Virtual Cache Archived

[Team Jedi]

We placed two Virtual Caches while on Vacation. Both of these caches had you take a picture of you by an object. (The two were) A picture of you by THe Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk Park in N.C. and The other was a Sign post at Fort Macon. GC.com Rules on placing caches while on Vacation follows:

 

Placing Caches on Vacation

 

Placing caches on vacation is unacceptable and these caches will not be approved on the web site. As the cache owner you are obligated to be in a position to manage your caches, and caches placed on vacation require someone else to maintain them for you. Please be responsible.

 

 

We agree with this rule as to a hardcache as it's hard to do Cache Maintance while your 500 miles away! BUT the two we placed, "WE CAN control them" because there is no HARDCACHE so you do not have to do any type of cache maintance. So on a Picture Cache we do not feel this rule applies as it is talking about Hardcaches.

 

We are asking for a little help in getting these cache unarchived. So what does everyone thinks about this!

 

THanks

 

Team Jedi

[umc]

Well if you followed the rule that you should place a physical cache when you can and that would be asked if you could place a physical cache at either of these locations it wouldn't matter since it then would be a vacation cache.

 

Hows that for a run-on sentance..

 

__________________________

Caching without a clue....

[+southdeltan]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Jedi:

We placed two Virtual Caches while on Vacation. Both of these caches had you take a picture of you by an object. (The two were) A picture of you by THe Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk Park in N.C. and The other was a Sign post at Fort Macon. GC.com Rules on placing caches while on Vacation follows:

 

We agree with this rule as to a hardcache as it's hard to do Cache Maintance while your 500 miles away! BUT the two we placed, "WE CAN control them" because there is no HARDCACHE so you do not have to do any type of cache maintance. So on a Picture Cache we do not feel this rule applies as it is talking about Hardcaches.

 

---

 

I hate to point this out - but just because it's a virtual doesn't mean it doesn't require maintainence. I'm assuming the first was by a statue, and although it's unlikely that it would move or be moved - stranger things have happend. The second is near a signpost? I hate to admit it, but around here some signs don't last long. I also don't think a signpost fits the part about 'coffee table book worthy' or whatever the quote is (ie, that it has to be VERY interesting).

 

Besides, why place a cache that may limit locals from placing their own. If the cachers in that area didn't think it was worthy of a cache, then it may not be. I'm sure there are lots of places near your home that could handle some caches.

 

southdeltan

 

"Man can counterfeit everything except silence". - William Faulkner

[+The Leprechauns]

The vacation cache rule applies to virtuals as well as to physical caches. And, speaking as someone who hunted in vain for a virtual cache that WASN'T THERE ANYMORE -- a cache placed by someone on vacation -- I think the rule makes good sense.

 

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Next time, instead of getting married, I think I'll just find a woman I don't like and buy her a house.

[Team Jedi]

Well, Unless someone wants to move a 1325 ton marble statue in the next 100 years ) lol

 

The Sign post was a bad word to use on my part, It's a State Marker. Taking part in the Ohio State marker program, I can tell you that It would be very hard to remove that sign now, And besides, I can arcive the cache if it does.

 

It's not like having your cache BOX being taken, where you have to go and replace it, if These things are removed, They are gone and I'm not replacing them (Not at 2.5 Milion, I Just don't have that kind of money)

 

It would be No different then if it was 100 feet from my front door. The Cahe would then be archived if it was removed. (And Yes, Any State statues or History markers in the U.S. that are moved are placed in the Public record before they are mmoved or removed) (Hey 62 Caches hidden, None Removed and all that need permits have them, Done my Homework Big Smile and a quick pat on the back)

 

As far as my area, If where everyone lived was the best place in the world, No one would take Vacations ) lol

 

Doc

 

(PS) I understand Rules, The Rule STATS as a hardcache. Nit picking about a 1325 ton statue being moved to make a point is very thin at the least. The thing about rules is, you can not read between the lines. If you could then there would be no room for rules as you could nit pick around them all.

 

I am asking help in the FACTS OF THE RULE and not the What if's! (DOn't want to sound stuck up about that, But I am going by the rule as it is written and as I read it, not WHAT IF!)

 

Happy Hiking

 

Doc

 

(PSS, I am not looking for a crash bang rip them up posting slam fest. If you wish to do that, Please be a cool cacher and E-Mail our team in Private as this question is not just our question but a few other teams are watching. THanks

[umc]

I just wonder why its so important to have a virtual cache in another state or at all for that matter. I have placed two and couldn't care less about them but don't archive them because I fear that someone else would come along and snag them as their own. I guess I would feel different about mine if they weren't lam@$$ plaques. Anyway I don't think I would ever feel the urge to place a virt or any cache that wasn't near me especially a virt because they are boring to begin with.

 

quote:

---

Besides, why place a cache that may limit locals from placing their own. If the cachers in that area didn't think it was worthy of a cache, then it may not be.

---

 

I really like both of those points.

 

__________________________

Caching without a clue....

[Team Jedi]

A Memeber of OKIC (Ohio Kentucky Indiana Cachers) point this out to me.

 

>Prior to considering a virtual cache, you must have given

>consideration to the question "why a regular geocache – perhaps a

>micro or only a log book - couldn't be placed there?" If there is a

>good answer, then it may be a valid virtual cache opportunity. Also,

>consider making the location a step in a multi-stage cache, with the

>physical cache placed in an area that is appropriate.

 

My answer to him was this cache:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=53444

 

Before we left for Vacation I printed out caches to find while I was there. Both places (Macon and Kitty Hawk) do not let you place Hardcaches on state grounds. (As you see in the cache above) The question above was answered, the VC is now the only type of you can have.

 

Gets back to the rule of placing while you are on vacation, Yes, I agree as the rule reads: I can not do cache maintance on a Hardcache.

 

And we do fill the requirement as we can maintain these VC. There are not like someting on the side of the Road, These have

tons and tons of visitors and I would think that someone in that area would have already made these VC. Which is why ARE TEAM did.

 

Team Jedi

[+Renegade Knight]

The vacation cache is all about your ability to maintain a cache. This has been discussed in these forums. If you can maintain the cache then it's not a vacation cache by defintion.

 

A virtual can be maintained. If they move the statue someone will post 'gee the statue is gone' and the cache owner can do what he needs to do. That's about as much notice as anyone gets to check on a cache.

 

How can it be maintained? I could think of a way and I don't have any intention of doing an more virtual caches.

[+JohnnyVegas]

The reason that your virtual was turned down is because the approvers just do not want to approve them anymore. This has been a prolem in N. Cal. lately. My gut feeling is that virtuals just are not allowed anymore.

[+Runaround]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnnyvegas:

The reason that your virtual was turned down is because the approvers just do not want to approve them anymore. This has been a prolem in N. Cal. lately. My gut feeling is that virtuals just are not allowed anymore.

---

 

Not true. At least in my neck of the woods. We've had a few new virtuals approved.

 

Why are so many people looking for a loophole in the vacation cache policy? If we let one cache in, then there will be a 2nd. And a 3rd. And ........

 

Regardless of the merits, let's stick to the no vacation caches policy and life will be a lot simpler. There are a lot of rules restricting caches in my home area and we are working hard with local land managers to improve the situation. That said, we have a hard enough time keeping up with caches placed but newbies who didn't know the rules. Vacation caches just add to the problem.

 

Now where did I park my car???????

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

The reason that your virtual was turned down is because the approvers just do not want to approve them anymore. This has been a prolem in N. Cal. lately. My gut feeling is that virtuals just are not allowed anymore

---

 

It is a lot harder to get a virtual cache approved these days. You have to demonstrate the site is one of significant interest AND that it would be impossible to place a real cache, whether a micro, or an offset.

 

Since other than places where real geocaches are banned, its almost always possible to place a real cache, so most virtuals won't be approved.

 

To me, this is a good thing. People were making virtuals out of practically every roadside plaque, or marker, no matter how uninteresting.

 

"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

[+woodsters]

I may be a minority here but I agree with you Team Jedi. Going along with the "if a physical couldn't be placed there" guideline, I don't see why at least the Wright Bros one wouldn't get approved. It's of historical nature. Someone mentioned in a different thread about it's hard for the approvers to know what is private property and etc. I would think this would probably go with along the same line. How would an approver know if a physical could be placed there, unless they have specific knowledge of that exact spot? As far as the vacation cache thing goes, the guidelines do no tell it all. Jeremy did state in a thread that they would be allowed if certain requirements were met. They are not written in the guidelines but he did state it on the forum.

 

As far as a virtual not being there tomorrow, I have to agree, I would say a statue has a better chance of being there than a tupperware container, film canister or ammo box. Just as those are sometimes taken or moved and those caches have to be archived, I would think you could easily do it with the virtuals and probably more less often than the traditionals and micros.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+BVCY Swim]

I'd say that Doc's (Jedi) Wright Brother's VC IS of significant interest as 2003 is the 100th Anniversary of the First Flight by the Wright Brothers! If that ain't significant enough, then what is? Doc already made his case about normal caches not being allowed at this location. It should be approved.

 

I cannot speak for the other VC, though.

 

Cheers ... BVCY Swim

OKIC Cache Counselor

[Team Kender]

I agree with BVCY Swim. It is a place of great interest and would make a great virt. But I've also seen some micros in some pretty crazy places, so the burden would be on proving that a person couldn't get a micro planted somewhere near by.

 

Team Kender - "The Sun is coming up!" "No, the horizon is going down."

[+PastorCacher]

I agree with limiting caches that cannot be maintained. I see no logical reason to prefer hard caches to interesting virtual ones since the fun is in the search and discovery. And I will be a total heretic here and suggest that vacationers might notice things that local residents have long taken for granted and made part of their wall paper, thus creating even more interesting virtual caches.

For me the fun is in the search and discovery, I'm happy with as many sorts of caches as imagination can stimulate.

 

PastorCacher

[Team Jedi]

>Why are so many people looking for a loophole >in the vacation cache policy?

 

I would like to say that we are not looking for a Loop hole. Far from it. I am looking at the one single greatest feat known to man outside of the splitting the atom (Which was also Dropped from a plane) We placed a VC there as it's breath Taking to those who dream about flight the same as people Dream about NASCAR, Baseball and some, Geocaching LOL

 

I looked at the rules before I left, I then added the VC.

 

As for The Marker for Fort Macon, I liked it

for this one thing. It's in front of the Fort That was one of the first real things that the U.S. ACoE Built. THe Core built East FOrk Lake which is 4 miles from my house. 150 years to the date of project start 1826 for the fort, 1976 for East Fork.

 

Sorry for the History test )

 

My point is, I am not looking for any loop hole, I am looking at what I think is Fun in History. We tend to forget history until you see places like FOrt Macon (WHich by the way, I would not have seen it if I didn't look for caches to find while I was there to begin with). We saw something that we could share with other Cachers "Like are team did" Enjoy it to the max and it would have been a lose if we missed it.

 

The other thing is in the quote above. "Why are so many people looking " THis is a good point to ponder as If so many people are looking for a loop hole, then maybe they do not like the rule or maybe they are like me, They Read the rule, Placed there cache and had it archived.

 

I understand some people don't like VC caches, Yavin (A follow cacher he in ohio) use to get them here. I at the time hated them. BUT after find a few, I found they where not so bad and with all the New Rules state parks (Now Local small Parks) are coming up with about placing a Hardcache, Someday the VC cache may be about the only cache you'll be able to place ( would hate to see that happen...

 

Anyway, That is my final two cents on the Subject, I hope I have explaned why I think they should be accepted.

 

Thanks for the Great Input everyone )

 

Happy Hiking.

 

Team Jedi

[+trippy1976]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Jedi:

Well, Unless someone wants to move a 1325 ton marble statue in the next 100 years ) lol

---

 

Don't laugh. There was a whole cathedral in Detroit that was moved.

 

I'm thinking of making a cache involving it... but I will want to keep an eye on it. In case it moves again.

 

--------

trippy1976 - Team KKF2A

Saving geocaches - one golf ball at a time.

[Dinoprophet]

quote:

---

Originally posted by trippy1976:

Don't laugh. There was a whole cathedral in Detroit that was moved.

 

I'm thinking of making a cache involving it... but I will want to keep an eye on it. In case it moves again.

---

 

Too bad moving caches aren't allowed anymore. That'd be a good one.

 

I believe we had an entire theater moved not long ago, too (The Gem).

 

Then, in NH, you've got The Old Man In The Mountain. Didn't expect that.

Well the mountain was so beautiful that this guy built a mall and a pizza shack

Yeah he built an ugly city because he wanted the mountain to love him back -- Dar Williams

[+Nurse Dave]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team Jedi:

>Why are so many people looking for a loophole >in the vacation cache policy?

 

I would like to say that we are not looking for a Loop hole. Far from it. I am looking at the one single greatest feat known to man outside of the splitting the atom (Which was also Dropped from a plane) We placed a VC there as it's breath Taking to those who dream about flight the same as people Dream about NASCAR, Baseball and some, Geocaching LOL

---

 

Worded that way or not, that's exactly what it sounds like you are doing. Almost everyone that places a cache outside the guidelines has some reason why theirs is different and should be approved. You want it there, no vacation caches allowed, there has to be plenty of space around where you live to place another cache. Just have to move on.

 

---Real men cache in shorts.

[+Breaktrack]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PastorCacher:

I agree with limiting caches that cannot be maintained. I see no logical reason to prefer hard caches to interesting virtual ones since the fun is in the search and discovery. And I will be a total heretic here and suggest that vacationers might notice things that local residents have long taken for granted and made part of their wall paper, thus creating even more interesting virtual caches.

For me the fun is in the search and discovery, I'm happy with as many sorts of caches as imagination can stimulate.

 

PastorCacher

---

 

Absolutely freaking A right! Unfortunately, I've been trying to make the same point for over a year now but it's hard to get the info through the fingers in the ears.....lol. I have several virtual caches in other states (all prior to the "no vacation cache" rule) as when I went on vacation with my kids I would not have DREAMED of placing a hard cache somewhere to just become some kind of geotrash at some point. However, I was pretty sure that Pike's Peak would not go anywhere, nor the Basalt Cliffs in Yellowstone, or the various Civil War forts or battle sites around. At none of these sites did I stand outside for weeks waiting to be the first person in so I could "cheat some local of a cache site". These were all done long after I started caching and NO ONE showed the slightest interest in doing them as virtuals. If anyone had objected I'd have been fine with archiving them so someone local could take that site over, I still will, but it just can't be said that should happen because the virtual caches can't be maintained! Good grief. We have regular "traditional" tupperware and ammo can caches that are neglected and abandoned ALL THE TIME and NO ONE is in these forums saying we should do away with those kinds of caches because they aren't being maintained.... The truth is, with all types of caches, you have individuals who will maintain their caches, regardless of how far away they are, and you have those that wouldn't maintain one if it was placed in their own back yard... This blanket "rule" is just that, an overall reaction to objections made by people here and there and made to look like a bigger problem than it really is. Virtual caches, whether "vacation caches" or not, are not the problem. Hard caches placed where they have no business being placed are the problem.

 

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

[+woodsters]

Couldn't say it any better Breaktrack. As I mentioned, Jeremy did mention in the one thread I had mentioned before about that Vacation Caches would be allowed under certain circumstances. Here's what Jeremy said in that thread:

 

quote:

---

have a solution, and I'll be happy to amend the vacation cache issue.

 

If you place a cache and the land owner has agreed to maintain it, you are welcome to place one on vacation. To do this you need to put the land manager's contact information (phone number or email will do) on the cache page so if it needs maintaining the geocacher can contact them.

 

Otherwise don't place caches on vacation. It's irresponsible behavior to hide something you have no intention of maintaining.

 

---

 

So with that said, what about Virtual Vacation Caches? I think that the physical on the spot maintenance is voided in these cases. Just like any other traditional type of cache, if someone reports the virtual is no longer there, then it gets archived.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+Nurse Dave]

So with that said, what about Virtual Vacation Caches? I think that the physical on the spot maintenance is voided in these cases. Just like any other traditional type of cache, if someone reports the virtual is no longer there, then it gets archived.

 

Brian

 

 

Once again I'll bring up the example of the hider writing down the wrong coords. You're back home, somebody says "hey those coords point to the middle of a lake." Now what? And also once again, caches aren't meant to be placed with the idea that they are just going to be archived at the first sign of trouble. And thus the reason for requiring maintenance.

 

---Real men cache in shorts.

[+woodsters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nurse Dave & LKay:

 

Once again I'll bring up the example of the hider writing down the wrong coords. You're back home, somebody says "hey those coords point to the middle of a lake." Now what? And also once again, caches aren't meant to be placed with the idea that they are just going to be archived at the first sign of trouble. And thus the reason for requiring maintenance.

---

 

And what about traditionals that post the wrong coordinates as well? What happens with them? People post that they couldn't find it or as you mentioned in the middle of a lake. The cache placer can: A)Make a trip back if reasonable to check the coordinates, B)Tell this person what they were supposed to be pointing to and ask to see what coordinates they have for it and make adjustments on the page, or C) archive it.

 

It happens. Even if I go back to a spot 10 different times, I may end up with different coordinates than you. There is a local cache here like that.

 

I would think that in the apporval process when the approver plots it out and sees that it's in the middle of water that they would question it.

 

People make mistakes.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+Frolickin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

And what about traditionals that post the wrong coordinates as well? What happens with them? People post that they couldn't find it or as you mentioned in the middle of a lake. The cache placer can: A)Make a trip back if reasonable to check the coordinates,

---

 

There's the rub. If it is placed while on vacation, the hider cannot return to the site and get new readings.

 

Fro.

 

________________________________________

Geocaching . . . hiking with a purpose

[+Draegon]

Nurse Dave, no offense, and not to sound nit-picky, but I think you're grasping for straws.

 

Jedi and I live in a fairly cache-inundated area, granted it's not So Cal but we've got quite a few caches around, and I think I can safely say that from this area writing down the wrong coords happen maybe 1 in every 100-150 caches.

And even if it did happen, as accidents will, he, or any other cacher in the same boat, could contact a local and ask for some help. And in this case, the placer has made a local contact to help keep an eye out to make sure, say Mt. Rushmore, has indeed NOT moved.

 

And then, if the 1300lb. statue in question did get moved, the coordinates could always be edited once it was found out.

People for some reason or another have figured that just because the cache is a virtual that they WILL find it. Part of the geocaching challenge is the risk or the treasure not being there, and if someone get's their shorts in a knot because they couldn't find the marker for that cache then I think they should try to find a solution to the problem instead of complaining about it.

 

Draegon, Mentor of the OKIC

Team Draegon

Cincinnati, Ohio USA

 

"To conquer without risk is to succeed without glory"

[deadpollyparrot]

Team Jed:

 

I've got the same problem. I have 3 vcaches I'd like to 'place', but the vacation and approval process is a deal killer. Two of mine are Federally protected and guarded by Texas Rangers 24 hours a day. Hmmm... probably doesn't need maintenance.

 

Perhaps the desire to scribble in a logbook has turned to obsession.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nurse Dave & LKay:

So with that said, what about Virtual Vacation Caches? I think that the physical on the spot maintenance is voided in these cases. Just like any other traditional type of cache, if someone reports the virtual is no longer there, then it gets archived.

---

 

Once placed, the vacation virtual is effectively abandoned by its "owner." Objects serving as virtual caches are sometimes moved. I've done two virtual caches (and also a webcam cache) where the object of the cache had been moved a considerable distance since the cache had been posted by absentee owners. One had been moved over 1/2 mile from the posted coordinates.

 

Objects of virtual caches are also sometimes permanently removed. I recently verified that an abandoned NYC virtual that had been reported as 'possbily missing' nine months earlier in fact no longer existed. In my opinion, a cache "owner" must be available to determine the status of their virtual in a timely manner and take appropriate action.

[Team Jedi]

I know I said I was done BUT I found another Penny )

 

I had TWO MORE VC's archived today, Both of these are less then 70 miles from my House. So I post the following as to what you are to do before placing a cache.

 

YES-It can be Maintained by ME! the placer

as I can reach the site in less than

2 hours.

 

YES-It is in MY back yard and I go there alot

 

YES-It is in a Park that NO LONGER lets you

place hard caches in the park so a VC is

the ONLY type of cache that can be placed.

 

YES-It is a VC that is very cool, It's in

Hocking Hill State Park in Ohio. (Our

Kitty Hawk in Ohio)

 

YES if you were an out of towner the same as

I was in Kitty Hawk N.C. I would want you

to see these two spots as they are as

Breath taking as Kitty Hawk was.

 

So, Why are they not approved, What rule am I missing now? They met EVERY rule in the book WORD for WORD, Not Binding rules not reading in between lines BUT word for word and NO LOOP Holes no nothing! They were Archived.

 

ANother wrote (If someone there (Being Kitty Hawk N.C.) thought it was worthy then they would have place a VC there!) Well, Maybe they did and it was Archived just as the ones in MY back yard were archived.

 

I agree with those who wrote that GC.Com does not want VC's. I can see it just as the hugh nose on my face. You know, Hocking hills no longer lets you place HARDCACHES, We were also just informed today by (Geocaching.com's KY Admin) that another park in Kentucky Just pulled caches out of the park and will not let you place them their anymore. You know, Soon the VC will be the only cache you will aloud to play. Sad BUT it's heading that way.

 

Also before my penny runs out, to answer the question of "writing down the wrong coords" Dragaon has a good point to that"

 

Also while I was being branded above of nit picking to get my cache approved, Well let's say

this to that statment....

 

I wrote the Coords wrong to Kitty Hawk N.C.or any other person who is placing a VC wrote down the wrong coords, Okay The Coods are wrong and now what, Well, You will get a few messages saying it's not there and then......

 

The Cache is Arcived, Problem Solved! taken care of by the Placer 500 Miles away from there VC. Maintained the cache.....

 

Let's say they are off 12 clicks BUT the cacher happens to be a coolcacher, Starts to look around to see if maybe the coords ARE off or maybe there GPS is off (Like the GPS being off like that's never happend to a cacher before) Hey Look, They find the 60 foot 1300 ton granet statue you can see 2 1/2 miles away because it's on a flat island. (If that cool cacher was you, WOULD you or would you not E-mail the cacher who placed it and tell them what you found and the New Coords of where you found it?) I think you would. I would! Most cachers would. Then the placer of the VC CAN change the Coords to the cache and the cache is now correct!

 

Problem Solved! taken care of by the Placer 500 Miles away from there VC. Maintained the cache.....

 

 

So far it's about 2 to 1 in favor of this cache. Makes me feel a little better... )

 

Cache On...

 

Doc

[+JoesBar]

I just returned from NC and logged a virtual cache at Kitty Hawk. "Dawn of Avation" GCB57D. This cache requires that you find a certain large marker. This cache was hidden 12/17/02

 

****************************************************

Dorothy: "How can you talk if haven't got a brain?" Scarecrow: "I don't know. But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?"

[+leatherman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Going along with the "if a physical couldn't be placed there" guideline,

---

 

There is absolutely no reason that the virtual can not be a stage in a multi cache.

As for places that you can not hide a cache. It was for places like National Parks. Where they are forbidden. If a cache is not forbidden then it can be a traditional. There are many multis that use a historical marker for a virtual stage.

 

Pepper playing nice!

Mokita!

[CacheMonkeez]

IMHO, micros and virtuals should be exempt from the vacation rule. Your caches should be approved and unarchived.

[+hydee]

Your virtual cache was archvied because it was a cache placed on vacation. Vacation caches are not allowed. If you would like to email a local cacher and have them adopt the cache then we would be more than happy to reconsider your submission as long as it meets the virtual cache guidelines.

 

hydee

I work for the frog

[+hydee]

As for your caches that were archived today did you attempt to work with the approver. Many cases a virtual is archived while it is being reviewed by the approver.

 

hydee

I work for the frog

[+joefrog]

I was recently caching in NYC while visiting the inlaws. Two of the caches I remember offhand that I hit were placed by a cacher from Nashville, TN -- two virtual and one micro. They're still there...

 

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

Once placed, the vacation virtual is effectively abandoned by its "owner." Objects serving as virtual caches are sometimes moved. I've done two virtual caches (and also a webcam cache) where the object of the cache had been moved a considerable distance since the cache had been posted by absentee owners. One had been moved over 1/2 mile from the posted coordinates.

 

Objects of virtual caches are also sometimes permanently removed. I recently verified that an abandoned NYC virtual that had been reported as 'possbily missing' nine months earlier in fact no longer existed. In my opinion, a cache "owner" must be available to determine the status of their virtual in a timely manner and take appropriate action.

---

 

Joel (joefrog)

 

"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for ye are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!"

[+woodsters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frolickin:

 

There's the rub. If it is placed while on vacation, the hider cannot return to the site and get new readings.

 

Fro.

 

---

 

Who's to say they can't? Not everyone goes hundreds or thousands of miles to vacation. As I stated the cache can be archived. If fellow cachers that are in the area want to try to help them then that's another option. We are talking about a virtual and not a traditional. If it so happens that the coordinates are wrong and the person can't go back to the spot and recheck them, then it gets archived. There's nothing left there. No cache to go pick up that will litter the ground.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+woodsters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by hydee:

Your virtual cache was archvied because it was a cache placed on vacation. Vacation caches are not allowed. If you would like to email a local cacher and have them adopt the cache then we would be more than happy to reconsider your submission as long as it meets the virtual cache guidelines.

 

hydee

_I work for the frog_

---

Adopt a virtual? I can see adopting a virtual only for the fact that a person no longer wants to approve finds or gets out of geocaching. But other than that, that makes no sense.

 

Ok, now someone has to get someone to adopt a virtual? Remember Jeremy stated that vacation caches are allowed within the restrictions that I posted above. So to be technical about it, the statement of vacation caches are not allowed would not be correct, as they are, with restrictions.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+hydee]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Ok, now someone has to get someone to adopt a virtual? Remember Jeremy stated that vacation caches are allowed within the restrictions that I posted above. So to be technical about it, the statement of vacation caches are not allowed would not be correct, as they are, with restrictions.

 

Brian

---

 

My statement is correct. They are not allowed according to the guidelines.

 

There are exceptions made on a case by case basis. Jeremy stated one of those cases where an exception could be made.

 

Might I remind you that is the great thing about guidelines, they can be flexible. If you plan on planting a cache that does not meet the guidelines I suggest seeking permission before placing the cache or submitting the page, as you don't want to be left disappointed.

 

hydee

I work for the frog

[+woodsters]

But his (Jeremy) statement wasn't on one particular cache. It was on the vacation cache issue in general. Matter of fact he stated he would "amend" the vacation cache issue. As far as what it states on the guidelines, yes it says "No Vacation Caches". Is it a correct statement now? No, as they are allowed with the restrictions. I know it's being nit-picky. But it's not fair to lead newer people like me and those even newer the wrong way.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+Harrald]

I only have one thing to add to this thread.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own.

Sydney J. Harris

[+leatherman]

Yawn.....

 

Pepper playing nice!

Mokita!

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

only have one thing to add to this thread.

---

 

Typical Harrald hit-n-run . Say something pithy and bye!

 

"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

[+mtn-man]

Despite the fact that this has been argued to death, I will ask one question regarding the Kitty Hawk Area cache submission.

 

Why do you feel the need to place another virtual right next to the existing one for the same location? You even logged the existing virtual cache and you are using the same picture that you got for the log on that cache on your submitted (and rejected) cache...

Dawn of Aviation

 

I personally think one virtual cache for a small historic location like this should be enough. At least in Washington DC when you walk 529 feet and find another virtual cache it relates to something else and not the same thing. This cache if approved would be like having two virtual caches for the Lincoln Memorial -- one on each side. Why not let the existing cache be the cache for the location?

 

As far as signs being moved, take a look at the logs on my Kennesaw Mtn. Virtual Cache. As you can see, on June 22, 2002 one of the signs was reported as missing. I was able to check it immediately, disable the cache and then enable the cache again once the sign was put back in place. Strange things can and do happen, but you must have a plan in place to deal with the issues that come up or your cache will not be approved. I never would have thought that they would dig that sign up, but they most certainly did.

[+wimseyguy]

OK so I'm jumping into this one a little bit late but...:

 

quote:

---

Well, Unless someone wants to move a 1325 ton marble statue in the next 100 years ) lol

---

 

The Cape Hattaras Lighthouse just a few miles further down the Outer Banks from the Kitty Hawk Monument was moved a few years back. I think it is even a bit bigger than the KH Monument too.

 

These changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes;

Nothing remains quite the same.

Through all of the islands and all of the highlands,

If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane

[+Frolickin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Who's to say they can't? Not everyone goes hundreds or thousands of miles to vacation.

---

If it is in your caching area, then it would not have been archived as a vacation cache. You are trying to split hairs.

 

Fro.

 

________________________________________

Geocaching . . . hiking with a purpose

[+Breaktrack]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

Once placed, the vacation virtual is effectively abandoned by its "owner." Objects serving as virtual caches are sometimes moved. I've done two virtual caches (and also a webcam cache) where the object of the cache had been moved a considerable distance since the cache had been posted by absentee owners. One had been moved over 1/2 mile from the posted coordinates.

 

Objects of virtual caches are also sometimes permanently removed. I recently verified that an abandoned NYC virtual that had been reported as 'possbily missing' nine months earlier in fact no longer existed. In my opinion, a cache "owner" must be available to determine the status of their virtual in a timely manner and take appropriate action.

---

 

Here's the rub with this premise, I have several out of state virtuals. They were all placed prior to the newest and most popular rule about "no vacation caches". To say that I have "abandoned" these caches would be intellectually dishonest. I have five traditional caches along the coast of Texas that I have taken great pains to make interesting and more than a little difficult to get to and they have gotten very good reviews. I have to do much less cache maintenance to those five caches (even replacing them after the recent hurricane) than I do for any or all of my virtuals. My virtuals require certain things to be done, or certain information to be provided in order to legally log the "find". This requires me to keep up with the logs, ensureing the correct photo, information or key fact is actually found by the cacher. This happens on an almost daily basis. This is not abandonment. This is involvement. If I am ever told that Pike's Peak has moved I will arrange an immediate trip to see what the new coordinates are so I can update the page. The same as I did when I learned one of my caches were lost in the hurricane. I made a trip the very next weekend after being told (by a friend who lives in the area and checked on it for me) and replaced the cache. If the Little Bighorn National Battlefield Park ever decides the place the monument is placed is incorrect, and they move it, I will arrange to get the new coordinates, even if I have to drive there to do it. If Fort Pickens in Florida is washed into the sea some day, I'll know it through my association with Civil War buffs and clubs I keep in touch with, and I'll archive the virtual. If the Capulin Volcano in New Mexico decides to erupt again I'll temorarily disable the cache till it quits and it's safe to cache there again.

 

The point of the story is it's enormously silly, IMHO, to argue about this issue. It is a non-issue. It is unbelievably petty to argue about something that has so little affect on Geocaching as a whole. I have been hunting for caches since the 2nd of June, 2001, and became a member when the first offered memberships, mine being dated the 10th of August 2001. All that to say I have watched for some time as the virtual cache became the black sheep of the Geocaching family. I understood about locationless and moving caches, good cases were made by the powers that be to support such decisions. Physical vacation caches have also been shown to be a less than optimal idea. However, the straws that are being grasped at in order to justify the disallowance of vacation "virtual" caches is highly unusual, even for these forums. Those that do not like to do virtuals, for their own personal reasons, seem to believe that since they don't like them, there is no justification for their existence. I beg to differ. I believe virtuals are a type of cache, the difference being I don't have to open up a smelly ammo can or tupperware container and find a messy, damp, junky cache that is not being maintained by it's owner, who can't be bothered to take care of it even after numerous e-mails and notes on the cache page. I can hear you now saying, "Just mark it for the adminsa to take a look and archive it," but alas, that does not always work either. For proof, just look at the caches in Puerto Rico for evidence it does not always work.

 

If you have a better case for not allowing vacation virtuals that meet the normal requirements for a virtual cache, I'd love to hear it. So far I've only seen posts that are whiney at best, and demeaning at worst. I like both kinds of caches, but I like them well maintained and kept to the standards expected as participating members of the Geocaching community. I will do my best to not place a lame cache, to maintain those I do place, or archive them if this can't be done. But I will not succumb to less than accurate portrayals of virtuals being some kind of underclass of cache. It just is not the case.

 

P. S. - None of this is aimed at Bassonpilot, I simply chose his post in order to make my case about abandonment, he was not the first to bring up this aspect. He is respected by this poster.

 

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by joefrog:

I was recently caching in NYC while visiting the inlaws. Two of the caches I remember offhand that I hit were placed by a cacher from Nashville, TN -- two virtual and one micro. They're still there...

---

 

Yes, caches placed before the new rules took effect were "grandfathered." Not incidentally, caches by that individual have suffered a variety of problems, ranging from very bad coordinates (I supplied the correct coordinates for one of the virtuals) to being placed in closed-off areas. Other caches were placed in areas that were later temporarily closed off. (In all fairness, it must be added that that individual has maintained an active interest in her caches and has disabled or archived caches when necessary.)

 

I haven't checked to see which ones you did, but I agree it would be pretty hard to move the Metropolitan Museum, the Castle, or the Empire State Building ...

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on July 29, 2003 at 06:30 PM.]

[+fly46]

First of all, whoever said "VC Cache", that's like saying "ATM Machine"... VERY redundant and EXTREMEMLY annoying. (I'm a journalist, I can't help it. I had to say that.)

 

Secondly, Virtual Caches are EXTREMELY ANNOYING. Just about everyone can walk to any given spot and do whatever there... At least with a micro or a regular cache there is something to look FOR and not just a place to go to. A micro can be stuck to the bottom of a tampon dispenser at least.

 

Yeah, the Wright brother's flight was extremely important to technological innovations of the past 100 years, but you know what, if we put a virtual cache at EVERY MUSEUM, there'd be thousands of them, and what is the point in that? Museums aren't anything special. They are buildings which house things. Auto Garages and Malls house things too.

 

You know, Geocaching's rules are there for a reason. I went to a cache a few months ago that was started by someone who lives over a thouand miles from here and who's brother is supposedly checking the cache. This cache, sitting on the ground in the woods, is a crappy plastic container that won't stay closed without a bungee cord wrapped around it - and which certainly doesn't stay dry.

 

I emailed him and told him that his cache was getting very wet. I even told him that I'd be more than happy to help maintain it if he would like me to. I offered to go get an ammo can to put the contents in if he would send me the money (I'm unemployed and can't afford to just buy one)...

This guy didn't even bother to reply to me.

 

I don't care what kind of cache it is.. The GC rules are here for a reason. Get over it and move on.

[Team Jedi]

Quote: same picture

 

Yes, I used the same picture because I feel that this cache will not be approved even thought it look like more people are for it. so why lose such a wonderful picture, Two very happy cachers. Besides, That picture was in with the Kitty Hawk Cache for the smiling faces, It had nothing to do with the cache itself Except the statue way in the background. If you would have read them both you would see (One) That it's 1/2 mile away from FAO VC, which is more then (1/10 a mile) and (two) it's not the same thing. FOA is about the flight itself, Kitty Hawk is about the Statue of the Wright brothers (I.E. you take your picture with Orville) so they are two different caches.

 

Also, The Light house on the cape, I knew that they were moving it before they moved it, I have pictures of the event (And I DID NOT GO to the moving, I read about it) so yes, I can say it's easy to follow the Kitty Hawk VC cache.

 

Even in the Guildlines for placing a cache it says: There are always exceptions! I would like to believe that is true, This is why I posted this here on the Forum to begin with.

 

Just like another cacher used for his defence for his point of view (the view About the Picture i Placed on FOA VC being the same as Kitty Hawk) The cacher didn't even know that they were 1/2 mile apart and they are two different caches, Which leands to what my point was, Unless you GO to a place that is in question then it's hard to understand and debate it. From any chair it's easy to reply.

 

The only thing that is Nit Picky is the fact that the cachers are the ones who lose out as the cache WILL NOT BE Approved and it's such a cool spot. And I thought that's what caching was about. Maybe it's just about Nit picking at rules. Oh Please Sign me up for that.

 

(

 

Happy Hicking

 

Doc

[+woodsters]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frolickin:

 

If it is in your caching area, then it would not have been archived as a vacation cache. You are trying to split hairs.

 

Fro.

 

---

 

Ok so now that I have caches found into different areas a 1000 miles apart. One area is where I currently reside. The other is my hometown. What you stated doesn't make sense.

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

[+woodsters]

If the virtual cache location is a small one and there is already a cache there, then I would have to agree with Mtn Man. You could at least make reference to the location in your online log for others to see and even include it's coordinates. Or perhaps email the original cache owner and see if they will make a note of that in the description.

 

AS far as fly46's comment on virtuals being annoying, the neat thing is that geocaching lets you know what's a virtual, so those that don't want to do them, don't have to.

 

I agree with leatherman....yawn...

 

Glad I didn't start this thread....lol

 

Brian

 

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump