way back when I started playing, in 2006, there was one cache in my city, a city of about 45000 people. And it wasn't owned by a local, it had been placed by a visitor, with a local relative as maintainer. The next closest was about 20 miles away, the next 60 miles, the next about 100 miles, each way. Outside the large metropolitan areas, caches were very few and far between. Occasionally, a local cacher would flood a locality with hides, but these were not the norm. And there is a LOT of nothing in those few and far between places. Head south from where I live, its about 500 miles, north its about 1500 miles, and I haven't even left my state. Its about a 6 hr drive to my capital city. 

 

For this reason, we tended to keep any caches that were published, up and running, almost at any cost. Plus the aussie trait of helping a mate, meant a lot of aussie cachers have repair kits, some very extensive, in their vehicles, so "community maintenance" for want of a better phrase, was born. Is it in the rules, no. But if not for it, then chances are, you wouldn't have anywhere near as many cachers in Australia as there is now. You could travel literally hundreds of KM and not have a cache to find. We just do not have the population density, or population spread, that you have in the USA. Even now, about 26 million people spread over a land mass the approx. size of the 48 lower states, mainly concentrated in the south east corner of the country, and within about 200 miles of the eastern seaboard, and there is a whole lot of nothingness out there. 

 

I developed one of those remote geocaching hubs, a town or city with a high concentration of hides, about 50 in my first year or so of playing. There was nothing else I could do. An all day drive to find a couple of caches just wasn't feasible weekend after weekend. I then moved to a smaller country town for work, and stayed there for 7 years. This was even worse. At one point, I had no unfound caches within an approx. 300km radius, and that totalled about a dozen finds inside that radius. When I moved back to my hometown, about 4 years ago, the situation had improved somewhat. There is probably now about 10 cachers in town. 

 

Whilst I cant speak with first hand knowledge, I think the local reviewers recognised this situation, and have allowed it to continue. We have had various reviewers over the time I have played, and even some overseas reviewers coming in from time to time. All has been sweet. The game has continued on much the same, until about 6 months ago, when it was announced that our local reviewers were taking extended leave to travel, and a new reviewer would be taking over their duties on a temporary basis. Its gone downhill since then. Is he/she following the rules as set down by Groundspeak, I cant deny that, yes. But there seems to be absolutely no give to take here. Its bang, bang, bang, the rules say this, or that, that's whats going to happen.

 

Ahh Ha, I hear you say, Bundyrumandcoke has a case of sour grapes. Possibly, but I haven't tried to get a cache published in a couple of years, I haven't had a listing declined recently. I simply did, a few months ago, what I and many other aussie cachers have done innumerable times, performed maintenance on a cache that wasn't our own. And now, because I cannot remove the little red spanner, that cache has now been archived. The container is still there. Its now rubbish. 

 

Am I seeking to make throwdowns, as you call them, acceptable, of course not. Nor am I attempting to bring holiday caches back to life. I can actually do either of these things, as well as a whole heap of other things that GS no longer allows, quite easily by listing on a parallel service, Geocaching Australia. 

 

Check my profile, you will see that I have a couple of caches that are currently disabled. One, Bundys Commute #4, has been disabled for about 9 weeks. Yes, by now, it probably should have been archived. (Its getting replaced later today) Personally, I still own a number of caches out west, in that little country town where I spent 7 years. They rely on community maintenance, even though I have never asked for it on the pages, as its too far from home to keep up regular maintenance. When I moved back home, I archived approx. 1/2 of the caches out there, but kept some going. If there were any issues arising, I would then archive them. But all have continued along well. 

 

As I said previously, I can name (but I wont) 2 caches that have relied on community maintenance for well over 10 years. One, placed in 2003, a holiday cache with local resident as maintainer, should have been archived when the local maintainer moved away, but a cache from 2003 is a rarity in these parts, and is worth keeping alive. Plus its a beaut spot. 

 

By way of example. Here is a You Tube clip. It shows graphically the growth of caching in Australia from July 2000 to Aug 2009. Each dot is a cache. At the end of the clip, there are about 24500 caches that have been published. But it gives you a good perspective of the caching hot spots as they developed, and the huge areas of caching emptiness or near emptiness in between. Remember, you are looking at an area the approx. size of the lower 48 states of the union.

 

EDITED ADDENDUM

 

Local variances must occur in the rules. I read often in the forums where you have to deal with various levels of authorities placing certain restrictions on the game at various times or places. We also have this. But additionally, some placement rules that apply in the US, don't, or are not as strict over here. The example I use most often is placement in close proximity to active rail corridors. I believe, over there, its 150 yards, or 500 ft, or some such huge figure. In my home state, its 10 metres (approx. 30 ft) from the outer rail, or outside the boundary fenceline. Being a train driver (or engineer, as you call them) its a subject close to my heart. One set of rules cannot cover all aspects of this game, everywhere its played. There should be no reason that the rules regarding cache maintenance cannot also be more flexible where it is warranted. 

 

Can I ask, hypothetical question. A geocaching staff member at a polar station at the South Pole places a Geocache on one of the buildings on the base. That staff member then departs for the winter, with the full intention of returning to the base in the coming spring. The cache was published, and available for finding, prior to their departure. Due to the low number of possible visitors, and their intention to return next year, they see no need to advise anyone else on base of the caches existence. Unfortunately, an illness prevents them from returning to the base as planned. They subsequently die. Time passes, and over the ensuing couple of years, the ravages of the climate take their toll on the container, but its still there, having been found and logged by a number of geocaching scientists. One logs a NM on the cache. One subsequent geocacher decided to put a new container in its place. This is the one and only geocache at the South Pole. Archive? 

 

FURTHER ADDENDUM

 

To take this to the extreme- 

 

What about the cache on the ISS? Who maintains that one? Apart from the fact its on the ISS, what makes it different to any other cache, apart from the fact it doesn't have a log book. 

 

 

 

Edited by Bundyrumandcoke
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

For this reason, we tended to keep any caches that were published, up and running, almost at any cost. Plus the aussie trait of helping a mate, meant a lot of aussie cachers have repair kits, some very extensive, in their vehicles, so "community maintenance" for want of a better phrase, was born. Is it in the rules, no.

I really do understand the sentiment and the logic. I also understand wanting to help by replacing a log or missing lid, or even swapping out a cracked or broken container. And of course, where I live now is vastly different than Austrailia. But in my experience, since 2006 as well, although people use the retoric of "helping a mate," the truth has been that they are really helping themselves so they can claim one more Found it when there was nothing to find. Is what you describe a cacher driving for hours, then hiking for hours, from his/her home and civilization to perform maintenance on a cache that isn't his/hers to help out a mate wanting to find it? Or is it a cacher driving for hours, then hiking for hours, from his/her home and civilization, to a beautiful location, hoping to find a cache, but failing to find it, places a new one to help out his mate, but then posts an online Found it log, when in actuality he found nothing other than the place he thinks the cache might have been?

 

35 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

One, placed in 2003, a holiday cache with local resident as maintainer, should have been archived when the local maintainer moved away, but a cache from 2003 is a rarity in these parts, and is worth keeping alive. Plus its a beaut spot. 

The sentiment of a beaut spot and historicity is understood and shared by most. It was even a recent topic in the forums. But it is the listing that some consider historic, not a replaced container or throwdown. The beaut spot will still be a beaut spot with no cache or a newly published cache.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I read that discussion about historic caches. The debate raged, with interesting and valid points on both sides.  I do disagree with one point from that discussion, that the listing itself is historic, and that it lives forever as a listing, even when archived. Whilst true, in reality, who goes through all the archived caches, and for what reason, apart from those die hard cachers who search for still in place, archived containers. 

 

To bring up points form that discussion. What does make a cache historic? As I pointed out, I have one of my own that I think I could nominate. 

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCYZ1H_carorica-gladstones-tb-motel?guid=eb0162f7-2e4b-4ecb-a4ca-c7c9118e1370

 

Placed Oct 2006

 

Never been offline, never been DNFed, never been replaced, original container, original log book. 

 

Why do I think its historic, its an early game piece in this area, original, all in tact. Like finding Tommy the Atomic Robot, with original packaging, in an old shed, rather than going out and buying a new replica. 

Share this post


Link to post

And Yes, you make valid points about cache replacement. You do describe, essentially, what I did, so I can see your side of the discussion. It actually raises an interesting scenario that I was involved in. Rescuing a lost cache container, which actually ended up being the original, and one replacement, at GZ. A second replacement was in play at the time. They were down the bottom of a hollow pipe fence post. Read the posts from April 2017. 

http://coord.info/GC70YV4

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Team Christiansen said:

But in my experience, since 2006 as well, although people use the retoric of "helping a mate," the truth has been that they are really helping themselves so they can claim one more Found it when there was nothing to find.

I don't deny there are people that throw down just so they can claim a find, but what I've seen in my area is really helping a mate. The fact that someone can claim a find they couldn't otherwise claim being incidental. When I first started in 2010, it wasn't unusual, and no one cared much. Neither the perpetrator nor any other seekers were concerned about the fact that someone could claim 10 finds in that day instead of only 9. Even the person dropping the cache was doing it more to clear the map -- "been there, done that" -- than because it gave them +1.

 

Since then, almost everyone has cellphones, so the behavior hasn't changed much except that most people are very careful to call the CO and ask for permission before replacing a cache.

 

The only time I can remember rampant throwdowns is the occasional unscrupulous outsider cruising through town, but that hasn't happened for years.

Share this post


Link to post

There is also a presumption in this discussion about a complete replacement cache. But what about a damaged container, clearly identifiable as a geocache or wet log book, that has a NM red spanner against it's name, and someone does maintenance. No throw down, no extra container on site, just a new container or log book. It's the same argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

There is also a presumption in this discussion about a complete replacement cache. But what about a damaged container, clearly identifiable as a geocache or wet log book, that has a NM red spanner against it's name, and someone does maintenance. No throw down, no extra container on site, just a new container or log book. It's the same argument. 

 

(Assuming you're on the phone app or can otherwise hit the website) I think it's a "Message Center" message to the CO: "Your container is hosed, and I have one with me. Can I replace it?"

 

Then, I'd wait a little while.

 

If they respond and say "Go ahead, thanks," then you have CO permission and go ahead and replace it.

 

If they don't respond, then I'd file a NM.

 

I understand what you said about your area and local customs, and there can ALWAYS be special circumstances, but this is what I'd START with.

 

Now, if the container is there and completely shattered, and there's no way a reasonable CO would object for the week it might take them to get there, then I might go ahead. In that case, there IS harm being done by leaving it container-less.

 

But, a Co's responsibility is the CO's responsibility, and I'd go on the assumption that they'll step up.

 

Frequently disappointed in that regard,

...Bill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

There is also a presumption in this discussion about a complete replacement cache. But what about a damaged container, clearly identifiable as a geocache or wet log book, that has a NM red spanner against it's name, and someone does maintenance. No throw down, no extra container on site, just a new container or log book. It's the same argument. 

I think it's more of a simplification for purposes of discussion than a presumption. Certainly replacing a damaged container with an identical container on a historically well maintained cache is less of an issue, but it's just a difference in degree. Like most things in geocaching, nothing's black and white even though we love to talk as if they were. Replacing a damaged container is more likely useful, but it can also be a problem if the cache is habitually damaged and the CO never does maintenance. In that case, although replacing the container seems like a nice thing to do, it results in keeping a cache going that really should be scrapped.

 

I do think it's a good example for the people that claim all non-CO maintenance is done by number grubbers. You can sign the log in a damaged container and already claim the find, so the complaint that seeker maintenance is only done for selfish reasons can't be applied when a failing container is replaced with a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, dprovan said:

so the complaint that seeker maintenance is only done for selfish reasons can't be applied when a failing container is replaced with a good one.

 

 

What's your definition of "a good one"? It is extraordinarily rare that a failed container is replaced with a quality container, i.e. anything that costs more than $1, example: authentic Lock&Lock(TM), ammo can, Coghlan's matchstick container, preform container, Plano container.  A candy tin gets replaced with a dollar store container. A dollar store container gets replaced with a bead jar.  A failed peanut butter jar gets replaced with a throwaway ziploc container. A preform gets replaced with a film canister. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

What's your definition of "a good one"?

In this context, obviously by "a good one", I meant one that wasn't failing.

3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

It is extraordinarily rare that a failed container is replaced with a quality container, i.e. anything that costs more than $1, example: authentic Lock&Lock(TM), ammo can, Coghlan's matchstick container, preform container, Plano container.  A candy tin gets replaced with a dollar store container. A dollar store container gets replaced with a bead jar.  A failed peanut butter jar gets replaced with a throwaway ziploc container. A preform gets replaced with a film canister.

This underscores that the main issue here is regional. In my area, a replacement container is typically of similar quality to what it's replacing. In fact, it's not uncommon for it to be higher quality, since a failed container often fails because it wasn't very high quality to begin with. No one around here bothers to carry around cheap containers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, dprovan said:

This underscores that the main issue here is regional. In my area, a replacement container is typically of similar quality to what it's replacing. In fact, it's not uncommon for it to be higher quality, since a failed container often fails because it wasn't very high quality to begin with. No one around here bothers to carry around cheap containers.

:lol:  Yeah, sure, whatever.  I guess it depends on what you mean by "similar quality", but not the case in my general experience.  If your talking about replacing a missing container, the piece of velcro, the detached magnet, a broken container filled with mold and water, or my favorite, the plastic has decomposed to such a degree that only small fragments of plastic remain, then yes, the film canister throwdown, in most cases is superior to what wasn't there to begin with or no longer recognizable as a cache container.

 

The part that puzzles me, is the small number of folks that take part in the throwdown mentality rarely follow up.  In a few cases the throwdown goes missing very quickly after the throwdown action.  These folks never come back to check on the health of the container they left behind, and the CO continues to be absent in a number of these incidents.  When the Listing finally meets it's inevitable demise, these same folks have no desire to submit a new Listing page apparently.  Seems like a real disconnect between the sentiment to keep the Listing active, but no desire to follow up or follow through to maintain it properly.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Touchstone said:

The part that puzzles me, is the small number of folks that take part in the throwdown mentality rarely follow up.  In a few cases the throwdown goes missing very quickly after the throwdown action.  These folks never come back to check on the health of the container they left behind, and the CO continues to be absent in a number of these incidents.  When the Listing finally meets it's inevitable demise, these same folks have no desire to submit a new Listing page apparently.  Seems like a real disconnect between the sentiment to keep the Listing active, but no desire to follow up or follow through to maintain it properly.

2

 

Excellent observation. So true. 

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Touchstone said:

:lol:  Yeah, sure, whatever.  I guess it depends on what you mean by "similar quality", but not the case in my general experience.  If your talking about replacing a missing container, the piece of velcro, the detached magnet, a broken container filled with mold and water, or my favorite, the plastic has decomposed to such a degree that only small fragments of plastic remain, then yes, the film canister throwdown, in most cases is superior to what wasn't there to begin with or no longer recognizable as a cache container.

Well, literally nothing like what I was talking about, but whatever.

43 minutes ago, Touchstone said:

The part that puzzles me, is the small number of folks that take part in the throwdown mentality rarely follow up.

Oh, sorry, here's the problem. There are rarely throwdowns in my area, so I wasn't thinking about that at all. I'm talking about people replacing containers for their friend's caches. The main players in my area tend to know each other. Most people would be embarrassed to place a cheap container either as a new cache or as a replacement for someone else's failed container. I guess things are different where you cache.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, dprovan said:

Well, literally nothing like what I was talking about, but whatever.

Oh, sorry, here's the problem. There are rarely throwdowns in my area, so I wasn't thinking about that at all. I'm talking about people replacing containers for their friend's caches. The main players in my area tend to know each other. Most people would be embarrassed to place a cheap container either as a new cache or as a replacement for someone else's failed container. I guess things are different where you cache.

Which raises an interesting observation. The fact that cachers tend to base their beliefs of how Geocaching is played worldwide on their own personal experience of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Which raises an interesting observation. The fact that cachers tend to base their beliefs of how Geocaching is played worldwide on their own personal experience of the game. 

Yes, exactly the problem: people that think their local problems are universal and insist that the authorities step in and take over everything everywhere in the foolish belief that that will fix what can only be fixed by the local community.

  • Upvote 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 6

×