Jump to content

Can I report a nasty cache owner?


Recommended Posts

This is a little awkward for me to write, but I seem to be getting very negative vibes from one pretty active cache owner in our area.  He currently has over 300 active caches in our region, so it is very common to come across his caches, though I plan to avoid them now.  Here is our experience so far.  One time, my husband and I were trying to solve of of this man's mystery caches.  I was certain the answer was correct, but it would not work in the checker.  After going back and forth, I finally wrote him and let him know our confusion.  I got a nasty response back that it was only to check the first stage.  Okay, no problem, I apologized and thanked him anyway.  Another time, we were doing his nighttime Multi.  We were great, until Stage 4.  We looked for 30 minutes and found no sign of the reflector plate.  A big issue, was that patch of woods had LOTS of very freshly cut trees.  As in the sawdust was still on the ground (not exaggerating).  So we wrote the owner and explained the problem.  He responded that he did not even know where the stage was supposed to be anymore.  With a smiley face, I told him my fingers were crossed he could find it again and we looked forward to when the cache was updated.  The cache was never disabled while he looked (if he looked), there was no note, and there have been no changes.  No one has found it since we looked.  Today was the final straw.  I found the cache and saw there was no logbook, just a little scrap of paper which many others had marked before me.  So I added my stamp and logged the find.  I also added a Needs Maintenance and explained how there was no logbook.  Later in the day, I noticed my Stats were suddenly lower.  I had no logged cache from today.  I checked the last cache to see if it did not transfer from my phone.  I found he disabled the cache and wrote a snippy note about how if there were no logbook, it could not be logged, it was not a virtual.  I reposted my log and wrote him about how he was correct, but there was a slip of paper and I added my name to all the others on it.  Normally I would blow this off and move on, but this seems to be a theme.  There was also another post on a cache we found another day commenting on how it was great that this owner was playing again and how whatever made him quit last time, he must have cooled off.  The wording was such, that the log came across as if the owner had a hair up his butt.  I'm starting to think this is the case.  I am about to head out and grab another cache, as I've been very diligent in trying to do a cache every day for my Stats this year.  I have a feeling, this guy is going to delete my log again, so better safe than sorry.  Is there any way to report him, or is this just a part of the game; there are grumpy owners/players who one just needs to avoid?  I guess this really bothers me, as I have never been rude and just followed the rules, but while he still puts out new caches, he does not want people asking for help or being told his cache needs maintenance.  It just seems like he is somehow a bully.  I even think I met him at a local caching event when we were new to the area and if I am correct, he snorted when he saw our name (we had recently planted our first cache near home).  Though I could be wrong about this incident.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 3
Link to post
18 minutes ago, WadleClan said:

Is there any way to report him, or is this just a part of the game; there are grumpy owners/players who one just needs to avoid?

As long as he doesn't openly abuse anyone in his logs on geocaching.com, it's "just part of the game". Jerks exist, and some of them do geocaching.

 

Over the years, I've had some troubles with one or two owners as well. My usual tactics when logging their caches is then to a) write only very short logs ("TFTC") and b) make a photo of the cache and my signature in the logbook (or scrap of paper ;) ). So in case a log is deleted, I have proof of my find so that I can appeal at GS to have my log reinstated (and locked against further deletion).

  • Upvote 6
  • Helpful 1
Link to post

If you have proof of finding the cache, for example a photo with the container and your log, you can always write to HQ about the situation.

Some people like to show their power and dominance by deleting logs, some are just rude. You can't do anything about it, only avoid them or always secure yourself with an additional photolog.

Link to post

There's no other caches in your area to find ?   Odd asking others "what to do", when most would simply give this creep a wide berth.  :)

I feel "complaining" about someone needs  a bit more than "he's a bully" to get the site to do something about it.

You can contest lost "finds" through Groundspeak against a CO.  That'd be through the Help Center.

Unfortunately (for you), if you didn't take a photo to show Groundspeak, it's your word against theirs. 

 - Maybe it'd be surprising to find (maybe at an event) you're not the only one who's complained, but I don't believe the site would tell you that.

Link to post
15 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

There's no other caches in your area to find ?   Odd asking others "what to do", when most would simply give this creep a wide berth.  :)

I feel "complaining" about someone needs  a bit more than "he's a bully" to get the site to do something about it.

You can contest lost "finds" through Groundspeak against a CO.  That'd be through the Help Center.

Unfortunately (for you), if you didn't take a photo to show Groundspeak, it's your word against theirs. 

 

Thanks! Yes, I plan to give them a wide berth after this. They wrote me a nasty response, so that cinched it. Yes, there are other caches around, but we are pretty rural in Germany and near our home, he has over 300 caches, so it actually takes a bit of an effort to avoid him. I was more worried about him going further in the bullying and deleting past logs, which would put the last 109 days of daily caching as a waste in terms of my Stats. In the future, I will make certain to photograph every log and cache in case this happens with someone else. I may not be able to report him, but it is good to know one can contest a delete, if there is proof. I am almost tempted to drive back to the cache and photograph my log, but he's not worth it. Instead, my son and I found another by another owner. My son is content. 🙂 Thanks again.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3
Link to post

Please use paragraph breaks.

 

I've noticed an apparent increasing trend lately of COs unwilling to disable a cache when they have good reason to think it is missing.

 

COs can be very oddly behaved sometimes. One local, probably no longer active (though some of his caches are), wrote all of his cache descriptions in ALL CAPS. If there were DNFs, he would delete them after confirming the cache was still present or replacing it if it was missing. (This was well before the Cache Health Score existed.)

  • Funny 1
Link to post
7 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

I've noticed an apparent increasing trend lately of COs unwilling to disable a cache when they have good reason to think it is missing.

 

I see that too. I wonder if some cachers feel that the important thing is keeping the listing active. Perhaps they're hoping that if the listing remains active maybe someone will toss a throwdown and keep it going, before a reviewer gets wind of the growing DNF list. I don't understand why else  they are unwilling to disable. 

Edited by L0ne.R
  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Love 2
Link to post

I tend to treat jerks the way they treat me +1 because they deserve it.

I wouldn't care about him deleting my past stats. (but that's me) Nor would I do anything outside of guidelines.  I'd actually make a point of finding every cache of his I could. Take photo proof of all that you log. Report any deleted logs that don't deserve deletion. Put a NM or NA on any caches that even slightly qualify under guidelines and ignore any attempted contacts from the jerk.

But that's me. More of a grumpy old man than a good example.

You do what YOU think is right.

Edited by RocTheCacheBox
  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 5
  • Surprised 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, MtnGoat50 said:

Here are my thoughts (FWIW).

I think your response was perfect. Him responding rudely to your email isn't something that needs reporting. You can solve the problem by not emailing him anymore. On the other hand if he starts sending you rude, unsolicited emails or messages, I'd report that right away. 

 

After his previous rude email response, I wouldn't have emailed him. Instead I'd log my DNF, log a (polite) Needs Maintenance and if there was no response after a few of weeks I'd follow it up with a (polite) Needs Archived.

 

As long as he doesn't delete your re-log, I'd let it go. So far I don't think his actions rise to the level that needs to be reported. However, if he does delete your new log, I would return to the cache take a photo of your stamp on the paper, contact HQ and request that your log be reinstated. 

 

Moving forward I'd avoid any personal communication with him, no emails or message center. I'd probably still keep finding his caches when convenient. I would make a point of always taking a picture my signature or stamp in the log and post it with my found it (no spoilers just the log). I'd also post (polite) DNFs, NMs or NAs logs when appropriate. If he does delete a future, legitimate found it log, I'd go straight to HQ and ask that it be reinstated. 

 

If it helps here is a link to the contact form. Under, "What can we help you with?"  #16, Geocacher disagreement, is probably the best choice.

 

Excellent advice. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

I can't really judge this situation because I can easily imagine from your vague accusations that the CO could file a very similar complaint about you. Some of your actions might seem to him as entitled and demanding, and his response you describe as "nasty" might have just been terse.

 

I'm not accusing you of anything, 'cuz I really have no idea how these exchanges really went, but since he has a lot of caches in your area and, therefore, you have a lot to thank him for, you might want to consider resetting your attitude and try to be friendly and give him plenty of slack even if he really is the worst CO ever. If I were you, I would care less how this started and focus more on defusing the clear escalation that's going on. If the only way you can do that is to avoid his caches, that's fine, but I'd be more inclined to change my attitude to one that allows me to enjoy his caches even if it turns out that I can't do anything about his brusk manner.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 1
Link to post
On 12/9/2020 at 8:09 AM, WadleClan said:

I found the cache and saw there was no logbook, just a little scrap of paper which many others had marked before me.

 

While it would be preferable for every geocache to have a nice logbook, a piece of paper in a container is the minimum of what is required for a geocache.

 

In other words, there was a log, even if it was a "Notlog" or emergency log.

 

That said, yes, this sounds like quite the attitude problem on his end.

 

If you found the cache and signed the piece of paper, then you get a find. I would ask appeals to restore your find. Use the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of the page.

Link to post
On 12/9/2020 at 5:09 AM, WadleClan said:

I found the cache and saw there was no logbook, just a little scrap of paper which many others had marked before me.  So I added my stamp and logged the find.  I also added a Needs Maintenance and explained how there was no logbook.  Later in the day, I noticed my Stats were suddenly lower.  I had no logged cache from today.  I checked the last cache to see if it did not transfer from my phone.  I found he disabled the cache and wrote a snippy note about how if there were no logbook, it could not be logged, it was not a virtual.

 

To me, it seems that both of you are behaving childishly. You have over 1,000 finds and surely you know by now that a slip of paper is all this required. I am certain that you've found many micros with just a slip of paper that you did not log a NM requiest. You know an actual logbook is not required, regardless of the size of the cache. To post a NM with such a reason gives the appearance that you were being snippy based on your past history with the CO. He responded with the same snippy attitude and removed your find. He does have a point, if you say there isn't a valid log, then therefore you didn't sign a valid log, hence no find.

Edited by fbingha
  • Upvote 3
  • Surprised 3
  • Love 2
Link to post

No matter if I know the CO or not, I will post a NM if I find a cache with a piece of paper that doesn't look like the log the CO placed. NM logs are meant to alert the CO of problems with the cache and shouldn't bee seen as anything more than that.

Deleting the online log because of a NM is kind of petty anyway.

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
3 hours ago, on4bam said:

Deleting the online log because of a NM is kind of petty anyway.

 

True, but somehow I can understand the situation when one complains that cache has no logbook but still logs Found it online without explaining that there were a logsheet instead. CO may understand that the Found was bogus because there is no way to sign the logbook in this situation.

 

 

Edited by arisoft
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 3
Link to post
2 hours ago, on4bam said:

No matter if I know the CO or not, I will post a NM if I find a cache with a piece of paper that doesn't look like the log the CO placed. NM logs are meant to alert the CO of problems with the cache and shouldn't bee seen as anything more than that.

Deleting the online log because of a NM is kind of petty anyway.

 

Of course, that's a proper thing to do... but if you have a "history" with the CO, MANY OF US KNOW how such simple actions can blow up. 

Edited by fbingha
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
On 12/9/2020 at 2:09 PM, WadleClan said:

He responded that he did not even know where the stage was supposed to be anymore.

He hided 100 Multicaches, hundreds of tradis and additional hundrets of Mysterys with together thousands of FPs. I can understand that he really don't know all hiding places, not respected that some geocacher  hide the stages "better". than the owner. My last information was, that he have no car and so, cache maintainance is not very easy for him. This  facts are not a justification for brusk manner, but maybe you understand the backround a little bit more. Hope you finde a way like that:

 

6 hours ago, dprovan said:

I'm not accusing you of anything, 'cuz I really have no idea how these exchanges really went, but since he has a lot of caches in your area and, therefore, you have a lot to thank him for, you might want to consider resetting your attitude and try to be friendly and give him plenty of slack even if he really is the worst CO ever. If I were you, I would care less how this started and focus more on defusing the clear escalation that's going on. If the only way you can do that is to avoid his caches, that's fine, but I'd be more inclined to change my attitude to one that allows me to enjoy his caches even if it turns out that I can't do anything about his brusk manner.

Greetings Johannis10


 
Edited by Johannis10
Link to post
41 minutes ago, Johannis10 said:

My last information was, that he have no car and so, cache maintainance is not very easy for him.

People should only place caches where they can easily maintain them, or are prepared to put in effort to maintain them. Otherwise, only place caches close to your home.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 1
Link to post
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

People should only place caches where they can easily maintain them, or are prepared to put in effort to maintain them. Otherwise, only place caches close to your home.

 

Might I also suggest a third option, namely placing a cache that's unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime? Something like a rugged container (ammo can for example) with a logbook big enough that it's never going to get anywhere near full with the likely number of finds and hidden somewhere well away from even the most inquisitive muggles and protected from sun, rain, hail, flood and fire.

 

This is one I adopted that was placed in 2005, still with the original container and original logbook (this photo was taken about 6 weeks ago):

 

20201030_124903.jpg.802a7dbae8507e53eb0d8879ed469c3b.jpg

 

The only maintenance I've done on it was, after adoption, checking the listed trackables against what was actually in it and marking the others as missing. And yes, that one has been through at least one fire in the time it's been there.

Edited by barefootjeff
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Love 2
Link to post
1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

Might I also suggest a third option, namely placing a cache that's unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime?

I was once in a remote place and came upon a rock ledge with a wonderful view over the thick bushland, down into the valley. I wished I had had a suitable cache to place there. One of those, "unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime", because it was hard bush-bashing getting there, and not getting younger, I had planned never to return.

Edited by Goldenwattle
Link to post
5 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Might I also suggest a third option, namely placing a cache that's unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime? Something like a rugged container (ammo can for example) with a logbook big enough that it's never going to get anywhere near full with the likely number of finds and hidden somewhere well away from even the most inquisitive muggles and protected from sun, rain, hail, flood and fire.

 

This is one I adopted that was placed in 2005, still with the original container and original logbook (this photo was taken about 6 weeks ago):

 

20201030_124903.jpg.802a7dbae8507e53eb0d8879ed469c3b.jpg

 

The only maintenance I've done on it was, after adoption, checking the listed trackables against what was actually in it and marking the others as missing. And yes, that one has been through at least one fire in the time it's been there.

I have a PVC cache, thats around 14 years old, never been DNFed, never been off line for maintenance, never needed maintenance, fairly easily found, about 100 metres off a busy main road. Large enough to be a TB motel for all but the very largest TBs. Container is 100mm PVC pipe about 1 metre long. 

Mind you, an ammo can is not the be all and end all for cache container, as I have seen one rusted out completely due to its proximity to the beach. 

Edited by Bundyrumandcoke
Link to post
39 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

I have a PVC cache, thats around 14 years old, never been DNFed, never been off line for maintenance, never needed maintenance, fairly easily found, about 100 metres off a busy main road. Large enough to be a TB motel for all but the very largest TBs. Container is 100mm PVC pipe about 1 metre long. 

Mind you, an ammo can is not the be all and end all for cache container, as I have seen one rusted out completely due to its proximity to the beach. 

 

It all depends on the environment. PVC exposed to the sun will degrade whereas an Ammo can will continue to function.

Link to post
41 minutes ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

Mind you, an ammo can is not the be all and end all for cache container, as I have seen one rusted out completely due to its proximity to the beach. 

 

Yeah, there was one up Newcastle way in a crevice next to the sea and constantly exposed to sea spray that rusted out in under a year.

Link to post
21 hours ago, fbingha said:

He responded with the same snippy attitude and removed your find. He does have a point, if you say there isn't a valid log, then therefore you didn't sign a valid log, hence no find.

 

That was kind of a point I took away as well.  OP admitted there was no valid log, but wanted to claim the find... might have shot themselves in the foot by admitting that.  Not that I'm siding with the CO, just saying, the argument may be lost because of that if the OP still wants to claim the find.

It's like being in an accident; never immediately admit to being at fault, because you may not be;but admitting it means on record you've already lost :) 

Link to post
9 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

That was kind of a point I took away as well.  OP admitted there was no valid log, but wanted to claim the find...

 

 

Were previous logs also deleted? There was a "scrap of paper with many names". So it comes down to allowing the logs on the scrap of paper (all of them) or not allowing them and delete the online logs (all of them). Deleting just one still remains petty to me.

Where do you draw the line? I've signed pieces of paper added by previous finders where the original log was wet/full. Valid find or not? I've signed rolls of paper that "might" be added by previous finders as they were blank paper and other logrolls had the cache's name printed on them. Can I know or should I check with the CO that the paper inside a container is the original log? Can I even know that a micro with log roll was placed by the CO if it looks exactly like the other caches of a series?

I will gladly log a DNF on a missing container but if I find a container with log at the given or calculated coordinates I'll mark it as a find. Let me add that I will not and have not logged a missing cache because the CO allowed it when a cache was missing.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post

Yeah I wasn't saying it's not a log, just pointing out the failure/mistake in the argumentation (intentional or not).  ie, if caches require a log, and they posted a nm because of this, do they expect the find to stand if "there is no log to sign" and therefore they didn't sign the log, which is the one requirement as evidence to keep an online find log in place? That's all :)  

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Yeah I wasn't saying it's not a log, just pointing out the failure/mistake in the argumentation (intentional or not).  ie, if caches require a log, and they posted a nm because of this, do they expect the find to stand if "there is no log to sign" and therefore they didn't sign the log, which is the one requirement as evidence to keep an online find log in place? That's all :)  

 

I would argue that it is up to the owner to provide the log and keep a functioning log in the cache. He did not.  As a result of his negligence, deleting online find logs is not justifiable. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
59 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

I would argue that it is up to the owner to provide the log and keep a functioning log in the cache. He did not.  As a result of his negligence, deleting online find logs is not justifiable. 

 

This would be against guidelines. To keep the online cache page up-to-date, the cache owner must Delete logs that appear to be false or inappropriate. Found it logs without signing the logbook in physical caches are false.

Edited by arisoft
Link to post
19 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Found it logs without signing the logbook in physical caches are false.

 

Sure, if the CO provides a logbook which s/he checks. If the online logger's signature is not in that logbook, then he can legitimately delete the log because it appears to be false. 

  • Funny 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

I would argue that it is up to the owner to provide the log and keep a functioning log in the cache. He did not.  As a result of his negligence, deleting online find logs is not justifiable. 

 

We're already in a pit of (spirit of) guideline breaking. It might be nice of the cache owner to let the logs stand, but per CO responsibility, technically they are supposed to remove false logs. The CO isn't required to delete every log that isn't verified by signature on the logsheet (as we see clearly in practice) - but the rules essentially maintain that if your name is on the logsheet your online log is valid (it can't be deleted, or rather it can be restored if deleted). So it's kind of a grey area. The spirit is that the CO maintains the integrity of their cache, and if they're found to be shirking their responsibilities (by the judgment of reviewers or hq, typically demonstrated after an extended period of time) at some point they can face consequences. That's why COs are allowed to let logs stand if they feel a cache has been found - ie, that the Find Log accurately represents the state of the cache; but that's also under the assumption that the CO will do their necessary maintenance to ensure that there is a logsheet to sign within their cache, as required by guidelines.

 

In this case, the CO seems to have been negligent - but that doesn't give the 'right' to any cache finder to merely log it found without signing the intended logsheet (even if it's a replacement/scrap). But the CO can allow those logs to stand; except that they're now in a status of possibly shirking responsibilities if they don't ensure there is an official logsheet to sign.  Basically the same situation as actively permitting throwdowns.

However, if this particular CO says that that scrap sheet IS the logsheet, then the CO is technically fine.

 

But that wasn't the point of my comment :) Mine was that the OP stated that they believe the cache does not have a logsheet, yet they signed the scrap and expect the log to stand. The CO by the OP's admission would have evidence to support their deletion of the find log claiming it should have been a DNF and/or NM, not a Find and NM.

 

But arguably, appeals might just say 'you could just take the high road seeing that they found the geocache as intended and let the log stand and avoid additional future conflict' (as they might for photo evidence disputes and people who found a throwdown unknowingly). So who knows :P

Link to post
20 hours ago, Johannis10 said:

He hided 100 Multicaches, hundreds of tradis and additional hundrets of Mysterys with together thousands of FPs. I can understand that he really don't know all hiding places, not respected that some geocacher  hide the stages "better". than the owner. My last information was, that he have no car and so, cache maintainance is not very easy for him. ....



 

 

He sounds like a good cache owner, but if he lost his ability to easily maintain his caches, he should archive the listings or adopt them to other owners who are able do the maintenance.

Edited by K13
speeling
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to post

The fact remains that a finder can almost never know if the paper inside a container was placed by the CO or by someone who replaced a missing log. The finder signed the log in good faith so the online log should stand.

In the case of the TS I would add all the CO's caches to my ignore list and don't think twice about it. especially if there are enough other caches to find.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
3 minutes ago, on4bam said:

The fact remains that a finder can almost never know if the paper inside a container was placed by the CO or by someone who replaced a missing log. The finder signed the log in good faith so the online log should stand.

 

Agreed - excepting that in this case the OP admitted knowingly in writing that there was no log and it needs maintenance, so the CO would be technically justified in deleting the Find log (though we'd likely call them out as being a jerk :P).  Again it would fall in line with a CO discovering their cache is a throwdown after many have unknowingly signed the incorrect logsheet, if the OP didn't state there wasn't a log.:ninja:

 

Link to post
1 hour ago, on4bam said:

The finder signed the log in good faith so the online log should stand.

 

There is no guideline for good faith. Few years ago a local CO deleted many logs at once after realized that finders have found an extra throwdown cache. The original logbook was not signed. Finders signed the fake cache in good faith but CO didn't accept this.

Link to post
6 minutes ago, arisoft said:
2 hours ago, on4bam said:

The finder signed the log in good faith so the online log should stand.

 

There is no guideline for good faith. Few years ago a local CO deleted many logs at once after realized that finders have found an extra throwdown cache. The original logbook was not signed. Finders signed the fake cache in good faith but CO didn't accept this.

 

This is why I said it's a grey area and HQ may recommend the CO allow them - even though they'd be in their right to delete the logs:

 

 

Quote

 

7.11. Respond to "throwdowns"

Throwdowns are strongly discouraged

A “throwdown” is a container placed by a geocacher who cannot find the original cache.

Some geocachers place throwdowns so that they can log a find on a cache that they suspect is missing. Geocaches should never be replaced without the permission of the cache owner. This can lead to multiple containers, geocacher confusion, and disputes about whether someone is entitled to log a find or not.

How to handle throwdowns

Cache owners are responsible for maintenancema. When you are aware of throwdowns, check if your cache is still there and remove the throwdown cache. Consider disabling the cache until you can remove the throwdown or replace the original cache. If you do not disable the cache, you may want to honor Found It logs for the throwdown. However, the geocacher who placed the throwdown does not have a strong claim to log the cache as found.lolog

 

 

Link to post
23 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Might I also suggest a third option, namely placing a cache that's unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime? Something like a rugged container (ammo can for example) with a logbook big enough that it's never going to get anywhere near full with the likely number of finds and hidden somewhere well away from even the most inquisitive muggles and protected from sun, rain, hail, flood and fire.

 

I love ammo can caches as much as anyone: a durable and usually easy to find container. 

 

That said, even ammo cans have their limits. In the Florida peninsula, most preserve land either floods seasonally or is burned every few years. Ammo cans are resistant, but fire and frequent immersion will shorten their life considerably.

 

Hunters also seem to be a persistent problem as they will go anywhere a cacher might, and a significant number will gladly take any ammo can they find in the woods.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:
1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:
  On 12/10/2020 at 7:57 PM, barefootjeff said:

Might I also suggest a third option, namely placing a cache that's unlikely to ever need maintenance in its lifetime? Something like a rugged container (ammo can for example) with a logbook big enough

That said, even ammo cans have their limits.

 

Yes, definitely.

 

In a fire, the metal may have survived but the gasket is unlikely to be intact. 

 

I had an ammo can that was outdoors for 3 years, then the hinge pin holding the lid on rusted and snapped. I've seen a number of rusted holes in ammo cans. They are great but need to be checked once in a while. And I've seen intact ammo cans with a mess inside that could use a complete overhaul. 

 

No cache is full-proof. Ammo cans are fantastic but even they need to be attended to and sometimes replaced. 

 

Here are a few examples in rough shape:

 

e47fbe6b87b5ba38b8c14a8c2a5f71c1.jpg 667074c421d840d9398ffb1717416cd1.jpgd163b7cc7f423cc572df7045a6a57aac.jpg594ec6daa0cdc3b36e91185952b055af.jpg7f53f35ce33085b8b8c9f799d82df1c0.jpg

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

There is no guideline for good faith. Few years ago a local CO deleted many logs at once after realized that finders have found an extra throwdown cache. The original logbook was not signed. Finders signed the fake cache in good faith but CO didn't accept this.

 

There is a guideline for throwdowns and how COs should handle them (visit their cache and remove the throwdown). If I recall from other forum discussions, if finders complained their logs would be reinstated. From the guidelines below it sounds like everyone but the person who left the throwdown get to keep their find. 

 

https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=38&pgid=427

 

7.11. Respond to "throwdowns"

Throwdowns are strongly discouraged

A “throwdown” is a container placed by a geocacher who cannot find the original cache.

Some geocachers place throwdowns so that they can log a find on a cache that they suspect is missing. Geocaches should never be replaced without the permission of the cache owner. This can lead to multiple containers, geocacher confusion, and disputes about whether someone is entitled to log a find or not.

How to handle throwdowns

Cache owners are responsible for maintenance. When you are aware of throwdowns, check if your cache is still there and remove the throwdown cache. Consider disabling the cache until you can remove the throwdown or replace the original cache. If you do not disable the cache, you may want to honor Found It logs for the throwdown. However, the geocacher who placed the throwdown does not have a strong claim to log the cache as found.

 

Link to post
  • 3 weeks later...
On 12/9/2020 at 11:48 PM, Johannis10 said:

You like to get old an grumpy ;)? Just do it:

You like to find a treasure? Searce for an other way.

Greetings Johannis10


Bitterness is when you take a sip of poison every day and hope that the other dies from it.

NEVER on one of your caches!!!  We just did your Adventsfenster cache last night.  AMAZING!!! As usual.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 12/11/2020 at 12:19 AM, Johannis10 said:

He hided 100 Multicaches, hundreds of tradis and additional hundrets of Mysterys with together thousands of FPs. I can understand that he really don't know all hiding places, not respected that some geocacher  hide the stages "better". than the owner. My last information was, that he have no car and so, cache maintainance is not very easy for him. This  facts are not a justification for brusk manner, but maybe you understand the backround a little bit more. Hope you finde a way like that:

 

Greetings Johannis10



 

Thank you for the background.  I was trying not to make it clear who the person was, but since you are also local, you figured it out.  I can respect that his situation is harder at the moment.  I was not trying to be mean, just surprised by his reaction every time I have had any interaction.  I really did not have any ill feeling toward him.  The first interaction was asking to understand why I could not get a geochecker to work.  My husband is from here and I had him check my language, to make certain there was nothing lost in translation.  He was surprised by the response too.  But I figured it was just a bad day.  I tried to write him about the Multi-stage, as I know there are many who get upset with a DNF posted and wanted to let him know about the recent deforestation in that spot.  (Please understand as I type this, there is no angry voice, just a neutral tone. :-)  )  Then after the log about the missing logbook, it was just a needs maintenance, again, to let him know.  Nothing entitled.  I now carry extra logbooks to help if this is a problem in other caches.  Otherwise, the log I posted was about how this was a wonderful location and the deer were so beautiful.  There was nothing nasty.

If you know him, please let him know, there was NEVER any ill will toward him.  I thought I was just following the rules and contacting when I was supposed to or needed help.  Maybe there was a bit of language barrier when I translated something incorrectly. (I am working hard to get better in the language, but use Google translate to help write better logs.)  In the meantime, I am avoiding his caches, because I fear I must have said or written something to anger him and don't want to anger him further.  Maybe others have written and been nasty.  Based on a past log I read, I got the feeling there have been issues.  Fingers crossed, it all gets better in the end.  Also, in the future, if he needs help maintaining a cache, we are always happy to help as well.  We only have two active caches so far (with plans to make more, yours have inspired us) and I have the time to help if desired.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
13 hours ago, WadleClan said:

since you are also local

That wasn't the reason, but geocachers like to solve mysterys and that was D1, even for no locals. ;)

Your german seems to be better than my english, so i'll send you a PM in german language to explaine a little more the backround.

Greetings Johannis10

  • Helpful 1
Link to post

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...