Geocache Condition Report (free t-shirt)

[+trekkerdmc]

I received an email from lee@geocaching.com asking to participate in a "geocache condition Report" and would receive a free geocaching t-shirt. It asks to check 25 geocaches near me (whether I've found before) or not and to complete the report. When I looked further it said my email account could not access the report and asked if I wanted to use a different account.

 

It looks pretty legit but wanted so see if this is sponsored by HQ or if any others have received this message?

[+TeamRabbitRun]

Doesn't pass MY smell-test.

Sounds like a phishing expedition. Bet they ask for more info aside from another verified email address to sell.

Then MORE info from you.

 

REALLY look at the addresses and any links in the email before clicking on anything. Float your mouse over each hyperlink to see the address to which it points. Be suspicious.

 

If you want to check, email the SUPPORT link at the bottom of every page on the website.

See that? I didn't even give you an email address to use, because THAT'S scam-behavior, too!

[+trekkerdmc]

Thanks for the input TeamRabbitRun.

 

I was thinking it seemed a bit phishy. I got another e-mail from the person and it was marked as possibly unsafe from my e-mail carrier and that sealed the deal for me to NOT click on anything or give info to.

[Keystone]

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

[+trekkerdmc]

Thanks Keystone!

[+TeamRabbitRun]

4 minutes ago, Keystone said:

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

 

Well, OK then - apparently legit!

 

What did it for me was the part about using a different email address because 'his email address wouldn't work', whatever that means. That's why I advocated giving it a good going-over.

 

I'd be interested in reading about what you're doing and seeing what you learn.

[+BirdSearcher]

 

5 hours ago, Keystone said:

See this thread in the German-speaking forum on the same subject.  It includes a helpful explanation (in English).

I would love to participate in this , hope my part of Canada can be part of the study.

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, BirdSearcher said:

 

I would love to participate in this , hope my part of Canada can be part of the study.

 

I'm glad I wasn't, as the 25 traditionals closest to me (that I don't own) include one T4.5, three T4s, a T3.5 and seven T3s, so not something that could be knocked over in one afternoon, particularly in the late summer heat and humidity we currently have. Some of those have absent owners but are still being found, some have historical outstanding NMs that turned out to be irrelevant (one a heads-up on roadworks that ended up not disturbing the cache) and some have recent DNFs but are tricky to find and likely to still be there. I wonder, if one of the chosen checkers can't find the cache, if it gets deemed to be missing or whether there's an allowance for it just outsmarting them. Does the CO get to provide any input?

[+HuggableHamster]

8 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I'm glad I wasn't, as the 25 traditionals closest to me (that I don't own) include one T4.5, three T4s, a T3.5 and seven T3s, so not something that could be knocked over in one afternoon, particularly in the late summer heat and humidity we currently have. Some of those have absent owners but are still being found, some have historical outstanding NMs that turned out to be irrelevant (one a heads-up on roadworks that ended up not disturbing the cache) and some have recent DNFs but are tricky to find and likely to still be there. I wonder, if one of the chosen checkers can't find the cache, if it gets deemed to be missing or whether there's an allowance for it just outsmarting them. Does the CO get to provide any input?

Me too, although because I’m saving my nearest trads for filling in my calendar rather than because they are particularly high T!  My friend got chosen though so I’m going to go and help her (though we are skipping out the ones you need a particular type of boat for!

[+AbacoRick]

I received an email as well and was likewise, dubious.  But if it was a phishing attempt they went to alot of trouble, as they knew my "handle" and the 25 caches they want me to check are all legit and geolocated close to my home.   Unfortunately, many of them were rough to find and I'm not sure I have those bushwhacks in me again.   To get better participation, they need to do a little better job identifying themselves in this process, as it comes across as "phishy".   The word "Groundspeak" appears nowhere so I also was wary.

[+Jayeffel]

Just signed on to see if there was anything about this.-- I signed on and it knew my user name and had 25 caches close to me ; but the list only showed 21, the map beside the list showed all of them though.

 

One happens to be my own and one cache I was contemplating not going for - a 35 foot crawl in a storm sewer! The rest I found already--just to remember where!

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, Jayeffel said:

One happens to be my own and one cache I was contemplating not going for - a 35 foot crawl in a storm sewer! The rest I found already--just to remember where!

 

It seems odd that they're including your own caches in this. Looking at the nearest 25 traditionals to me, I own 8 of them and, since they're apparently interested in cache quality as well as health, it would hardly be an unbiassed assessment.

[+trekkerdmc]

After reading the post and the attached link from Keystone, things apparently are legit and I have received my list of caches to go rate. 

[+Jayeffel]

9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

It seems odd that they're including your own caches in this. Looking at the nearest 25 traditionals to me, I own 8 of them and, since they're apparently interested in cache quality as well as health, it would hardly be an unbiassed assessment.

This note is on the cache list page: "Note: You must visit caches you already found or you own for this study in order to obtain unbiased data on cache condition in your area." 

 

Hopefully each cacher will be as honest with personal caches as with others. 

 

[+Jayeffel]

I know this in an outside of Geocaching.com study, but the list is to show 25 nearest traditional caches; the list I have  shows 21, the map beside that list does show 25. However, I checked three of the caches today and one was in good shape, the other two were not there any longer.

 

I could only record survey response for two , the third does not show on the list, but does show on the mail but clicking on the cache icon does nothing. 

 

And I guess that a log entry such as NM or just a note about the cache is permissible with the Geocache Cache Condition Research Study. I thunk when I do  write a note I will mentioned it was checked to complete the study.

[Moun10Bike]

14 minutes ago, Jayeffel said:

I know this in an outside of Geocaching.com study, but the list is to show 25 nearest traditional caches; the list I have  shows 21, the map beside that list does show 25. However, I checked three of the caches today and one was in good shape, the other two were not there any longer.

 

Your 25 are there, but you have to scroll your list. The scrollbar will not appear until you hover over the list.

 

[+Jayeffel]

I will check, thought I did that!

 

Edit: Went back and after maybe five or six tries at that scrolling they finally showed up.

Edited March 2, 2023 by Jayeffel

[+barefootjeff]

9 hours ago, Jayeffel said:

This note is on the cache list page: "Note: You must visit caches you already found or you own for this study in order to obtain unbiased data on cache condition in your area." 

 

Hopefully each cacher will be as honest with personal caches as with others. 

 

 

I guess it depends on what they're asking about the caches. If it's objective stuff like "Is the container damaged?" or "Is the log wet or full?" then it probably wouldn't matter who owned the cache, but if it's a more subjective assessment of cache quality ("Would you give this an FP if you were finding it today?") then, well, I know the community response to my caches is often quite different to what I expected, good and bad.

[+trekkerdmc]

19 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I guess it depends on what they're asking about the caches. If it's objective stuff like "Is the container damaged?" or "Is the log wet or full?" then it probably wouldn't matter who owned the cache, but if it's a more subjective assessment of cache quality ("Would you give this an FP if you were finding it today?") then, well, I know the community response to my caches is often quite different to what I expected, good and bad.

It is totally objective. They want 3 pictures. One of the container, the log and the surrounding area so it's not real issue with taking data on your own hides. They're looking at data for the algorithm to see if it lines up with posted logs and such

[+Jayeffel]

I have no idea how to take a picture on my iPhone and put it on their survey screen.

 

Edit: Sent them Study  people a message concerning this and one solution they recommended does not work for me. So another one can be tried.

Edited March 3, 2023 by Jayeffel

[+barefootjeff]

4 hours ago, trekkerdmc said:

It is totally objective. They want 3 pictures. One of the container, the log and the surrounding area so it's not real issue with taking data on your own hides. They're looking at data for the algorithm to see if it lines up with posted logs and such

 

That's good to know, although if I was taking photos of my own hides I'd probably spruce them up a bit first . Trying to judge cache quality often comes down to personal tastes...

 

[+Jayeffel]

Wonder how many cachers are selected and how many in a general area. 

[+Jayeffel]

I completed my assigned caches today; one new one and one of my own plus 23 others.  I could not locate (re-locate )seven of them ; two of those have been archived since. Several had logs that need attention, but all caches I located had containers that were intact and decent.

 

They wanted pictures of the container, the log, and the general area of each cache. I was able to do so on maybe six or seven caches, had no clue how to for a while,  then had too many hoops to jump through . 

 

The one cache that was new was one I was putting off, almost decided to forego it, but it  was not nearly as bad as I anticipated. The water level was only an inch above my boots!

[+dealfarms1]

Out of curiosity, has anybody received feedback after completing their assigned caches?  

[+trekkerdmc]

I have not. I imagine since the deadline date was the 31st, it may take a minute before hearing anything. 

But more importantly, where is my T Shirt? Lol!

[+trekkerdmc]

Just a little bump on this thread.  Still waiting on the results and the t-shirt. Anyone received either yet? 

[+Jayeffel]

I received notification soon after all 25 were recorded that it was done basically, heard nothing since then, other than in the same message the shirt order was bring processed. MY guess is they did not have the shirts made until then had a fairly accurate count of how many would be needed. Wonder if there was a minimum order-- if so we should have been notified by now. 

[Moun10Bike]

The shipping of T-shirts ran into a delay as the shop guys are graciously donating their free time to help us with that and our main compatriot took a well-deserved vacation, but that process is back up and chugging. It will take some time for all the shirts to go out, so please be patient - you are not forgotten.

 

As for the data, we just presented the finished analysis to senior management on Wednesday. Lee and I will be working on modifying that for general consumption and plan to cut a video showing the results next week (Lee is currently fighting a bout of COVID). We will hopefully be able to distribute that to all participants in the next week or two.

 

Again, thanks to everyone who participated!

[+dealfarms1]

I got my shirt a couple of days ago.  I thought it was pretty cool and am looking forward to wearing it to the next event we attend.  

[+BirdSearcher]

2 hours ago, dealfarms1 said:

I got my shirt a couple of days ago.  I thought it was pretty cool and am looking forward to wearing it to the next event we attend.  

Care to post a photo..?

Edited May 2, 2023 by BirdSearcher

[+dealfarms1]

[+BirdSearcher]

Love it! Anyone know if these shirts are available for purchase somewhere?

[+Jayeffel]

Got an email from UPS stating my shirt is to be delivered today, another email from Groundspeak I believe showed an attachment to obtain the results but I cannot get those results.

 

Apparently the attachment need to be converted but when I go through the indicated process I see no results. Maybe it worked and I simply have no clue where to look to retrieve it.

 

No matter, the world will still function.

 

Edit: of course this would happen! Shortly after writing the message above I went back to the email from Lee and the attachment opened to a YouTube presentation. But I could not hear very much of the conversation ,the male voice pretty much but the other I could only hear noise, not recognizable content.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2023 by Jayeffel

[Moun10Bike]

On 5/2/2023 at 8:16 AM, BirdSearcher said:

Love it! Anyone know if these shirts are available for purchase somewhere?

 

Yes, the shirts are also available for purchase from the shop: https://shop.geocaching.com/default/clothes/shirts/official-geocacher-ammo-can-tee.html

[+Beechtrees]

4 hours ago, Jayeffel said:

 

 

Edit: of course this would happen! Shortly after writing the message above I went back to the email from Lee and the attachment opened to a YouTube presentation. But I could not hear very much of the conversation ,the male voice pretty much but the other I could only hear noise, not recognizable content.

 

 

Subtitles/ closed captions work if thatmight help? Very small but readable.

[+dealfarms1]

Was a report ever released summarizing the results?

[Moun10Bike]

Yes, a link to a video summarizing the results was sent out to all participants: 

 

[+essap2]

The graph at 7:39 is very interesting. Why does the US have close to a 22 percent  DNF rate for 6 months + inactive cache owners compared to Germany's 8 percent. 

 

Is it cultural?

- Are Germans less likely to muggle geocaches

 

Are German Reviewers more aggressive with archiving caches?

 

My best guess would be this:

From my observations, Germany seems to have a much more dense geocacher base than the US. I think this may cause the average German geocache to have many more logs than the average American geocache. This would mean, because the German geocache is searched for more often, the cache health score would deteriorate quicker than an American geocache and would subsequently be marked and archived by a reviewer quicker than its American counterparts. Therefore, the gameboard is cleared quicker in Germany resulting in less caches that are in a "zombie" state as the graph shows.

[+barefootjeff]

That's an interesting study and I'm curious to see what changes result from it. Most of the new players I see around here start off with premium membership before they've even found their fist cache and exclusively use the app for caching, having never visited the website, so they never get to see a cache page as the CO presented it. Maybe that's as much a part of the reason for their short tenure in the game as absent COs.

 

On DNFs, they aren't a particularly good measure of cache health, particularly if taken singularly. On two of my own hides, both multis, the most recent log was a DNF but that doesn't mean those caches are problematic. In one case, the logger completed the tasks at the first waypoint but ran out of time to go to the final, and on the other,  a much longer multi with six waypoints along a fire trail and some off-trail rock-hopping to get to the final, the logger decided they weren't well enough equipped to get to GZ. Of my own DNF logs, only about ten percent turn out to be missing caches, the rest are just me doing a good Blind Freddy impersonation or being insufficiently prepared for what's required to get my name in the logbook. A lot of the time I'm able to turn them into finds on my next attempt.

[+fizzymagic]

On 5/1/2023 at 3:20 PM, dealfarms1 said:

I got my shirt a couple of days ago.  I thought it was pretty cool and am looking forward to wearing it to the next event we attend.  

Hmm.   Never did get mine.  Maybe I should do something about that.

[+fizzymagic]

4 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

On DNFs, they aren't a particularly good measure of cache health, particularly if taken singularly. On two of my own hides, both multis, the most recent log was a DNF but that doesn't mean those caches are problematic. In one case, the logger completed the tasks at the first waypoint but ran out of time to go to the final, and on the other,  a much longer multi with six waypoints along a fire trail and some off-trail rock-hopping to get to the final, the logger decided they weren't well enough equipped to get to GZ. Of my own DNF logs, only about ten percent turn out to be missing caches, the rest are just me doing a good Blind Freddy impersonation or being insufficiently prepared for what's required to get my name in the logbook. A lot of the time I'm able to turn them into finds on my next attempt.

 

I think you missed the conclusion of the study.  It did not find that DNFs are over-reported, as you seem to believe, but the converse:  DNFs appear to be wildly under-reported.

[+dealfarms1]

16 hours ago, Moun10Bike said:

Yes, a link to a video summarizing the results was sent out to all participants: 

 

Thank you for posting the link.

[+MNTA]

21 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

 

I think you missed the conclusion of the study.  It did not find that DNFs are over-reported, as you seem to believe, but the converse:  DNFs appear to be wildly under-reported.

Yup

 

I've definitely noticed a lot of their same conclusions. Having spent a few years in a new area and finding a lot of duds and then moving back to my present area which has a  high cache density and many inactive COs finding at one time all traditional caches in a 5 mile radius.

 

Negative experience are not good for the game. It saddens me to find a cache that is a slimy moldy mess. It saddens me find a container full of water with smelly toys. And it saddens me to arrive at a GZ and read the four previous logs saying there are problems or worse yet it is missing, I just wasted my time and gas.   It saddens me to see an old cache now in the middle of stinging nettles or field of black berry bushes 10 feet high. 

 

My unpopular suggestions 

1) Encourage filing of "Owner attention requested" and owner maintenance yes even for full logs. If not acted upon automate disabling within a couple of months. Automate the archival of abandoned caches suspend hiding for lack of maintenance of owned caches. Don't complain you volunteered to maintain your cache when you listed it.It's part of the game.

2) Encourage and reward CO maintenance. Collect enough points get 25% off an item in the store or get a virtual reward. Utilize geofencing for maintenance logs or request reviewer approval of unverified maintenance. Ex next cacher reported all is fine, or no service in the area. Take a picture and prove maintenance ad submit for reviewer only.

3) Have an expiration date on caches unless CO performs maintenance after a few years or request a waiver from the reviewer based upon a written set of criteria. Pick X number of years. Even active COs sometimes don't maintain their caches. Automate this process don't make the reviewers the bad guys. Please replace your ten year old cracked plastic container.

4) Get rid of cache adoption in cache dense areas. As the data shows the find rate drops as the locals have all rushed out to find the new caches. Gives the opportunity for new caches closer to peoples home. It is my belief unless folks are on a trip, vacation or just a weekend outing they don't want to be traveling tens of miles away for a caches. Allow the opportunity to refresh a local area. I'd be interested if the data supported this. Allow for exceptions for valued and culturally important to the game bar should be high. For those that are already abandoned but not adopted add a maintainer responsible for the cache or declare eminent domain and reassign ownership possible to the local caching association. How would the geocaching community feel in the absent CO for Mingo decided to log in and archive the cache, which is his right as owner. It should be preserved by the game as should others that currently have active owners. But there should be someone that can be responsible to address problems. Change the listing agreement for future caches to address abandonment. If someone truly wants to take over relist the cache.

5) Increase the number of reviewers or automate a lot of what they currently do. Have special reviewers or guidelines for new hiders to help them and require pictures of the cache placement and confirming good coordinates etc.

6) Improve the app to support finding hiding locations in the field. If I see what I think is a prefect spot to hide a cache I should be able to get a green light or a message saying please contact a reviewer for guidance. Figure out a mechanism to protect hidden locations and prevent battle shipping this is a big complaint. Also allow the app to get the coordinates not manually enter. I have been confronted by angry landowners why I was on their property, one was armed and that was not fun at all.

7) Hove local volunteers to go and checkup on potential problems as directed by reviewers or GS. Actual community maintenance.  First time hiders, have a community volunteer check the cache before publishing and work with CO/reviewer to address problems. Sorry this does not count as a FTF since it was not published but could count as a find.

8) CO archival should be followed within a short period of time retrieval of container logs. Do not allow new listings if maintenance or cleanup is not performed. Have local volunteers attempt to collect archived abandoned caches. If the app would allow opening of archived listings GS could publish request for cleanup lists.

9) Possibly add survey for premium members during/after submitting find it logs requesting status information, Log Full, log almost full, container cracked, baggy ripped, moldy, coordinates off, everything is great! , was a positive experience, would recommend to other cachers. Supply feedback to CO on dashboard for feedback.

 

Before the board blows up on shooting down these suggestions. No I don't think many of these will be implemented. However, I firmly believe that the finding experience can and should be improved. Think of it from the perspective of a new caching family going out for their first time you want them to have a positive experience, heck when I go out I want a positive experience. So instead of focusing on the negatives focus on what could potentially work to improve things. Any changes are not free and details and +/- worked out even the best ideas may have execution issues. 

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, MNTA said:

My unpopular suggestions 

 

1) Encourage filing of "Owner attention requested" and owner maintenance yes even for full logs. If not acted upon automate disabling within a couple of months. Automate the archival of abandoned caches suspend hiding for lack of maintenance of owned caches. Don't complain you volunteered to maintain your cache when you listed it.It's part of the game.

Yes, appropriate use of "Owner attention requested" certainly needs to be encouraged more. As a CO, I'd welcome such logs for even the most minor of things as I want to be made aware of them and it's too easy to miss something (or be distracted and forget) if it's buried deep within a long find log. But that said, sometimes minor problems, like a full log, get fixed by the next finder, and sometimes NMs get logged even when there's no problem to fix (an old cache near here has a long-outstanding NM giving a heads-up about roadworks that ultimately didn't disturb the cache), so I'd rather see reviewer discretion rather than automatic disabling and archival. Around here, it's rare for a new cache to pop up after an old one is archived, mostly it just becomes more empty space on the map.

 

2) Encourage and reward CO maintenance. Collect enough points get 25% off an item in the store or get a virtual reward. Utilize geofencing for maintenance logs or request reviewer approval of unverified maintenance. Ex next cacher reported all is fine, or no service in the area. Take a picture and prove maintenance ad submit for reviewer only.

Wouldn't this just encourage the placement of rubbish containers that need lots of maintenance? I would be at a serious disadvantage here as I try to design my caches to be as maintenance-free as I can make them.

 

3) Have an expiration date on caches unless CO performs maintenance after a few years or request a waiver from the reviewer based upon a written set of criteria. Pick X number of years. Even active COs sometimes don't maintain their caches. Automate this process don't make the reviewers the bad guys. Please replace your ten year old cracked plastic container.

This is one of my caches that I placed in 2014. Well it's not quite ten years old but it doesn't look like it's about to suddenly crack up and its contents turn to soggy pulp between now and next March.

There's nothing magical about this, it's just a good quality container that's fit for purpose in its hiding place (in this instance, in a dry space under a rock ledge that protects it from the sun). I strive to make my caches as maintenance-free as I can, with a fit-for-purpose sturdy container and a logbook big enough to cope with all the finds it's likely to ever get, and if any don't live up to this expectation I'll redesign it to address its shortcomings. This is one of my more recent hides, with the plastic ammo can tucked in around to the left against the back wall of the cave. I'm not sure what sort of maintenance you expect this to need every few years, as I suspect it will outlast me and still be in good nick when my mates retrieve it after attending my funeral.

 

5) Increase the number of reviewers or automate a lot of what they currently do. Have special reviewers or guidelines for new hiders to help them and require pictures of the cache placement and confirming good coordinates etc.

The review process seems to work pretty well here and my understanding is they already have a fairly extensive tool set to help them, but I think requiring pictures of the hiding place and the cache in position would help catch badly wrong coordinates and caches that haven't been placed when the listing is submitted.

 

6) Improve the app to support finding hiding locations in the field. If I see what I think is a prefect spot to hide a cache I should be able to get a green light or a message saying please contact a reviewer for guidance. Figure out a mechanism to protect hidden locations and prevent battle shipping this is a big complaint. Also allow the app to get the coordinates not manually enter. I have been confronted by angry landowners why I was on their property, one was armed and that was not fun at all.

Yes, the app certainly needs improvement to aid cache placement, as the present suggested method of just adding a waypoint to an existing cache doesn't make it easy to get accurate coordinates. Something that takes multiple readings with intelligent averaging over at least five or ten minutes would be better, I'm sure.

 

7) Hove local volunteers to go and checkup on potential problems as directed by reviewers or GS. Actual community maintenance.  First time hiders, have a community volunteer check the cache before publishing and work with CO/reviewer to address problems. Sorry this does not count as a FTF since it was not published but could count as a find.

I suspect this would require lots of volunteers (and with all the personal interaction problems that arise in any endeavour involving lots of volunteers), lots of time and lots of traveling. Requiring photos with cache submissions might be a better way to catch the more common newbie problems.

 

8) CO archival should be followed within a short period of time retrieval of container logs. Do not allow new listings if maintenance or cleanup is not performed. Have local volunteers attempt to collect archived abandoned caches. If the app would allow opening of archived listings GS could publish request for cleanup lists.

What about caches that were archived because they went missing or were destroyed? I've archived 16 of the physical caches I've placed over my decade in the game, and of those two were muggled, two were washed away in floods (I searched the surrounding shoreline but couldn't find anything) and one was buried in a rock fall. The rest I've retrieved and some have even been recycled into new caches.

 

9) Possibly add survey for premium members during/after submitting find it logs requesting status information, Log Full, log almost full, container cracked, baggy ripped, moldy, coordinates off, everything is great! , was a positive experience, would recommend to other cachers. Supply feedback to CO on dashboard for feedback.

Maybe it'd be better to go back to point one and encourage better use of "owner atttention requested" logs. I don't like subjective things like "was a positive experience" or "would recommend to other cachers" because everyone has different tastes. There are caches I've thought were a horrible experience that others have given FPs to, and vice versa.

 

I hope I'm not doing too much shooting down, but some of these suggestions seem highly focused on urban areas saturated with high-maintenance micros and would have significant negative impacts on low density regions where caches are scarce and are often robust and long-lasting without needing constant maintenance.

[+barefootjeff]

22 hours ago, MNTA said:

Have an expiration date on caches unless CO performs maintenance after a few years

 

It being a beautiful late winter's day today, I decided to spend it doing the 12km return hike from Wondabyne railway station to my challenge cache CG752YF on Scopas Peak (elevation 220 metres) in Brisbane Water National Park (the cache has permission). It was placed in August 2017, making it just on six years old, so it must be long overdue for maintenance, right? Well...

 

 

As expected, the stainless steel container is clean and dry, the pencil is still sharp and the sharpener doesn't need emptying. With only 20 finds, the most recent in April 2022, the 160-page logbook isn't quite full yet either. About the only thing needing maintenance is the CO as my legs are pretty stiff and sore now after the workout.

 

Maybe caches like this are an anachronism in this modern age of quick smileys on short-lived urban micros, but do they really need to be expired out after a few years because they haven't needed maintenance? The nearest other cache is 1.6km away so I doubt it's blocking anyone's new creation, particularly with all the hoops i had to jump through to get national parks approval, but if anyone does want the spot they only have to ask and I'll happily oblige as I'll then get rewarded with a smiley the next time I do the hike.

[+MNTA]

8 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Maybe caches like this are an anachronism in this modern age of quick smileys on short-lived urban micros, but do they really need to be expired out after a few years because they haven't needed maintenance? The nearest other cache is 1.6km away so I doubt it's blocking anyone's new creation, particularly with all the hoops i had to jump through to get national parks approval, but if anyone does want the spot they only have to ask and I'll happily oblige as I'll then get rewarded with a smiley the next time I do the hike.

I wish we had more quality caches like yours. Let me give you an example of a few of our older urban hide problems.

 

Cache hidden in 2011 CO still plays but does not maintain NM filed 2 months ago problems reported 5 months ago in logs. Just the lid.

 

 

A 2013 cache I filed a NM on lots of logs saying problems with the log and cache. CO appears to rely on community maintenance, but tons of problems reported in logs.

 

Another 2010 cache with CO that relies on community maintenance. The problem is that dropping off a slip of paper does not solve the underlying problem and the next rain will have the same issue. Most older containers need new o-rings and/or new containers.

 

 

A 2014 letterbox with an unsignable log oh and missing stamp.

 

[+Goldenwattle]

On 8/19/2023 at 5:08 PM, MNTA said:

Do not allow new listings if maintenance or cleanup is not performed.

Oh yes, yes , YES!.

Don't let people continuously put out power trails when they are not maintaining their old ones.

[+Goldenwattle]

On 8/19/2023 at 8:17 PM, barefootjeff said:

Have an expiration date on caches unless CO performs maintenance after a few years or request a waiver from the reviewer based upon a written set of criteria. Pick X number of years. Even active COs sometimes don't maintain their caches. Automate this process don't make the reviewers the bad guys. Please replace your ten year old cracked plastic container.

This is one of my caches that I placed in 2014. Well it's not quite ten years old but it doesn't look like it's about to suddenly crack up and its contents turn to soggy pulp between now and next March.

I agree, it's better to reward people for placing the right container in the first place.

 

On 8/19/2023 at 8:17 PM, barefootjeff said:

I think requiring pictures of the hiding place and the cache in position would help catch badly wrong coordinates and caches that haven't been placed when the listing is submitted.

Good suggestion

 

4 hours ago, MNTA said:

CO appears to rely on community maintenance

LOL, I have met geocachers like that. I put several NMs on a power trail owned by one CO (for full logs), and as I found out later, I wasn't the only one who had placed some NMs. A month or so later I put a NA on only one of them, thinking this would nudge CO into action and replace the logs. NO, I got told off. The CO expected the finders to replace the logs. They were too busy. I was a nasty person ruining the game, etc. They placed a log on each of their caches (even those I hadn't put NMs on) saying there was a nasty person who was placing nasty logs (Um yes, log is full and need replacement...yes, so nasty'.) The reviewer came in and said a NM is not an attack and it is their responsibility to maintain their own caches, and that they weren't the only person who was busy. Thank you reviewer for backing me up. 

Another I placed a NM on because the log was overfull, and from memory tatty, I got told off in the following log by the next finder, using their log to say I should not have placed the NM, but rather replaced the log myself. I think they wrote with note paper I was carrying. I was carrying NO notepaper, so couldn't have change the log. I believe if you place a log you maintain it. I maintain my own, and would be very annoyed if someone replaced the log on one of my caches without permission, as I check logs. Just log the NM and leave it up to the CO. (The words are what are remembered and might not be 100% exact.)

 

 

[+L0ne.R]

19 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Maybe caches like this are an anachronism in this modern age of quick smileys on short-lived urban micros, but do they really need to be expired out after a few years because they haven't needed maintenance?

 

I think there needs to be an expiration date to refresh the game and get rid of the caches that are no longer being monitored by cache owners that never plan to maintain.  IMO you are very conscientious rarity when it comes to ownership and maintenance. Are there any other cache owners in your area maintain caches as well as you do?

 

[+L0ne.R]

Here are the last few caches that I found before I stopped bothering to spend my time and money geocaching:

 

Just a crushed painted juice bottle that was repeated logged as a found with no Needs Maintenance log.

 

Tabs broken off this so that the lid just rested on on the container. Found It logs reported it as 'wet' for over a year but no NM logs.

 

Found It logs reported it as broken into pieces but no NM log.

 

The state of caches in my area was the big reason for stopping. The other was being called a 'cache cop' a number of times for reporting caches.

 

But I'm really glad to see a couple of staff members in the Groundspeak ranks taking the issue a little more seriously.