Mr.Yuck Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 The St Louis Throwdown Twins were in the Christian Co area again on 11/12/2011 throwing down caches and claiming finds. Their typical MO when they can't find a cache: St Louis Phony Finder 11888 Found it 11/12/2011 Driving around the Pana area with (St Charles Phony Finder) and picking up caches. Based on a priori knowledge we knew the cache was missing and left a replacement. Signed log as (SLPF/SCPF). Good job. Thanks, (cache owner), for placing this cache. – SLPF St. Louis MO I have seen your posts about these notorious throw-down cachers. Well hey, at least their honest, and admit to throwing down caches, and somehow think they're "helping out". Today, I find a throw-down left by the local 15,000+ find couple. They have separate accounts, and always copy and paste their logs. I did not know this was a throw-down in the field, only discovered upon logging my find. Their copy and paste find logs from July 2011 don't even mention throwing down a micro. They can't even freaking remember which caches they've thrown down a micro at. Pretty sad, if you ask me.
+Wadcutter Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 The St Louis Throwdown Twins were in the Christian Co area again on 11/12/2011 throwing down caches and claiming finds. Their typical MO when they can't find a cache: St Louis Phony Finder 11888 Found it 11/12/2011 Driving around the Pana area with (St Charles Phony Finder) and picking up caches. Based on a priori knowledge we knew the cache was missing and left a replacement. Signed log as (SLPF/SCPF). Good job. Thanks, (cache owner), for placing this cache. – SLPF St. Louis MO I have seen your posts about these notorious throw-down cachers. Well hey, at least their honest, and admit to throwing down caches, and somehow think they're "helping out". Today, I find a throw-down left by the local 15,000+ find couple. They have separate accounts, and always copy and paste their logs. I did not know this was a throw-down in the field, only discovered upon logging my find. Their copy and paste find logs from July 2011 don't even mention throwing down a micro. They can't even freaking remember which caches they've thrown down a micro at. Pretty sad, if you ask me. "Honest"? That's not hardly an accurate word to describe what they do. If they were honest then they'd post a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archived. Or how about just a DNF since they didn't find the cache? Trying to help? Or just trying to pad their numbers? One of their acquaintances in that area once sent me a PM stating they had done a check of this crews' finds and a bit over 10% of their finds are throwdowns. Just because they can't find the cache doesn't mean it's missing. After they leave is there now 2 caches at the same site? Who knows. Twice I've found 2 caches at locations where they've thrown down a cache. And his crew copy and pastes their finds from their runs too.
Mr.Yuck Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 The St Louis Throwdown Twins were in the Christian Co area again on 11/12/2011 throwing down caches and claiming finds. Their typical MO when they can't find a cache: St Louis Phony Finder 11888 Found it 11/12/2011 Driving around the Pana area with (St Charles Phony Finder) and picking up caches. Based on a priori knowledge we knew the cache was missing and left a replacement. Signed log as (SLPF/SCPF). Good job. Thanks, (cache owner), for placing this cache. – SLPF St. Louis MO I have seen your posts about these notorious throw-down cachers. Well hey, at least their honest, and admit to throwing down caches, and somehow think they're "helping out". Today, I find a throw-down left by the local 15,000+ find couple. They have separate accounts, and always copy and paste their logs. I did not know this was a throw-down in the field, only discovered upon logging my find. Their copy and paste find logs from July 2011 don't even mention throwing down a micro. They can't even freaking remember which caches they've thrown down a micro at. Pretty sad, if you ask me. "Honest"? That's not hardly an accurate word to describe what they do. If they were honest then they'd post a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archived. Or how about just a DNF since they didn't find the cache? Trying to help? Or just trying to pad their numbers? One of their acquaintances in that area once sent me a PM stating they had done a check of this crews' finds and a bit over 10% of their finds are throwdowns. Just because they can't find the cache doesn't mean it's missing. After they leave is there now 2 caches at the same site? Who knows. Twice I've found 2 caches at locations where they've thrown down a cache. And his crew copy and pastes their finds from their runs too. Oh, it does almost sound as if I'm defending them. Not my intention!! I guess I was just trying to make it sound even worser what my local numbers hounds are doing. Not even saying there's a throw-down, presumably because you can't remember which cache it was.
JASTA 11 Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 I wonder if the 'STL Throwdown Duo' is aware of how famous they've become?
+Wadcutter Posted November 30, 2011 Posted November 30, 2011 I wonder if the 'STL Throwdown Duo' is aware of how famous they've become? They're infamous around these parts. Doesn't take long to know they've been around if you have caches on your watch list. Their throwdown logs start showing up. And they're infamous in their own area too. One of their group members said their group gave them an award for finding so many caches. That's when other members of the local group complained that about 10% of their finds were throwdowns.
JASTA 11 Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 This one was a for a cache that was archived by the reviewer for non-maintenance: SavesMeAWalk Found it Found replacement cache in hands of NonFinder while at the ****** gathering in the park. Thanks for the cache. Want to boost your numbers? Have a friend who carries around a replacement for somebody elses archived cache! Nonfinder Found it All is well at this cool tree. Nice, easy find. TNLNSL TFTC Of course it was a nice, easy find. You were carrying it around with you all day!
+adt1982 Posted December 14, 2011 Posted December 14, 2011 I found that the STL Throwdown duo replaced an archived cache on 12/3. It had been disabled since 9/29. They replaced on 12/3 (the day it was archived).
+adt1982 Posted December 16, 2011 Posted December 16, 2011 Cache was missing. I didn't have any magnetic containers so I replaced with an "unconventional" container with some duct tape. May want to check on soon as I don't know how long the tape will hold. Thanks for the smilie! <bangs head against the wall>
+bulcacher Posted December 16, 2011 Posted December 16, 2011 I found a container a week or so ago, signed the log, then went to log it online, finding that it had been archived but not removed, so I went ahead and logged it as found and told them they may want to remove the container. In the same town, I found a magnet from a what used to be a cache, but I didn't log that as found. I took a picture of the magnet and told them they may want to replace it.
JASTA 11 Posted December 23, 2011 Posted December 23, 2011 This was from a CITO Event. The CO decided to boost his numbers and log a find, twice: 4/22/11 by EventHost (1256 found) Had a really great time. Thanks for the help XXXX! Might try this once a month. This place could use some help. EventHost and Gang 4/22/11 by EventHost (1256 found) Worked it. EventHost Funny thing about this one is that the CO's logs accounted for half of the total attended.
+briansnat Posted December 23, 2011 Posted December 23, 2011 11/21/2011 #598 - Does finding only a zip-tie count? Of course. I should have expected as much. I'm so glad I didn't save this one for my 600th. Not exactly a cacher's field of dreams with all the poorly-maintained caches here. 05/25/2011 Found the setup for the cache, and snapped a photo but the cache itself is gone. I searched the ground for the container but no luck. If co requires I'll email the photo.
+JabbaTHutt Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 I would have no problem logging this cache, how is he to know that he can't do the cache untill he gets there? I mean did CO put in the listing that a 5'11 210LB person can't do it? I know I can't do it, I have a HUGE ribcage, ya I am overweight but that part fits in many places as long as the ribcage can fit, but if it doesn't fit, well I can't make it smaller. Its like hiking 3 or 4 KM and not easy KM to a cache only to find out that, 1, its a small cave and not a large one and you have problems with confinded places, and 2 the water you must walk in to get to the cache causes your knees to practically seize up and you either have to go back out or continue on and have to be carried out, the rest of the group that did manage to get to the cache did sign you in. But you log was deleted by the CO because you didn't breath the air from inside the container. Okay, here's a good one. To give a little background, this is one of the toughest caches in my region. Its on the supports of an abandoned RR bridge and requires that you slide between old RR ties to the bridge support, then walk about 8 feet on a 4 inch wide steel beam, suspended about 40 feet above a rocky river. A tough cache! Here is the found it log: WELL!! LET ME SAY THE COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ONE ARE ALL TRUE. WHILE I DID FIND THE CACHE I DIDN'T ACTUALLY TOUCH IT. MY 5'11 210LB BODY WOULD NOT SQUEEZE THRU. I SAT AND STARED DOWN AT IT FOR A WHILE,LOOKED AROUND FOR MACRO'S IMPLEMENT OF RETREIVAL, FINALLY DECIDED TO GET OUT OF THERE BEFORE MY NERVES GAVE OUT OR SOMEBODY CALLED THE POLICE THINKING I WAS A JUMPER. NICE AREA,BROUGHT MY MOUNTAIN BIKE AND RODE ALONG THE CANAL PATH FOR ABOUT 10 MILES. THANKS FOR THE ADVENTURE ANDA FEW MORE GRAY HAIRS. JIM
+Wadcutter Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) The St Louis are throwdown twins strike again. This time even more flagrant abuse. They claim to have left a throwdown "based on the previous finders logs". Except every one of the previous logs for past 7 months were logged as Finds. Several commented in their logs about this cache being a difficult find and taking a bit of time to find it. The cache has been out there since July 2010. 19 Finds and 1 DNF which was on 05/19/11. But not the St Louis Throwdown Twins. If they can't find it then it just means they're so good that the cache has to be gone so they throwdown another one. Now at this cache location there are probably 2 caches hidden somewhere close to each other. St Louis Throwdown #2 Premium Member 10985 Found it01/21/2012Geocaching with St Louis Throwdown #1 on a cold winter's day after an evening of freezing rain -- making for treacherous driving -- logging caches as "SL Throwdown #1 / SL Throwdown #2" for brevity. We searched the area thoroughly before stowing a replacement cache at the posted coordinates. No stones in the wall need to be moved to log the cache. Thanks, (cache owner), for placing this cache! -- St Louis Throwdown # 2, St. Charles, MO. St Louis Throwdown #1 01/21/12 Charter Member 12192 Found it01/21/2012Caching with St Louis Throwdown #2 on a day that started with glare ice. transitioned to sunshine then ended with overcast and darkness. Signed log as (SL Throwdown #1 / SL Throwdown #2) for brevity. Based on the previous finders log we quickly determined the cache was now missing. We left a replacement camouflaged 35mm film canister in the hiding spot closest to the coordinates. Good job. Thanks, (cache owner), for placing this cache. – Throwdown # 1 and # 2, St. Louis MO True Cache Finder A 01/08/12 Premium Member 4092 (Found log) True Cache Finder B 12/24/11 Member 3380 (Found log) True Cache Finder C 11/25/11 Premium Member 47 (Found log) True Cache Finder D 11/05/11 Member 12 (Found log) True Cache Finder E 10/29/11 Member 57 (Found log) True Cache Finder F 08/12/11 Member 39 (Found log) True Cache Finder G 07/17/11 Premium Member 3156 (Found log) True Cache Finder H 06/03/11 Member 130 (Found log) Edited January 22, 2012 by Wadcutter
+Totem Clan Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 (edited) This one pissed me off. I don't like LPC much but this was a real good cache. On keyholder cache with a twist. It's a nice cache (or was). Edit to say: this was a 2/3 cache. 01/20/2012 by Missedout Was a nice quick find on this cold, bright morning. TFTC 01/19/2012 by Ruinedthehide This is one of several cache finds for Cachefriend and me today. I found a magnet but no container or log, so I replaced both. SL TFTC!! 01/16/2012 by Honestcacher Is this one still there?? I see the last find was 5 months ago. Oklee 08/05/2011 by Truecacher Excellent hide. We were stumped for about 10 minutes until we found it Edited January 26, 2012 by Totem Clan
+Harry Dolphin Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 Hah! Missing caches are easier to find than this thread! Was checking some non-US tourist sites and came across a few where the CO has been missing for almost two years. One of the caches has had eleven different containers in the last two years! Found itWhat a great place!!! The cache was gone, so we replace it. In: TB TFTC
+Totem Clan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) This was posted on a cache that was just a cardboard box taped to a telephone pole. (or just a peice of soggy cardboard on the ground and eletric tape on the pole by the time this cacher got to it) logsanything Found it 01/20/2012 Found the "container" but there was nothing in it so could not log. Was cold this morning but a nice day for caching. Edited February 3, 2012 by Totem Clan
+The_Incredibles_ Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Edited February 3, 2012 by The_Incredibles_
Mr.Yuck Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! I was going to ask what "QEF" was, but I waited to post hoping something would come to me, and I eventually have determined it's probably Quick Easy Find. You can rest assured that's a regional acronym used in your area. OMG, OMG, OMG!! Found It = Didn't Find It has been moved to the Geocaching Topics forum. Put on your asbestos suits, people.
+deercreekth Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 This is one of my favorites. They were with someone else who also didn't find the cache but logged the find. This is before a group of three didn't find the cache but put out a replacement. I've never been able to find it, so I don't know what they think they found. Found what was sure to be the location but no container or log. Could tell it was there before. Missing?
+Harry Dolphin Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Did you find the cache? Doesn't sound like it...
Mr.Yuck Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Did you find the cache? Doesn't sound like it... Well, not a throw-down in the classic sense if the owner knew they were going to replace it for them. I still can't believe this thread has been moved here. You can cut the impending angst with a knife....
+Genoist Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 I just saw this happen on my closes-to-home cache (that I can't find). Moohoohahahaa Found it 01/28/2012 No such luck might be missing I emailed the CO as well as the "finder". I figured they made a mistake. This was nearly a week ago. Seeing that both the finder and the CO have both been on the site either today or yesterday I can only assume it was intentional.
+hukilaulau Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Two of my all-time favorites: "If it was there I would have found it, so I'm claiming the find." (A cache in Central Park that was found at least half a dozen times over the next few days.) "Can't log a DNF, 'cause it wasn't there to be found!" So he claimed a find instead. This might have been the previously mentioned screwhole cache. So now when I have a tough DNF, I think about writing: "I saw where *I* would have put it, so I'm claiming a find" Edited February 4, 2012 by hukilaulau
+Wadcutter Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Did you find the cache? Doesn't sound like it... A throwdown. Was it "definately missing" or "definitely couldn't find it"? Too many are are absolutely positive it's missing because they couldn't find it. Doesn't mean it's "definately missing" but that they couldn't find it and are so sure they're so good at finding caches that it just must be "definately missing". If the CO takes no more interest in the cache to maintain it then it should be archived if it's actually missing so that someone else could have the opportunity to hide one within that .1 mile area. Throwdowns continue to perpetuate lazy cache owners and caches where the cache owners are MIA and instead of good caches we end up with a bunch of micro throwdowns tossed out by everyone who was absolutely positive it was "definately missing".
+dfx Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 (edited) Really? Friday, 03 February 2012 Ontario, Canada With permission from CO I claim as found. I have verified its absence and I believe that it has been washed down the hill as I think the flow of water has changed directions since it was hidden. Very cool area though thanks for showing it to me. TFTC needs maintenance Friday, 03 February 2012 Ontario, Canada Should be disabled until replaced. Edited February 4, 2012 by dfx
+briansnat Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 (edited) Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Did you find the cache? Doesn't sound like it... Well, not a throw-down in the classic sense if the owner knew they were going to replace it for them. I still can't believe this thread has been moved here. You can cut the impending angst with a knife.... I agree. It's a thread that is been active for many years with only limited instances of angst. I think it is now traveling the road to locking. I just saw this happen on my closes-to-home cache (that I can't find). Moohoohahahaa Found it 01/28/2012 No such luck might be missing I emailed the CO as well as the "finder". I figured they made a mistake. This was nearly a week ago. Seeing that both the finder and the CO have both been on the site either today or yesterday I can only assume it was intentional. Please no links. Jamie Z, asked in his OP "No names, no links, just the log.". The idea is not to call individuals out. Start doing that and this long lived thread won't have much of a lifespan. Edited February 6, 2012 by briansnat
+Chokecherry Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 :)Found it 02/04/2012 found the area but to much snow. i did not want to go digging around and leave evidence. i will be back when the snow goes away to sign. View
+The_Incredibles_ Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 (edited) Heres one of my own logs: QEF. OK only because I hid a new one. Bark was there and no cache, so I put a black micro with log in place. The backstory is the cache was definately missing and the c.o. was extremely grateful that I was planning to bring a replacement... easiest find ever! Did you find the cache? Doesn't sound like it... A throwdown. Was it "definately missing" or "definitely couldn't find it"? Too many are are absolutely positive it's missing because they couldn't find it. Doesn't mean it's "definately missing" but that they couldn't find it and are so sure they're so good at finding caches that it just must be "definately missing". If the CO takes no more interest in the cache to maintain it then it should be archived if it's actually missing so that someone else could have the opportunity to hide one within that .1 mile area. Throwdowns continue to perpetuate lazy cache owners and caches where the cache owners are MIA and instead of good caches we end up with a bunch of micro throwdowns tossed out by everyone who was absolutely positive it was "definately missing". No, not a throwdown at all. The hint was very specific ie "under piece of bark 1 foot to left of..." and nobody was finding it. The bark was right where it was supposed to be but no cache. I emailed the cache owner ahead of time to ask if they wanted me to replace it, especially as the cache contained a number important to a series and I was going to be in the area anyway. They were very grateful. And they are not lazy cache owners. Edited February 6, 2012 by The_Incredibles_
+Wadcutter Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 No, not a throwdown at all. The hint was very specific ie "under piece of bark 1 foot to left of..." and nobody was finding it. The bark was right where it was supposed to be but no cache. I emailed the cache owner ahead of time to ask if they wanted me to replace it, especially as the cache contained a number important to a series and I was going to be in the area anyway. They were very grateful. And they are not lazy cache owners. If they aren't lazy CO then they should be maintaining it themselves instead of relying on someone else to throwdown a new cache and then claim what they just threw down as a find. It's a throwdown. But you got your smiley so call it whatever you want.
+Mr.Benchmark Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 No, not a throwdown at all. The hint was very specific ie "under piece of bark 1 foot to left of..." and nobody was finding it. The bark was right where it was supposed to be but no cache. I emailed the cache owner ahead of time to ask if they wanted me to replace it, especially as the cache contained a number important to a series and I was going to be in the area anyway. They were very grateful. And they are not lazy cache owners. If they aren't lazy CO then they should be maintaining it themselves instead of relying on someone else to throwdown a new cache and then claim what they just threw down as a find. It's a throwdown. But you got your smiley so call it whatever you want. So it would've been better to just leave it disabled or missing for a couple of weeks until the owner got to the site? I think there is a big difference in conferring with the owner and verifying the absence of a cache before replacing it, and looking for 37 seconds, decidng "well, didn't find it, must be gone", and dropping the one you had prepped (and probably already signed and good to go) in your pocket to get another find. What she did was helpful and nice, while the latter risks placing two caches in the same location, which is just confusing for everyone. I guess though there are no exceptional or extenuating circumstances ever?
JASTA 11 Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) We've done replacements for missing caches, but only on ones we've already found. Most of them are older caches where the CO isn't playing anymore. There was one challenging cache in our area that was found floating down river from GZ. We talked to other local cachers who'd found it and one of them replaced it. We went out later and made the find. Logging a find on a throwdown is akin to logging a find on one of your own hides. But that's just my opinion.... Edited February 7, 2012 by JASTA 11
JASTA 11 Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Getting back on topic: It seems that you don't always have to find the actual cache.... McToysCount Found it 08/01/20XX Found nothing but a broken toy on 8/1/XX ??? This next one was in an area with a fair amount of trash scattered around.... HonestCacher1 Didn't find it 07/30/20XX With HonestCacher2, we searched the area without finding anything. Is it still there? Ifoundsumthin Found it 10/13/20XX Found bits and pieces of what i think us to be the CC ,GPSr was at 2 ft maybe it's gone someone needs to check NM Ifoundsumthin Needs Maintenance 10/13/20XX i think it's gone Sad thing, this last guy has almost 3,000 finds logged. Maybe his PM account didn't come with the DNF option.
+The_Incredibles_ Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 No, not a throwdown at all. The hint was very specific ie "under piece of bark 1 foot to left of..." and nobody was finding it. The bark was right where it was supposed to be but no cache. I emailed the cache owner ahead of time to ask if they wanted me to replace it, especially as the cache contained a number important to a series and I was going to be in the area anyway. They were very grateful. And they are not lazy cache owners. If they aren't lazy CO then they should be maintaining it themselves instead of relying on someone else to throwdown a new cache and then claim what they just threw down as a find. It's a throwdown. But you got your smiley so call it whatever you want. So it would've been better to just leave it disabled or missing for a couple of weeks until the owner got to the site? I think there is a big difference in conferring with the owner and verifying the absence of a cache before replacing it, and looking for 37 seconds, decidng "well, didn't find it, must be gone", and dropping the one you had prepped (and probably already signed and good to go) in your pocket to get another find. What she did was helpful and nice, while the latter risks placing two caches in the same location, which is just confusing for everyone. I guess though there are no exceptional or extenuating circumstances ever? Thank-you Mr Benchmark. A big difference in the 2 circumstances as you noted.
+Mr.Benchmark Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 BTW, I've thought about this a little more, and I think where people get started with "throwdowns" is a situation like the following: 1. New Cacher places an LPC at the local Tram Law. 2. New cacher decides call of duty is more fun than this game, or finds out he hates PI or whatever, abandons said LPC 3. First rain storm, said LPC turns to mush 4. A zillion people log "NM" or whatever, because hey, who doesn't have to buy something sometimes, until finally some muggle puts this sucker out of its misery 5. UberCacher16K comes along and replaces said cache with one that isn't, well, as badly constructed. (And logs a find). From their perspective, how would that not be an improvement and community service? We'll ignore for a moment that many would argue that the location is uninspired, the hide technique tired, and the experience generally "meh". If that is someone's idea of caching, well, hey, they fixed something. I'm sure in their mind, it isn't any different than replacing a full log that the owner clearly isn't ever going to replace. (And technically, they DID replace the log - they just replaced everything else with it!) Sure, they didn't find the cache - but certainly they found where it SHOULD have been! Unfortunately, like a lot of roads paved with good intentions, this one doesn't ultimately lead anyplace good! It's one thing to do this with an LPC where there is really only one probable hiding spot. The trouble is, often there can be more than one hiding spot, and sometimes "NewCacher" hasn't abandoned a thing, and they may have rated the cache a D1, but it is in fact more properly rated a 2 or 3, and will take some effort to find. Deciding such a thing is gone is by no means certain without prior knowledge, which the UberCacher won't generally have. So you end up with multiple caches in one spot, and subsequent finders get an extra star of difficulty as they try to find the real cache amongst the throwdowns. People are really good at rationalizing stuff, and I guess from a certain perspective, how do you cheat at a game with few rules and no score?
+Moose Mob Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 BTW, I've thought about this a little more, and I think where people get started with "throwdowns" is a situation like the following: 1. New Cacher places an LPC at the local Tram Law. 2. New cacher decides call of duty is more fun than this game, or finds out he hates PI or whatever, abandons said LPC 3. First rain storm, said LPC turns to mush 4. A zillion people log "NM" or whatever, because hey, who doesn't have to buy something sometimes, until finally some muggle puts this sucker out of its misery 5. UberCacher16K comes along and replaces said cache with one that isn't, well, as badly constructed. (And logs a find). From their perspective, how would that not be an improvement and community service? We'll ignore for a moment that many would argue that the location is uninspired, the hide technique tired, and the experience generally "meh". If that is someone's idea of caching, well, hey, they fixed something. I'm sure in their mind, it isn't any different than replacing a full log that the owner clearly isn't ever going to replace. (And technically, they DID replace the log - they just replaced everything else with it!) Sure, they didn't find the cache - but certainly they found where it SHOULD have been! Unfortunately, like a lot of roads paved with good intentions, this one doesn't ultimately lead anyplace good! It's one thing to do this with an LPC where there is really only one probable hiding spot. The trouble is, often there can be more than one hiding spot, and sometimes "NewCacher" hasn't abandoned a thing, and they may have rated the cache a D1, but it is in fact more properly rated a 2 or 3, and will take some effort to find. Deciding such a thing is gone is by no means certain without prior knowledge, which the UberCacher won't generally have. So you end up with multiple caches in one spot, and subsequent finders get an extra star of difficulty as they try to find the real cache amongst the throwdowns. People are really good at rationalizing stuff, and I guess from a certain perspective, how do you cheat at a game with few rules and no score? Some may argue that at some point, the container will eventually be replaced with a durable one more suited for the location. Mint tin gets rusty, gets a new mint tin, until it gets a pretty new painted preform. At least if the lid crqacks or gets lost, there is a good chance we have a new lid on the soda we are drinking. Not saying it 'should' happen this way. I vote for the new cache owner angle when the CO is AWOL.
+Mr.Benchmark Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 Not saying it 'should' happen this way. I vote for the new cache owner angle when the CO is AWOL. Who is going to adopt a cache at the local big box store? I would assume that after finding about 10,000 or so trivial park-n-grabs, that something just burns out in some people's mind and they lose the ability to recognize that not all caches are completely trivial. (No offense to people with high find counts intended here.) There are a ton of caches I've found in the first place I looked, and where I thought the hiding place was obvious. I can see how someone could conclude that they'd seen it all and if they didn't find it rather fast, it was probably gone. Unfortunately, that isn't always the case, especially if they are dealing with a cache that is actually well and creatively hidden, in which case the obvious places are almost certainly the WRONG places to look. I think this is a really bad problem for the game. I don't know what you'd do about it though. Most of the things the site / reviewers could do end up punishing the owner, which seems unfair.
+Harry Dolphin Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 Knows What a DNF Is 10894 Didn't find it 02/07/2012 Well I wanted to fill in 'qrs' Province, but if the cache isn't there then you should a DNF, I can't believe people are posting pictures at the location and claiming a find. I did do a complete search of the area I did find a lid to 35MM film container but that was all. I'll be in 'haa' for a few days so hopefully the cache owner might replace it. Otherwise a very nice and muggle free park thanks for bringing me here. This Isn't a virtual? 1 1516 Found it 02/02/2012 I had the same luck as the other two before me. However some photos may help. I rescued a frog from drowning in the pond in front of the statue. He could not get out of the pond and nowhere to rest. Just water and walls. He was happy. T4TC. This Sisn't a Virtual 2 894 Found it 02/02/2012 Took the "road less travelled" for this one. Found the rubbish tip, wandered next to rice paddies with people working, cattle grazing and chooks clucking. Next time we come here we must remember the maps, they would make things much easier. Finally arrived at GZ, just to find exactly what the last log said. New padlocks on both boxes. We did the same and took a photo.TFTC. Took photo, left nothing This Isn't a Virtual? 3 497 Found it 01/19/2012 We tried it two times. First try: some people were working on bigger of the two power boxes. Second try: both Boxes were closed with a lock, a friendly guy opened us the smaller box directly by the corner, but there was no Cache. This was our last chance to find a cache in 'aha', so we decided to make a picture of us at the box. Hopefully this is enough for a valid log. Thx (picture is coming in two weeks) (Note: No picture logged.) Found it 322 Found it 01/08/2012 We found it in the night, tftc Only missing a month. CO missing for almost two years. Quickly turned into a Virtual Cache.
knowschad Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 Not naming any names, but just as a generic reminder, I thought somebody should quote the OP before this good old thread goes too far astray in its new home: Let's not start a debate, or accuse people of cheating or any of that. No names, no links, just the log.
+Moose Mob Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 (edited) In another thread, the topic of logging a find when the cacher really didn't find the cache was mentioned. Someone suggested it would make an interesting topic on its own. I agree. This thread is for all those smiley-faced logs that admit that the hunters did not really find the cache. Let's not start a debate, or accuse people of cheating or any of that. No names, no links, just the log. Here's my first contribution: Found the spot, but not the cache! No film canister that I could find, but I was right on it at 0.0 feet! 1st find on my own! there we go. Edited February 8, 2012 by Moose Mob
+OZ2CPU Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 it is YOUR game, not others, what you do or dont is only YOUR problem. but if you play the SAME game as us, you need to play by the SAME RULES as us, else there is a big chance we will not take you or your achivements seriously. a cache is ONLY found, when the LOG is found and signed or stambed with your NAME !!! anything else is NOT a found !! you can not ask a friend to sign it, YOU must do this your self !! a CO is actually supposed to check the logbook, and delete online logs if they are not in the book, it is a gentleman sport/game, you as a geocacher is supposed to play fair and not lie, that is actually what you do if you log a cache you did not sign the physical logbook. you should write a NOTE or a DNF this way the CO and other cachers can ready about your experiance of this cache or the area, you could still also get a very nice trip and hike with out finding and signing the logbook. So enjoy that and be happy. I as a CO did delete logs a few times, but only since one of my caches is very complex with many stages and some found containers with hints, and think this is maybe the cache, so they put in a paper note with their log on it, that is NOT approved as a found. a logbook always contain the word LOGBOOK !! it may look like a piece of paper, or a book or whatever :-) and it must also contain the GC number and even the cache name, however some mystery caches do not do this, simply since the container with log, could be found by accident, and the CO dont want you to get an easy online find..
knowschad Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) it is YOUR game, not others, what you do or dont is only YOUR problem. but if you play the SAME game as us, you need to play by the SAME RULES as us, else there is a big chance we will not take you or your achivements seriously. a cache is ONLY found, when the LOG is found and signed or stambed with your NAME !!! anything else is NOT a found !! you can not ask a friend to sign it, YOU must do this your self !! a CO is actually supposed to check the logbook, and delete online logs if they are not in the book, it is a gentleman sport/game, you as a geocacher is supposed to play fair and not lie, that is actually what you do if you log a cache you did not sign the physical logbook. you should write a NOTE or a DNF this way the CO and other cachers can ready about your experiance of this cache or the area, you could still also get a very nice trip and hike with out finding and signing the logbook. So enjoy that and be happy. I as a CO did delete logs a few times, but only since one of my caches is very complex with many stages and some found containers with hints, and think this is maybe the cache, so they put in a paper note with their log on it, that is NOT approved as a found. a logbook always contain the word LOGBOOK !! it may look like a piece of paper, or a book or whatever :-) and it must also contain the GC number and even the cache name, however some mystery caches do not do this, simply since the container with log, could be found by accident, and the CO dont want you to get an easy online find.. Sigh... would you please read the OP? This is not be be a debate on the practice of logging what you didn't find. This thread has been sailing along nicely for almost 2000 posts, only to break into debate as soon as it was moved to this forum. Edited February 10, 2012 by knowschad
JASTA 11 Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Getting back on track....AGAIN!! Didn't find it 05/09/2011 we found shingles but we think the cache may be buried under a great pile of branches that has been recently dumped at GZ Found it 06/25/2011 No luck here today, I also believe this one got buried
+R.O.B Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 Found it My dad and I have really been enjoying your caches! The lake was up so high, we couldn't actually get to this one. Have a picture confirming we found (could see the cache) it, but couldn't get to it with out swimming! But, we did find it. TFTC! Found it we were 20 feet away. we could see it but we didnt have a boat to reach it. will log our find when water goes back down. Well, if you are going to be back to log it, why did you log it now...?
+Isonzo Karst Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 The continuing saga of VelcroCaching.... Geocacher2 Found only some velcor, please fix this. VelcroHunter4 Found velcro, thanks! VelcroHunter3 Out with VelcroHunter2, found your cache. TFTC VelcroHunter2 Found the velcro, tried to sign it. You might want to fix this. VelcroHunter Found some velcro, so I know were the cache was. Calling this a find. Geocacher Found this in poor shape. Velcro is failing. We tried to do a fix, but I don't think it will last. Nice spot.
+briansnat Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 found It 10/20/2011 Well kinda, whats left of it, and I signed a piece of plastic were cache was to be. I went to hint to see if I was in the right spot, I was and saw where people where here before. Needs owner intervention and will post maintenace on this one. Didn't Find It 10/09/2011 Found what we are pretty sure was GZ. The hint matched but no cache. We did find a few broken pieces of plastic, probably from the container, but nothing else. In all we searched for 9 caches today and found only 3. This along with 4 others showed strong evidence of being muggled, stolen and/or destroyed.
+Q10 Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) [[removed info]] Edited February 13, 2012 by BlueRajah removed info
+SwineFlew Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 (edited) Go for this one ... there is no cache ... [[removed]] That cache got a few ringbones in it. Edited February 13, 2012 by BlueRajah removed cache info
Trinity's Crew Posted February 12, 2012 Posted February 12, 2012 Found it 12/22/2011 Found it, Maintenance note posted as well. Needs Maintenance 12/22/2011 OK- I found the distractor cache- The paper in it is waterlogged and unable to be read. I searched within the 10 metres to find the main cache, sadly all I found was the tie strap and ring it was originally on, nothing else is there. Had fun looking though!
+Q10 Posted February 13, 2012 Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) "This post has been edited by BlueRajah: Today, 03:31 AM Reason for edit: removed info" [[removed info]] Why don't you archive the cache - not only remove my link? It's a test cache that Groundspeak has forgotten and it is logged again and again. Has been "found" 80 times. Last found log: Found it 11/Feb/2012 I'm still not really sure what happened. All I remember is I was on a ship with this creepy guy named Michael and a Korean guy named Jin. We were just working away just like any other day when something felt wrong. Now, Michael was a maverick. He would do the wildest things which would get anyone killed. Yet somehow, he survived it all. It was as if he was testing his mortality and he was winning (not in the Charlie Sheen winning sense, he is even stranger but we're going off course just like this ship). We could see this island off in the distance which wasn't on our charts. Could it be Atlantis? Were we just hallucinating from being out at sea for so long? We started going for it when we see this copter flying out and one dude bails. What is it with all these suicidal lunatics?!?! The copter gets closer and this woman starts yelling out Jin's name as he's waving his arms like he's at an 80's rap concert (put your hands in the air and wave them like you just don't care!). At this point, I'd had enough and walked over to the other side of the ship as far as I could to get away from these guys. Then, there was this explosion. I got jettisoned hundreds of yards out into the ocean with 3rd degree burns and a horrible headache. That's when I noticed the strangest thing yet. Remember how I mentioned we were near an island (at N 30° 55.525 W 140° 26.531, btw)? Well, it just vanished. Just a flash of light and it got swallowed up. That was seven years ago. It took a long time for me to flag down a passing vessel to rescue me out at sea and get me medical attention. It was five years afterwards when I found out about geocaching and now, after intense psychotherapy, I am able to speak about this horrible event without collapsing emotionally. However, it wasn't until today that I realized that the island was just the largest cache ever created. What's scary is that cache was muggled by God, Poseidon, Davy Jones (not the Monkees guy) or some other powerful being. So, this cache needs maintenance. I wasn't able to sign the logbook though. It was probably damp anyway. I'd say thanks for the cache but, dude, really, years of psychotherapy. I'm sure you understand. Edited February 13, 2012 by Q10
Recommended Posts