Yellow Jeep Fever Archived!!!

[+dino_hunters]

I just heard that the Yellow Jeep Fever Locationless cache was archived.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=16379

 

I was going to hunt for it this weekend! What happend? Who archived it, the owner or admin? Any chance it can be unarchived? If the owner did it, can it be transfered to another owner?

 

dino_hunters

[+bob393]

Whoo, I'm glad I got it!

[+Gazza&Girls]

Darn! Just as I saw a yellow Jeep three times this week.

[+cacheKidds]

This is sad news indeed. I never seem to have the GPSr when I see one.

Edited January 23, 2004 by cacheKidds

[+Bull Moose]

Maybe the lady logging her grandson's toy Jeep was the last straw?

[+Renegade Knight]

There probably is such a thing as too much work verifying a locaitonless that is as popular as this.

 

Now we need a Yellow Toyota Land Cruiser (FJ40) cache. Too bad the only one I konw of is about 3000 miles away.

[+mtn-man]

Maybe the lady logging her grandson's toy Jeep was the last straw?

What may be more amazing is that the log is still on the cache page as a find.

[+rover-r-us]

i just did this is one last month..

[+pokyjoe48]

Jeepers creepers, Well here in S.E. Idaho in the winter time there's a lot of yellow snow and trying to find a yellow Jeep is almost impossible. I guess we're lucky that its been archived...

[+wildearth2001]

dang ive seen seven in the past 3 days while driving to swim practise, now I am carrying my GPS and camera (i always had the gps just not my camers) and now this. Hey you can still log a find for it, i think.

[+Blaidd-Drwg]

I know the reason it was archived. I finally put it on my watch list today at lunch and made plans to start carrying my camera and GPS when I go out to lunch. I saw a yellow jeep today, just after putting the cache on my watchlist. I won't tell you the other 9 locationless caches I've added for near term finding. Hopefully, the powers to be won't archive all of them too.

[+rusty_tlc]

There probably is such a thing as too much work verifying a locaitonless that is as popular as this.

 

Now we need a Yellow Toyota Land Cruiser (FJ40) cache.  Too bad the only one I konw of is about 3000 miles away.

Maybe closer than you think.

Or maybe a green FJ40

 

[+Sparky-Watts]

When I went to pick up my new (to me) Jeep today, there were no less than 10 Yellow Wranglers in a row on the dealer's lot! I saw them the other day when I was out car hunting, and was going to snap a pic of all 10 in a row for the LC, but just before I left home, I looked at the cache page and saw it had been archived!

[+Jamie Z]

I looked at the cache page and saw it had been archived!

You must have also seen that Jeeps in dealer lots were prohibited.

 

Jamie

[+Huntnlady]

OH NO! Bring it back, its a classic! When I was working on logos for Todays Cacher recently, I made one with a little landscape, satellite above beaming down coordinates to a yellow jeep.

[+Sparky-Watts]

I looked at the cache page and saw it had been archived!

You must have also seen that Jeeps in dealer lots were prohibited.

 

Jamie

Yeah, but I woulda still done it! Ok, so I would have just posted a note, but still.....

[+robert]

I was going to use that as my 200th find, too.

[+Sparky-Watts]

I was going to use that as my 200th find, too.

It could've been my 23rd find! Oh, well, I was reading a local cacher's page today (after seeing that they had logged a grain elevator in Kansas on the Canadian grain elevator LC page), and figured if I took the time and cared about numbers, there's probably at least 50 I could legitmately do from home! One example is the one about the radio show, where you read the transcript and copy information from the dialogue. Another fine example is the Watertower LC....I could get that one from my front porch! Hmmm, now that I think about it, I can lean back just a few inches in my chair here at the computer and actually see the upper half of the water tower! BORING!!!!

[+robert]

Sparky,

 

That's crazy! YJF is definitely a classic and I'm sad to see it go. Maybe someone should offer to adopt it! I would but I've got a pretty full plate over here. Maybe YOU should do it! You'd be a hero.

[+Sparky-Watts]

Sparky,

 

That's crazy! YJF is definitely a classic and I'm sad to see it go. Maybe someone should offer to adopt it! I would but I've got a pretty full plate over here. Maybe YOU should do it! You'd be a hero.

Hmmmm....are you being sincere, or just looking for a way to get me too tied up to post in the forums?

 

Well, I'd have time to do it now, but in a few months, I should be pretty busy again around here. Guess someone should email the owner and ask what their plans are......

 

.....which brings up another question: Given the current moratorium on LC's, is it possible to adopt one? I don't know, so can anyone answer that question?

[+TheHawksNest]

I just bought a new Jeep this week to replace my white one, and its Yellow. Was going to take a pic tomorrow if weather was nice for the cache................

 

Darn

[+ChrisCindy]

Adopt it Sparky. It was a classic cache (that I need to log).

[+rusty_tlc]

I just bought a new Jeep this week to replace my white one, and its Yellow.  Was going to take a pic tomorrow if weather was nice for the cache................

 

Darn

Propably not to late to try to find a Green FJ40.

Just a suggestion, but I heard there was going to be a locationless approved for a GREEN FJ40 as soon as the moritorium was lifted.

[+DeerChaser & Company]

Well I just offered to take it over. I had a picture to send but I never got to it. I guess if they lay it in my lap I can't log it

[+Halden]

I just saw one today:(

[+The Blind Acorn]

Just logged it last Sunday... Yea the Grandma's post was going a bit too far!?! Real hard to find something in your own livingroom. Guess I could log a find for the miniature Little Tyke's Crazy Coupe that's on my shelf at that rate...

 

[+Jdrummerlax]

Luckily, this was my first locationless cache a while ago. But, no so lucky for my friend Sl33py------he really wanted to do this cache and just saw a bunck of yellow jeeps!!!!! What can you do. That's life. I know that the grandma toy was stretching the limit, but did they have to archive the cache?

 

Environmental Explorer

 

Make a difference - save the environment - recycle

[+ironman114]

Dang I just saw a yellow jeep after work at a local tavern 3 days in a row and either forgot my camera or gps

[+Corp Of Discovery]

We did find this cache and it was fun! TFTC! As far as the grandma is concerned- hey if it was yellow and a Jeep it counts! The cache page specifically said 'any model'! This is a new century, perhaps a Yellow Humvee locationless is in order?

[+haggaeus]

The owner has posted a note explaining why it was archived: "It was having a negative impact on the site and on the Pocket Query Generator. The site was not designed to accommodate caches with 1200 logs."

I just hope it was designed to host more than 80978 caches.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

This cache got grief for being too easy and "lame". Then comes Lazyboy who spent two months looking for a parked yellow jeep.

[+KiltCacher]

I don't really see how this cache could be considered "negative". As far as site constraints, does that mean all older caches will be eventually pushed off the site to accommodate newer caches? If this happens to one cache, does this mean that any cache listing a large number of finds will be archived for the same reason?

[+briansnat]

As far as site constraints, does that mean all older caches will be eventually pushed off the site to accommodate newer caches? If this happens to one cache, does this mean that any cache listing a large number of finds will be archived for the same reason?

 

Probably, but I don't think its an issue with real caches. Its highly unlikely that any real cache will reach over 1,000 logs. Could be an issue though with some of the more popular locationless caches. So unless they make the programming changes to accomodate all those logs I'm sure we'll see others archived fairly soon.

 

In this case I'd think it would be nice to waive the moratorium on locationless caches and allow the owner to create a duplicate.

[+sbell111]

That sounds like a great idea. Call it YJ2.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

As far as site constraints, does that mean all older caches will be eventually pushed off the site to accommodate newer caches? If this happens to one cache, does this mean that any cache listing a large number of finds will be archived for the same reason?

 

Probably, but I don't think its an issue with real caches. Its highly unlikely that any real cache will reach over 1,000 logs. Could be an issue though with some of the more popular locationless caches. So unless they make the programming changes to accomodate all those logs I'm sure we'll see others archived fairly soon.

 

In this case I'd think it would be nice to waive the moratorium on locationless caches and allow the owner to create a duplicate.

Yep let him put this baby back up, it'd be great

[+sept1c_tank]

briansnat wrote:

...In this case I'd think it would be nice to waive the moratorium on locationless caches and allow the owner to create a duplicate...

I have to agree. After all, more than 1000 geocachers can't be wrong!

 

I logged this cache 41 days ago. I'm astonished to find 163 additional finds logged since then! I can see where lengthy logs may become cumbersome, but a cache with this popularity should be allowed to live.

[Deego]

Bring on Yellow Jeep Fever II It wont kill anybody will it?

[+sbell111]

Its funny how this cache was widely derided during its lifetime, but now that it has been archived, people want it around. Don't get me wrong. I say reincarnate it and I'm not making any judgement about people who have posted to this thread. I just thought it was interesting.

[+robert]

I just saw one today:(

Same here. Only this time I wasn't upset that I didn't have my camera with me. Wouldn't have mattered anyway!

[+IV_Warrior]

Darn, and I was hoping to log this one once i bought a starter, and built it into a Real Jeep.

[inventorjg]

Wow, that stinks, I would have done this one, if I had known about it.

[+sbell111]

I always figured that I would get around to it, but never did. It's like when a family member passes away and you regret that you didn't see them enough.

[mufasa1023]

not that i have alot to say on the subject but i dont like having an unheard opinion either.........if possible it should be brought back or duplicated.....the cache seems popular enough to be representative of the kind of fun twists that our game can take

[+RocketMan]

Pssst – You can still log the cache while it is in the archived status.

[+rooboy]

Time for the Yellow Jeep Fever Redux locationless cache!

 

Ciao

RooBoy

[+jeff35080]

The site was not designed to accommodate caches with 1200 logs

 

Hmmm... my AV8R cache is approaching 800 logs.... the AV8R is popular. I hope that I don't have to archive it

[+cacheKidds]

Great, the day it gets archived I actually see one and take a picture of it with my GPSr. Been searching for a while. This sucks!

[+Mopar]

Pssst – You can still log the cache while it is in the archived status.

Sure, the site allows you to, but should you?

Part of maintaining a virtual or locationless cache is deleting improper logs. So any logged after it's archived should be deleted by the cache owner.

Considering it was archived because it was causing problems for everyone who uses the website, is it really wise to KEEP logging more finds on it? Seems to me that doing so is just reenforcing TPTB's reason for not accepting any new LC caches. It proves the website in it's current form isn't set up to properly handle LC caches. It would prove that there is a much bigger problem with people logging finds on an archived LC or virt then on physical caches. Seems to me that this line of thought would only make things worse for LC lovers, and all the rest. If 1200 logs is a problem now, maybe they will have to delete everyone's finds when it reaches 1300 to keep the rest of the site up?

Geesh, compared to almost any other game or sport, this one has very few rules or regulations, I can't see why it's so hard to follow the few that we have.

Edited January 25, 2004 by Mopar

[+RocketMan]

Pssst – You can still log the cache while it is in the archived status.

Sure, the site allows you to, but should you?

Part of maintaining a virtual or locationless cache is deleting improper logs. So any logged after it's archived should be deleted by the cache owner.

Considering it was archived because it was causing problems for everyone who uses the website, is it really wise to KEEP logging more finds on it? Seems to me that doing so is just reenforcing TPTB's reason for not accepting any new LC caches. It proves the website in it's current form isn't set up to properly handle LC caches. It would prove that there is a much bigger problem with people logging finds on an archived LC or virt then on physical caches. Seems to me that this line of thought would only make things worse for LC lovers, and all the rest. If 1200 logs is a problem now, maybe they will have to delete everyone's finds when it reaches 1300 to keep the rest of the site up?

Geesh, compared to almost any other game or sport, this one has very few rules or regulations, I can't see why it's so hard to follow the few that we have.

Good points Mopar. I actually agree with you. I really was hinting to all those folks that said things like I just located a yellow jeep last week and now I can't log it. I wasn't proposing that people keep logging indefinitely. The fact that it is archived will prevent that from happening since it no longer shows up in searches. Also, I got the impression from reading the thread that one of the big problems with the cache was relative to searches and PQ's. The fact that it is archived should eliminate that problem even if a few more people log the cache.

 

RM

 

Edit: One more point. I believe that the reason that people are allowed to log archived caches is so that if someone "finds" the cache but does not have a chance to log it before it gets archived, they can still do so.

Edited January 25, 2004 by Rocket Man

[+Mopar]

Edit: One more point. I believe that the reason that people are allowed to log archived caches is so that if someone "finds" the cache but does not have a chance to log it before it gets archived, they can still do so.

I think you're right, and, mainly since I'm 20 or more caches behind in logging my finds, I would hate to see logging archived caches become such a problem that the ability to do it is removed.