moving caches

[georapper]

on the subject of moving caches. if we place control of cache location back into the hands of the admins by requiring that each time a moving cache is placed in a new location that the new location be approved by the admins before being posted on the website. if we do this, there is no reason that moving caches would not be allowed because the admins now have control over placement. would this suffice to get moving caches going again?

 

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

[+Mr. 0]

I think that would be hard to do. Yeah we could place control to the admins...but for one they already have enough to do. Secondly, if someone places a mover in an unacceptable spot, what happens if no one retrives it?

 

Mr. 0

 

"Remember that nature and the elements are neither your friend or your enemy - they are actually disinterested."

 

Department of the Army Field Manual FM 21-76 "Survival" Oct. 1970

[georapper]

#1. whats another cache being placed have to do with the admins being overloaded. if the admins are overloaded, then new cache placement would come to a halt too. the number of moving caches is extremely small compared to the number of new caches. if the admins are overloaded, then geocaching would cease to exist.

 

#2. if the cache is placed and not approved, then it is the responsibility of the owner to retrieve the cache. cache owners to have responsibilities to maintain and upkeep their own caches. if not, then regular caches won't work either.

 

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

[+Renegade Knight]

You are just taking the work of a moving cache and multiplying it by a factor of 100 for the admins. They were already a logistical problem.

 

Moving caches can and will quicly move beyond the ability of the cache onwer to maintain. I sure as heck don't know where my cache is really at once it moved the first time. It doesn't take long to realize the result of a vacation cache and depend on the kindness of the local geocachers.

 

Moving caches fail utterly the vaction rule as well as being much more of a PITA than a vacation cache could ever bee.

 

I hear they are selling the grandfathered moving caches on eBay.

[georapper]

i was wondering when you would step in RK. did you get my request for additional info on the gem state happy cache? i found your hobo cache and put a clue in it to a moving coordinate cache.

 

what do you think of the moving coordinate caches? i've already done one in provo, utah and set one up in poci as well.

 

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

[+Mr. 0]

quote:

---

Originally posted by georapper:

#1. whats another cache being placed have to do with the admins being overloaded. if the admins are overloaded, then new cache placement would come to a halt too. the number of moving caches is extremely small compared to the number of new caches. if the admins are overloaded, then geocaching would cease to exist.

 

#2. if the cache is placed and not approved, then it is the responsibility of the owner to retrieve the cache. cache owners to have responsibilities to maintain and upkeep their own caches. if not, then regular caches won't work either.

 

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

---

 

#1 Good point. I suppose that there are a limited amount of them. So it wouldn't add a lot of extra approvals.

 

#2 Let's say I own a moving cache, I live in Central Ohio. What happens if my cache moves to somewhere say 500 miles away. It's placed, unapproved, and gets left. I'm fairly busy and wouldn't have opportunity for a long time to make the trip to retrive it. So at that point the only option I would have is to talk to someone locally and try to convince them to go somewhere dangerous, or illegal to retrive a cache for me that is of no concern to them.

 

I just want to make it clear, since the internet is a poor means for communication...I'm not trying to argue, or say you're wrong...I'm just trying to get a full understanding.

 

Mr. 0

 

"Remember that nature and the elements are neither your friend or your enemy - they are actually disinterested."

 

Department of the Army Field Manual FM 21-76 "Survival" Oct. 1970

[georapper]

good point #2. the cache needs to remain in a local area where the cache owner has access. i'm not talking about long distance caches but local caches traveling a max of maybe 100 miles or so. each move would have the max limit of 1 mile or so. i was thinking of doing a moving cache in my local area that would move 10 or so miles, in increments of .1 or .2 miles. i would give a bearing and distance range to move the cache. if the cache placer did not follow directions, their log would be deleted and a find not counted.

 

i realize that may be alot of direction to give a cacher, but this is a game, if people don't want to play the game then they shouldn't be geocaching. i just created a moving coordinate cache, lost in poci, that requires cachers to find 3 moving clues to a fixed cache location. yeah, that may be alot of effort but this is a game, if people don't like adventure or like to solve puzzles, then they should be geocaching.

 

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

[+Renegade Knight]

You might want to request that the clues remain in Pocatello.

 

This has been done in a similar fashion with Travel bugs. You have to get the TB to get the clue to find the Cache. It worked great until the main cache had to be archived due to the wildlife refuge banning geocahing. The TB was re-released for the new cache and it took a bit for the owner to catch up wiht the original TB and pull it.

 

I've never seen your version of this before. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.

[+hoys]

quote:

---

Originally posted by georapper:

#1. whats another cache being placed have to do with the admins being overloaded. if the admins are overloaded, then new cache placement would come to a halt too. the number of moving caches is extremely small compared to the number of new caches. if the admins are overloaded, then geocaching would cease to exist.

---

 

True. However, right now, the admins have to do the research and approve a cache once. After that, dozens or hundreds of people can find it. The person placing the cache has (in theory) put time and effort into making sure the location is correct, cool, and legal.

 

Now, someone grabs a cache and moves it each time. You have the usual problem with moving caches

 

- three people go to find it in a day, two are dissapointed

- placed coordinates are verified only once instead of the 4-5 times a placer should be verifying them

- new placer may not put the research into legal locations and drop it somewhere illegal - original cacher is now liable.

 

Then, add to that the fact that the approvers must re-approve the cache each and every time someone finds it, and do that research all over again. Right now, one approval is good for a large number of finds. Just a few caches like this in a large area could easily double the workload on the (volunteer) approvers.

 

Then, if the approver has a beef with the location, would they contact the person who moved it (who might be the only person able to find it again), or the cache owner?

 

Personally, I don't do moving caches. I see too many technical problems with them. So my opinion could hardly be considered unbiased.

 

I cannot imagine that the admins would be thrilled with the additional workload.

 

If your local admin approves it and is willing to take on the work, though, who am I to argue?

[+briansnat]

If you really want to make a moving cache that conforms to this website's rules, attach a travel bug to it. Then place it near an existing cache and use that cache as an offset. You could use Letterbox-like clues, or raw coordinates. The moving cache could be 50 feet from the real cache, or 500 feet.

 

Of course you won't get to add a "found it" to your find count because its a TB, but, as most of the vets say here "It's all about the hunt" .

 

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

 

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on August 11, 2003 at 03:59 AM.]