Jump to content

Garbage In, Cash Out? (gico)


SpiffJr

Recommended Posts

Hi all...

 

New to caching... but disappointed that of the caches that I have seen, fellow GCers let the contents degrade. I'm sure it's a matter of time before I find a "pretty rock" that someone picked up along the way.

 

My current thought is to Cito the cache as well. Has this been done before?

 

The philosophy, to me, should be like a campsite: leave it better than when you found it.

 

To do that, one can improve something, or remove that which is damaging. Or both!

 

Broken toys, used and filthy stuff that *should* have gone to the land fill actually detract from the cache... and that their removal actually raises the cache value, like removing rotten apples from a pile of good ones.

 

I'd hate to see this hobby turn into a nutty exercise where hundreds of thousands of people are burning fossil fuels to move small anounts of trash around in circles across the globe.

 

Cito the cache. Leave it better than you found it. :D

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Link to comment
I'm sure it's a matter of time before I find a "pretty rock" that someone picked up along the way.

 

.......

I'd hate to see this hobby turn into a nutty exercise where hundreds of thousands of people are burning fossil fuels to move small anounts of trash around in circles across the globe.

 

Cito the cache. Leave it better than you found it.  :D

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Welcome to the addiction, Spiff.

 

Just a friendly response from a not-so-new cacher...

 

Live and let live mostly.

 

We are burning fossil fuel to move trinkets/swag/other stuff from spot to spot. Most of us are having a blast doing it and - yes - will trash out some "junk" that might not be there.

 

But we're having a great time and most of us just smile and roll on over to the next cache.

 

So, relax - have fun with your GPSr - keep on caching and find the joy!

 

Momma Marauder

 

(who has found that posting is a lot of fun!) :D

 

(Edited to add: I like finding pretty rocks!)

Edited by Morgan's Marauders
Link to comment

I am not sure what you are suggesting. If you are suggesting adding good swag to a cache, this is a good thing. If you are suggesting that folks use their subjective views and remove everything from a cache that they don't think is good enough then you are crossing a line that probably most cachers would consider unethical.

 

I believe the general consensus is that the cache belongs to the person who placed it. Except for unusual circumstances the only person who should remove items from a cache (except as a trade) are the cache owner.

 

Emailing the owner with your concerns is fine, but taking it upon yourself to "edit" the contents of someone else's cache is not.

Link to comment

"If you are suggesting that folks use their subjective views and remove everything from a cache that they don't think is good enough then you are crossing a line that probably most cachers would consider unethical."

 

Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about...

 

And I appreciate your comments... I anticipated this, and is the reason why I bring it up for discussion.

 

I have a few things to think about with regard to this...

 

Subjectivity: All contents are subjective... and the basic philosiphy of trading for like value is ruled by subjectivity, yet there it is. It is a part of the sport.

 

Take an extreme to make the point: If someone defacated in a cache, would you treat it as part of the cache, or would you clean it out? (or at least hope someone would)

 

Subjectivity is unavoidable, and we already have to resign ourselves to the fact that subjectivity IS the mechanism that already determines cache contents.

 

Insanity: Treating anyting that makes it's way into a cache as a "sacred" object makes no sense either. Example: A small botlle of liquor that I recently read about. Drugs. Porn. Explosives.

 

The point is, at *some* point, garbage must be treated AS garbage in a cache, I believe.

 

Would you leave a wrapper from a snickers bar?

 

I appreciate the ethics involved. But I hope you can see that there is already precedent for removing objectionable items.

 

My proposal is thus:

 

If a thoughtful, yet admittedly subjective mind, percieves that the value of a cache will clearly improve by the sole act of removing something, then it should be removed.

 

This covers: Dangerous items, Porn, Food, trash, etc. This is not perfect, but we don't live in that kind of world anyway.

 

The Snickers wrapper has to go.

 

The army man that was chewed on by a dog for three hours has to go.

 

The cache is a finite space. Without some philosophy to at least *nudge* contents away from becoming a "globally distributed land fill", this sport will increasingly disappoint.

 

To aid in agreement of how this might work better, we could consider incorporating it into the accepted proposition of a subjective value trade... where I might take a couple of "low value" items for one rather nice one. (An army soldier and a bouncy ball for an LED flashlight, for example).

 

To "ethically" remove things... leave something of some percieved positive value, and remove all things of negative or zero value.

 

Would this scheme work better for you... ?

 

Best regards,

 

Spiff

Link to comment

If you'll take the time to read the guidelines, you'll find that: Dangerous items, Porn, Food - are not allowed in caches.

 

You will find that most geocachers will trash out legitimate trash. However, it's not up to me to decide what is or isn't a good trade items. One man's trash is anothers treasure.

 

We're not talking about broken McToys and lint. Just because you think a knick-knack is trash doesn't mean the next finder will.

 

Feces is definetly trash - I probably wouldn't personally remove it unless it was my own cache (in which case I'd trash the whole container out. gross) - and I don't think such an extreme example is needed.

 

No offense, but after you find more than a handful of caches you'll probably find that it's not about trading. I can't recall when the last time I traded anything. Most geocachers geocache for the hunt (or the thrill of the find or whatever you want to call it) or to get out of the house. A lot of people don't trade - and most don't geocache exclusively to trade.

 

If you feel you must go on a campaign - don't just trash out the items - trade something you think is a good item for every bad item (in your opinion). I don't think anybody would have a problem with that.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

Thanks for the note...

 

I know the guidelines... which is why I quoted them as a precident to removal of items based on a subjective evaluation of the item.

 

And guidelines are guidelines... there is nothing that is "not allowed" in geocaching.

 

The problem with what you have outlined can be summed up simply:

 

Is a swiss army knife dangerous?

 

By the very subjective definition you have used for removal of "dangerous" swag, we are already in trouble with a classic cache item. And is porn really dangerous?

 

Suddenly, what seemed simple a moment ago... is not so simple.

 

Now, about the concept of "what it's all about". If it's not about "trading", then all caches would be virtual or similar. It also dismisses the mindset of younger geocachers... or people that simply don't share your views. My suggeston along these lines is: If you appreciate simply roaming the earth, then enjoy! But don't dismiss the practical need to define and protect the basis of the sport, the hiden cache.

 

After all, it's not "GeoTrashing". :rolleyes:

 

I assume that there are some people like me that make serious efforts to improve the contents of a cache... but as the sport becomes more popular, and GPS units start to come free in specially marked boxes of Cheerios, it's going turn into a case of global TNLNSL and travel bugs.... and the cache will, for all practical purposes, be lost.

 

Spiff

Link to comment
Thanks for the note...

 

I know the guidelines... which is why I quoted them as a precident to removal of items based on a subjective evaluation of the item.

 

And guidelines are guidelines... there is nothing that is "not allowed" in geocaching.

 

The problem with what you have outlined can be summed up simply:

 

Is a swiss army knife dangerous?

 

By the very subjective definition you have used for removal of "dangerous" swag, we are already in trouble with a classic cache item. And is porn really dangerous?

 

Suddenly, what seemed simple a moment ago... is not so simple.

Ok, I tell you what - you go create a cache with weapons, alchohol, porn, and food in it - and see if it gets listed. I can assure you it will not.

 

It doesn't matter if the item is dangerous or offensive to you - GC.com will not allow caches containing that to be listed. The vast majority of geocachers will remove these items.

 

If you want to argue what should or shouldn't be allowed (which you are bordering on) you should start another thread.

 

It's common courtesy for most geocachers to take real trash and throw it away. If there are items that aren't up to your high personal standards - trade something you think is better for them. Otherwise, taking items that are not clearly trash without leaving something is unfair at best and stealing at worst (lets not get into the "you left it in the wild arguement, what happens happens" - it's tiresome and I think most people get my point w/out taking it to literally).

 

Now, about the concept of "what it's all about".  If it's not about "trading", then all caches would be virtual or similar.  It also dismisses the mindset of younger geocachers... or people that simply don't share your views.  My suggeston along these lines is:  If you appreciate simply roaming the earth, then enjoy!  But don't dismiss the practical need to define and protect the basis of the sport, the hiden cache.

 

After all, it's not "GeoTrashing".    :rolleyes:

 

Where exactly do you get that I don't like finding physical caches. I am fairly sure that after you find several hundred caches, you PROBABLY won't find trading as interesting as you do now. I have rarely found anything I'd even want to trade for in a cache and that includes quite a few FTF's and plenty of well stocked and maintained caches.

 

I'm well aware that families with children enjoy the trading aspect of the game. That's a seperate issue. I personally have no problem with people that trade and I try to stock my caches well (mainly with children in mind) and maintain them because cache contents degrade over time.

 

I assume that there are some people like me that make serious efforts to improve the contents of a cache... but as the sport becomes more popular, and GPS units start to come free in specially marked boxes of Cheerios, it's going turn into a case of global TNLNSL and travel bugs.... and the cache will, for all practical purposes, be lost.

 

Please don't take this as an attack on newbies - I assure you it's not (we were all newbies at one point). Take this as an experienced cachers advice. Let's be realistic - you've been a registered member for approximately 2 weeks and you've logged 3 finds. (I can't help but to admit that it is humorous for you to talk about your efforts to improve caches and contemplate how the sport will change long term when you're still fairly green...) I think your views on trading will probably change after you find more caches. I figure after a few hundred (and a few hundred trade items, I'm assuming from your comments you'd be trading stuff that's not cheap) your views on the value of items may change as well.

 

I like finding a physical container with a logbook. I prefer this to be a full sized cache, but I have nothing against a well done micro. The items are nice to look at, but I rarely bother (I dont' think there's anything wrong with trading, and I have nothing against those who do). I know many do - but I can't think of anybody who caches ONLY to trade for items. I know a lot of geocachers and lots of them trade - and all of them that hide full sized containers stock their caches well regardless of wether or not they trade.

 

You're misconstruing my arguements.

 

I still say - if you don't like an item - TRADE something for it - don't just take it under the label of "trashing out" the container. Otherwise - use common sense - an empty pack of batteries is clearly trash and should be removed. If it's not clear - then trade.

 

sd

Link to comment
Thanks for the note...

 

I know the guidelines... which is why I quoted them as a precident to removal of items based on a subjective evaluation of the item.

Well, since you know them so well, you know that right at the top they mention as far as this site goes, there is no precident set by any cache, right?

 

Since you'ra a guideline kinda guy, you also know that you're not supposed to crosspost the same thing in multiple forums, right?

Link to comment

I know the guidelines... which is why I quoted them as a precident to removal of items based on a subjective evaluation of the item.

 

The guidelines shouldn't be viewed as subjective, but rather objective. Yes, I do realize that those who made the guidelines were exercising subjective opinions. However the items that are listed as being against the rules by this site can be removed by anyone encountering them and nobody using this site should be surprised since we all know what those rules are. Some might agree with those rules and others may disagree, but the point is we all know what those rules are so if we violate them we know that there is a high probablity those items will be removed.

 

And guidelines are guidelines... there is nothing that is "not allowed" in geocaching.

 

That's true. If you want you can use this site to learn the location of caches and then go steal them. This is 100% legal as far as I know because anything left on public property is not private property. It might be legal, but is it ethical? Well, ethics is a subjective arena, but I suspect you would say no, it isn't ethical as would I.

 

The problem with what you have outlined can be summed up simply:

 

Is a swiss army knife dangerous?

 

By the very subjective definition you have used for removal of "dangerous" swag, we are already in trouble with a classic cache item. And is porn really dangerous?

 

A swiss army knife isn't dangerous all by itself. Neither is a loaded .44 magnum. Porn isn't dangerous either. The reason these things are taboo is because these things are often illegal. Porn is legal, but not for minors. Minors are often the ones who get too look through caches. Since GC.com appears to desire caching to be family friendly things not appropriate for kids are against the rules. Personally I would love to find a swiss army knife in a cache, but wouldn't want my 5 year old finding it. I also wouldn't have any problem finding some Hustler magazine in a cache, but many others would. The idea is to not place items that are commonly viewed as illegal, dangerous or offensive by others.

 

I assume that there are some people like me that make serious efforts to improve the contents of a cache... but as the sport becomes more popular, and GPS units start to come free in specially marked boxes of Cheerios, it's going turn into a case of global TNLNSL and travel bugs.... and the cache will, for all practical purposes, be lost.

 

I appreciate what you are saying, but you have said that it is your intent to remove items from a cache that your subjective opinion says aren't quality items. My view is that this is unethical. Yes, there are some items that are clearly in need of removing. You gave the example of someone defectating in a cache. Obviously nobody except a scat fiend wants to find that. Since scat is a health hazard nobody is going to criticise you for removing that. A candybar wrapper is another thing you gave as an example. Sure, remove that as it is obvious it has no value to anyone(unless it has a non expired coupon on it).

 

My concern is that you might visit a cache and find a bunch of happy meal toys in it and remove those. There are a lot of items that I have seen others berate as cache items that my 5 year old is delighted to find in a cache. My 5 year old is just as entitled to a quality experience as any adult is.

 

Here is what I propose to you: Put your money where your mouth (fingers) is. Feel 100% free to remove any item you wish from any cache as long as you leave an item in trade. Cleaning a cache is the sole responsibility and right of the cache owner, not those seeking the cache. If you find 5 items in a cache that you think are garbage, go ahead and remove them as long as you leave 5 items in trade.

 

If you think a cache just has trash and you don't have anything to trade then email the cache owner, post a log on the cache page about it or whatever.

 

Please just do not take it upon yourself to be a cache cleanser. It is unethical and at least a litle bit arrogant to assume that your subjective opinions are more correct than someone else's subjective opinion. This is a game played by a diverse group of people with widely differing opinions. Please don't assume the role of opinion police.

Link to comment

I have seen several cache's from my NYC queries that state specifically what kind of items should be traded. Creating a similar cache in your area would be a great way to try and minimize the not-so-desireable trinkets. (I plan doing the same as I have some really nice swag that I wouldn't mind getting a return on)

 

I agree that some of the cache contents I've seen just had to go.With that being said, I'm going to create a new thred just for this topic:

 

Strangest Swag You've Found

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
It doesn't matter if the item is dangerous or offensive to you - GC.com will not allow caches containing that to be listed.  The vast majority of geocachers will remove these items.

 

*You* said that "danger" was the metric. Not I. I merely pointed out how fragile *your* metric was.

 

Also, you are cofusing GC.com with Geocaching. Not the same.

 

Lastly, caches need not be set up with porn and drugs to eventually contain them, so my point still stands. I can get a nice cache listed, yet problematic items DO make their way into caches.

 

Now, my smart but abrasive friend, how do you deal with it?

 

You have not explained "real trash", yet caution me about subjectivity. Don't you see the problem with that?

 

Example: An item is located in a cache... and visited, yet not taken, several dozen times... and in the process is dropped, stepped on, rolls down the hill in the mud... but is continually returned to the cache. When, exactly, does it become "real trash"? How destroyed must it be?

 

I, at least, have tried to offer a philosophical basis for defining when that moment occurrs... where its removal reasonably improves the cache.

 

If you want to argue what should or shouldn't be allowed (which you are bordering on) you should start another thread.

 

Thanks for the advice... but I feel that I have to point out that I did not present any arguments about what should or should not be allowed. You did:

If you'll take the time to read the guidelines, you'll find that: Dangerous items, Porn, Food - are not allowed in caches.

So you may need to follow your own advice...

 

I'm well aware that families with children enjoy the trading aspect of the game.  That's a seperate issue.

 

Of course it is not a separate issue. This is my thread, and this is the fundimental issue of it.

 

you've been a registered member for approximately 2 weeks and you've logged 3 finds. (I can't help but to admit that it is humorous for you to talk about your efforts to improve caches and contemplate how the sport will change long term when you're still fairly green...)

 

Please don't offend me by pretending to know things about me that you do not. SpiffJr is the account holder... and is my 10 year old son. I have assembled his "kit" for he sport, and contains probably several months worth of supplies for trades that are for upgrades to existing cache content. Thanks for checking up on him, his background, and his finds... but you might wish to stop right there, thank you.

 

Back to topic, if all around you, you find that people that Geocache are "magically" no longer interested in trading... might it be to at least some significant extent, because the people that enjoy the trade aspect of it eventually lose interest, leaving ONLY the people the don't really care about trading, thus you seem surrounded by them, artificially reinforcing your argument?

 

This would make your observation more about "self selection". "I have noticed that people that stay in the green room for awhile, seem to come around to my way of thinking... that we like the green room. I don't know what happened to the other people." The people that like red rooms *left*.

 

I still say - if you don't like an item - TRADE something for it - don't just take it under the label of "trashing out" the container.  Otherwise - use common sense - an empty pack of batteries is clearly trash and should be removed.  If it's not clear - then trade.

 

You may have missed it. I proposed this in only the 2nd response:

To aid in agreement of how this might work better, we could consider incorporating it into the accepted proposition of a subjective value trade... where I might take a couple of "low value" items for one rather nice one. (An army soldier and a bouncy ball for an LED flashlight, for example).

 

Have you, by chance, ever heard of the Broken Window Syndrome?

 

Spiff

(NOT SpiffJr)

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

 

You may have missed it. From the very first post on the thread:

My current thought is to Cito the cache as well. Has this been done before?

 

I have clearly asked about the preexistance of an idea, and you have offered nothing in response to it... except to imply arrogance on my part.

 

But thank you for being abrasive and dilluting discussion.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Link to comment

My preference is that others do not make subjective decisions about items others have placed in my caches. If there are any items that are in a state of disrepair or which may be offensive to some cachers (either within or outside of the official guidelines), I would prefer a note to that effect and I will maintain the cache accordingly as the cache owner. If I fail to do so within a reasonable time-frame, then I suppose I would have no problem with the removal of so-called "garbage". In my case, I maintain caches I own. If a cache owner is not acting responsibly, then the cache should actually be reviewed for possible de-listing (IMHO).

 

I enjoy if someone trades an item of higher "value" for an item of lesser "value" to make the cache more interesting, but neither expect or require it. I would like to extend the offer to anyone to replace items in my caches with high-value gold bullion (1 ounce or wieghtier). Please let me know when you have done this!

 

Basically, I place caches for others to enjoy -- not for others to dictate their own personal bias' and desires upon -- either through editorial actions or self-appointed maintenace activities.

 

There is, however, an exception I allow to the above -- that is when a cache container or logbook is damaged. In these cases only, I am always grateful for a new container, a new log, a fresh pencil -- or other such truely helpful field repairs. Of course, a note asking me to maintain the cache is equally effective.

 

The best way to help this hobby is to lead by example and place nice items into caches without worrying about how and what others do to enjoy their experience of the game. What items do you place into caches? Some of what I place might be considered "junk" -- I place trading card game cards, old collectible stamps, little puzzles, etc.

Link to comment

Hi DaveA,

 

Thanks for the thoughtful note...

 

As far as the guidelines that you argue as being objective... I would tend to agree!

 

"Please! No alcohol, tobacco, firearms, prescription or illicit drugs. Let's keep this safe and legal."

 

But then you talk further about the swiss army knife and porn... but you don't see them in the guidelines above! You merely refer to them as "taboo". So: is it ethical to remove unstated "taboo" items? Where is the list of "taboo" items?

 

Yet certainly people choose (and I take it that you support) the removall of knives and pornography.

 

Thus the question under discussion: If we already know that people are using subjective standards for removing items not found in the guidelines... (porn, knives, aspirin? lighters?) Then one must ask... if these people are not "stealing" and are being "ethical", to protect the integrity of the cache, then is there a clear basis for rejecting other proposals for protecting the integrity of the cache that call for the removal of other items as well?

 

What I am beginning to discover is that most people, even experienced GCers don't really know/agree on a basic philisophical tool set for cache contents except in the easy cases.

 

It is easy to agree on the easy cases... but what about in the margins?

 

That's what I have started this thread for.

 

The early history of GeoCaching, way back in the long past year of 2000, had caches that were very "backpacker" "rock climber" and "adventurer" friendly... so knives, fire starters, sterno, etc. etc. etc. would not be uncommon.

 

Yet I detect from your post that things may have "morphed" a bit... at least for you, and perhaps for most people... but this "morphing" of unstated understandings causes me to wonder about basic philosophical foundations that can guide cache content... thus this thread on one aspect.

 

And I very much appreciate your contribution,

 

Spiff

Edited by SpiffJr
Link to comment

This topic is going to devolve quickly, I think, but thought I'd add some more to the fray.

 

Trade up should be the policy whenever possible. If there's OBVIOUS trash, remove it (trading or not), but if there are items that aren't "as nice" as they should be, don't remove them a la CITO.

 

If a cache is beyond repair due to problems with the container, location, etc., then either email the owner and/or submit a "should be archived" entry on the cache page.

 

While caches do degrade over time, our job as cachers is to improve through trading and example, not guess at what makes good trade items and throw away the rest.

Link to comment
It doesn't matter if the item is dangerous or offensive to you - GC.com will not allow caches containing that to be listed.  The vast majority of geocachers will remove these items.

 

*You* said that "danger" was the metric. Not I. I merely pointed out how fragile *your* metric was.

Metric? I have no idea what you are talking about. How fragile is my metric?

 

Also, you are cofusing GC.com with Geocaching.  Not the same.

 

I beg to differ. As far as I'm concerned - Geocaching and Geocaching.com are synonymous. (I'd wager that GC.com has in excess of 90% of the unique cache listings out there - 99.7% in my state). It's not the only site, but it's the original and it's the biggest (and best). Since the vast majority of caches are listed here - the vast majority of the time their guidelines apply.

 

Lastly, caches need not be set up with porn and drugs to eventually contain them, so my point still stands.  I can get a nice cache listed, yet problematic items DO make their way into caches.

 

Now, my smart but abrasive friend, how do you deal with it?

 

I did mention that the majority (and I'd wager vast) majority of experienced geocachers remove these items - often trading them out.

 

You have not explained "real trash", yet caution me about subjectivity.  Don't you see the problem with that?

 

Example:  An item is located in a cache... and visited, yet not taken, several dozen times... and in the process is dropped, stepped on, rolls down the hill in the mud... but is continually returned to the cache.  When, exactly, does it become "real trash"?  How destroyed must it be?

 

I, at least, have tried to offer a philosophical basis for defining when that moment occurrs... where its removal reasonably improves the cache.

 

If you truly have to ask this - I'm not sure I can answer it for you. We can wax philosophical for years if you want to - but that's not going to change anything. The problem is you CAN debate the minutia of this forever - I don't see the point. I think it's obvious what's trash and what's not trash. I suppose I could start a list - but it'd be endless and I don't see the point. A poor trade item doesn't necessarily mean it's trash. I'm not sure if you intend it - but your posts make it seem like everything you don't think is great is trash. That may not be the case.

 

If you're in doubt - trade the item out. It seems to be common practice among traders.

 

If you want to argue what should or shouldn't be allowed (which you are bordering on) you should start another thread.

 

Thanks for the advice... but I feel that I have to point out that I did not present any arguments about what should or should not be allowed. You did:

If you'll take the time to read the guidelines, you'll find that: Dangerous items, Porn, Food - are not allowed in caches.

So you may need to follow your own advice...

 

Actually, you did brought up the topic of dangerous items and implied they shouldn't be allowed in caches:

 

If a thoughtful, yet admittedly subjective mind, percieves that the value of a cache will clearly improve by the sole act of removing something, then it should be removed.

 

This covers: Dangerous items, Porn, Food, trash, etc. This is not perfect, but we don't live in that kind of world anyway.

 

My comment pointed out that there are already guidelines that prohibit this. You went off on a tangent discussing whether or not a Swiss Army Knife is dangerous. You brought it up first - and continued to carry it off topic.

 

I restate my original point - these items are already banned from geocaches. They are not to be placed in caches and should be removed (usually they are traded out).

 

I'm well aware that families with children enjoy the trading aspect of the game.  That's a seperate issue.

 

Of course it is not a separate issue. This is my thread, and this is the fundimental issue of it.

 

I thought the fundamental issue was improving cache content quality?

 

you've been a registered member for approximately 2 weeks and you've logged 3 finds. (I can't help but to admit that it is humorous for you to talk about your efforts to improve caches and contemplate how the sport will change long term when you're still fairly green...)

 

Please don't offend me by pretending to know things about me that you do not. SpiffJr is the account holder... and is my 10 year old son. I have assembled his "kit" for he sport, and contains probably several months worth of supplies for trades that are for upgrades to existing cache content. Thanks for checking up on him, his background, and his finds... but you might wish to stop right there, thank you.

 

I don't pretend to know anything about you. I do find it bizarre that you'd post under your sons account. Spiff and SpiffJr are very similar things and it's rather common for geocachers to abbreviate their names.

 

Why not post this under your OWN user account?

 

Back to topic, if all around you, you find that people that Geocache are "magically" no longer interested in trading... might it be to at least some significant extent, because the people that enjoy the trade aspect of it eventually lose interest, leaving ONLY the people the don't really care about trading, thus you seem surrounded by them, artificially reinforcing your argument?

 

Perhaps to some extent. Actually - I can make NO assumption on why people quit geocaching. I imagine if people honestly think they're going to find anything valuable in a cache - they're in for a rude awakening. I have nothing against trading - but it never grabbed me as an important part of the game. I know I am not alone. I know people that always trade, that sometimes trade, and that never trade. I know people that stock caches very well - and their items end up getting traded for some of the things you suggest are bad items. After a while - spending 25 to 50 bucks to keep a cache well stocked gets old so people stop.

 

I think a bigger issue here is something you are not going to change: Human Nature. I said before - One man's trash is anothers treasure.

 

This would make your observation more about "self selection".  "I have noticed that people that stay in the green room for awhile, seem to come around to my way of thinking... that we like the green room.  I don't know what happened to the other people."  The people that like red rooms *left*.

 

Huh?

 

I still say - if you don't like an item - TRADE something for it - don't just take it under the label of "trashing out" the container.  Otherwise - use common sense - an empty pack of batteries is clearly trash and should be removed.  If it's not clear - then trade.

 

You may have missed it. I proposed this in only the 2nd response:

To aid in agreement of how this might work better, we could consider incorporating it into the accepted proposition of a subjective value trade... where I might take a couple of "low value" items for one rather nice one. (An army soldier and a bouncy ball for an LED flashlight, for example).

 

I didn't miss it and it's not a new idea.

 

You've talked about subjectivity quite a bit. Who gets to decide what is a low value item? I know many people that would rather find a bouncy ball than a LED flashlight any day. Is it a monetary issue? Are we going to rate items by value now? I know some people that make their own trade items. They're usually simple, inexpsive items and they seem to be far more popular than expensive items.

 

In the real world - you'll find that the cause of the problem is directly related to this suggestion. Just as you say one "rather nice item" equals a couple (or several) "low value" item - MANY people think several "low value" items equals one nice item. This is one of the main reasons for cache degradation. Your solution is actually the problem.

 

Have you, by chance, ever heard of the Broken Window Syndrome?

 

Spiff

(NOT SpiffJr)

 

I haven't - but spare me. And please consider posting under your own account. I don't know that this classifies as a sockpuppet - but it's confusing to say the least.

 

Anyways - I think you have good intentions. You're in for an uphill battle and you're going to be greeted with much apathy :rolleyes:

 

southdeltan

Link to comment
While caches do degrade over time, our job as cachers is to improve through trading and example, not guess at what makes good trade items and throw away the rest.

 

This job is understood... but since "obvious trash" is in the eye of the beholder (someone posted here that someone's trash is anothers treasure)... no modification of contents can be allowed... thus the problem being discussed... becuase the people that advocate not removing garbage are the same people that say you can remove trash... and never differentiating between the two!

 

You will note that DaveA aready gave an example of this:

 

"A candybar wrapper is another thing you gave as an example. Sure, remove that as it is obvious it has no value to anyone(unless it has a non expired coupon on it)."

 

Throw out candy wrappers... unless you find a coupon on it.

 

The list of these kinds of minimal distinctions between treasure and trash are literally infinite! There is no end.

 

So all I can see at this point is... nobody agrees, and even they do not agree with themselves at times. (They want to find a knife, but don't want their daughter to find one).

 

I have also had people tell me that it's ok to throw out things with no obvious value, but at the same time caution me about removing things that obviously have a negative value! (a devaluing item).

 

I think that this test about what people believe and do leaves me with one final conclusion:

 

Do what you think is right with regard to protecting and improving the sport, because in the end, nobody seems to know just what to do... and is in reality only doing what they think is right anyway... allowing themselves to belive in "rules" that don't in actual fact, exist.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Link to comment

What I am beginning to discover is that most people, even experienced GCers don't really know/agree on a basic philisophical tool set for cache contents except in the easy cases.

 

It is easy to agree on the easy cases... but what about in the margins?

 

As an example of a marginal item -- I have several "reading" caches which contain comic books, graphic novels, and regular novels. If someone were to find a particular author or image offensive, should they be permitted to remove the cache? the item? They may base their view on their personal definition of pornographic, violent, or whatnot.

 

To extrapolate further, what of matter of religion, philosophy or personal bias? I, for example, am a vegitarian and an animal rights advocate -- and would not be happy if someone placed a coupon for a free hamburger in one of my caches -- but I certainly would never dream of removing it. Same goes for hunting badges and pins.

 

There is also something to be said about "survival" caches. These would be aimed at backcountry hikers in extremely remote locations, would not be "hidden" in the traditional sense, may contain some non-perisable food items, a knife, or a pack of waterproof matches. I'm not sure if any are listed here at www.geocaching.com -- but if they were they might violate some "rules" or "guidelines", but I wonder if they would be allowed? Strictly - no, but would they be approved based upon their nature? They would benefit from a geocacher finding them and ensuring they are well-stocked: "Took nothing, left survival blanket and flare, replaced battery on beacon device, signed log"

 

It is, then, something I think best left to the cache approver to decide whether to list a cache and left to the owner to decide when a cache or item is to be removed as an act of "cleaning" the cache. Players get to find and trade.

Link to comment
Thus the question under discussion:  If we already know that people are using subjective standards for removing items not found in the guidelines... (porn, knives, aspirin? lighters?)  Then one must ask... if these people are not "stealing" and are being "ethical", to protect the integrity of the cache, then is there a clear basis for rejecting other proposals for protecting the integrity of the cache that call for the removal of other items as well? 

These items ARE included in the guidelines. There's nothing subjective about it:

 

Geocaching Listing Requirements/Guidelines: Cache Contents

 

Explosives, fireworks, ammo, knives (including pocket knives and multi-tools), drugs, alcohol or other illicit material shouldn't be placed in a cache

 

While it is true that one cannot prevent these from being placed in caches - it is commonly accepted that these items should be removed. They are usually removed and often traded for.

 

Since these items are clearly against the guidelines I don't see how a basis for other actions, since it appears you are implying that people took it upon themselves to move these items for no apparant reason, exists.

 

What exactly do you mean by the "integrity of the cache". To me - that means that it is hidden as it should be and the contents (especially the logbook, but hopefully everything) is dry.

 

What I am beginning to discover is that most people, even experienced GCers don't really know/agree on a basic philisophical tool set for cache contents except in the easy cases.

 

Most "dangerous" or "offensive" items that are placed in caches are by newbies that don't know the guidelines.

 

Also, the concept of "trading up" is confusing for many.

 

I would wager that most experienced geocachers know what "trading fairly" is. If they do trade, they normally trade fairly.

 

You will find that most geocachers are not experienced geocachers.

 

Again - one man's trash is another man's treasure. It is perfectly logical for some people to trade 2 or 3 small items for one expensive one.

 

It's nobody's job to decide what item constitutes a good trade item. (This is a seperate issue from a dangerous or offensive item - this thread was started over "trash" - define trash?).

 

I think this falls back on the cache owner.

 

You are not the first to suggest that people trade nicer things - and you wont be the last - but I imagine your attempts will be as successful as most.

 

sd

Link to comment
I think that this test about what people believe and do leaves me with one final conclusion:

 

Do what you think is right with regard to protecting and improving the sport, because in the end, nobody seems to know just what to do... and is in reality only doing what they think is right anyway... allowing themselves to belive in "rules" that don't in actual fact, exist.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Just be cautious not to *improve* the sport by violating my rights to enjoy the sport in my unique way -- which means: Don't remove or otherwise "edit" my caches. Thanks.

 

I know exactly what I am doing. Placing my caches for others to enjoy, visiting other caches for pleasure (and the occasional trade), having fun.

 

To Add: What you think is "right" and what I think is "right" may be different. Please maintain and stock and trade in whatever way makes you feel happy, but allow me (and others) to do the same. If you remove my cache or otherwise *improve* it beyond a simple trade-- I may be offended. Let's say you feel its the "right" thing to do by letting people know about your personal religious beliefs -- would you then advocate removing all trade items from a cache and replacing them with religious material? -- I think you'll find some argument there. Be nice and have fun! What DO you place in caches you find?

Edited by Lemon Fresh Dog
Link to comment
Hi DaveA,

 

Thanks for the thoughtful note...

 

As far as the guidelines that you argue as being objective... I would tend to agree!

 

"Please! No alcohol, tobacco, firearms, prescription or illicit drugs. Let's keep this safe and legal."

 

But then you talk further about the swiss army knife and porn... but you don't see them in the guidelines above!  You merely refer to them as "taboo".  So:  is it ethical to remove unstated "taboo" items?  Where is the list of "taboo" items?

 

Well it was you who mentioned the swiss army knife and porn, not me. The rules specify issues of safety and legality. Porn is illegal for minors and knives are subject to age restrictions in some areas and length restrictions in some areas so they are both items that at least potentially violate the safe and legal guideline. As I stated I personally don't object to either as a cache item, but completely understand why some would.

 

Yet certainly people choose (and I take it that you support) the removall of knives and pornography.

 

Well, I am responding to your inquiry and trying to provide as objective a basis as I can for reasons to remove items from a cache and reasons when you shouldn't. Do I support removing knives and porn from caches? Yes, but only because they violate the rules as I understand them, not because I have any personal objection to either. Heck, I would be fine finding a bottle of whiskey in a cache. I think getting ahold of a stick of dynamite would be cool too. I don't recommend either as cache items though and wouldn't think poorly of the cacher who removed such items from a cache.

 

Here is my one and only concern: I perceive that you are not talking about porn and knives, but rather items that pose no safety or morality concern to anyone, but simply items you judge to be of very low value. It seems to me that you are seeking approval for removing such items as trash.

 

I would object to this under the "one man's trash=another man's treasure" principle.

 

Without getting into the specifics, if you find an item that clearly doesn't belong in a cache, then trash it. If you find an item that is in a cache and you think it too junky, trade it out or leave it alone and email the owner.

 

My only concern is that you are going to trash people's caches because you don't find many items that meet your high standards.

 

If I am misjudging then I offer my sincere apologies. If this is what you intend then I would request that you consider the trading up principle rather than the CITO concept.

Link to comment
The list of these kinds of minimal distinctions between treasure and trash are literally infinite!  There is no end.

 

Bingo!

 

I think you've finally hit the nail on the head.

 

You're opening a huge can of worms when you start debating what is or isn't a good trade item (especially when you consider that at some point somebody must have considered it a good item - and you get into questioning what a person is doing as well).

 

Are the rules (and even though they say guidelines, they are treated as rules) stricter than in 2000? Of course they are - but times have changed. At first most geocachers were outdoors/technology enthuisiasts and GPSr's were less common. As the game has changed, the necessity for rules has changed. It hasn't been popular, but many of the content rules that do exist are there for good reasons. Are there exceptions? Sure there are - but the majority of geocaches aren't hard to get to and are visited by people of all walks off life - so there are rules.

 

So - the staff here are unpopular enough for having rules that (for the most part) have good reasons behind them. Can you imagine the backlash if we start saying what is or isn't a good item?

 

However - it's fairly obvious to most people what's trash. If I found the wrapper to something - I'd remove it (even if it had a coupon) because it used to have food in it and food is against the rules (and for good reason). There are thousands of obvious trash items - somebody shouldn't have to tell you what that is. On the other hand - something being a bad trade (in a geocachers opinion) doesn't make it garbage.

 

southdeltan

 

EDITTED to say: I agree with DaveA's last post.

Edited by southdeltan
Link to comment

Lastly, caches need not be set up with porn and drugs to eventually contain them, so my point still stands.  I can get a nice cache listed, yet problematic items DO make their way into caches.

 

Now, my smart but abrasive friend, how do you deal with it?

 

I did mention that the majority (and I'd wager vast) majority of experienced geocachers remove these items - often trading them out.

 

BUT YOU STILL HAVE NOT DEFINED A BASIS FOR REMOVAL! (for those times when they are NOT traded out, as you already admit "experienced" cachers do!)

 

You are *really* failing to make any contribution here...

 

You have not explained "real trash", yet caution me about subjectivity.  Don't you see the problem with that?

 

Example:  An item is located in a cache... and visited, yet not taken, several dozen times... and in the process is dropped, stepped on, rolls down the hill in the mud... but is continually returned to the cache.  When, exactly, does it become "real trash"?  How destroyed must it be?

 

I, at least, have tried to offer a philosophical basis for defining when that moment occurrs... where its removal reasonably improves the cache.

 

If you truly have to ask this - I'm not sure I can answer it for you.

 

Then maybe you should not have responded, and simply watched the discussion...

or at least asked more questions.

 

Actually, you did brought up the topic of dangerous items and implied they shouldn't be allowed in caches:

 

If a thoughtful, yet admittedly subjective mind, percieves that the value of a cache will clearly improve by the sole act of removing something, then it should be removed.

 

This covers: Dangerous items, Porn, Food, trash, etc. This is not perfect, but we don't live in that kind of world anyway.

 

You are not understanding... I make the point that my notion was compatible with the common and preexisting traditions of barring: dangerous items, porn, food, etc... and made no actual case for legitimacy of the practice. I merely acknowledge that the practice exists, and am saying that my notion was compatible with it.

 

My suggestion: don't work off your perceptions of what you believe people are "implying". If you have to base your comments on your perceptions of "implication", then perhaps it is better that you simply ask, especially before you offer them unsolisited "suggestions" of how to correctly use this forum.

 

"Are you trying to make a case for removal of dangerous items?" would have been more than sufficient, don't you think?

 

Thanks for your help in devolving the discussion. And especially the comments on how bizzare that a father and son would persue Geocashing together on this site, suggesting that they separate their accounts. Thanks for invading my personal life.

 

Or maybe you should not have done a background check on ANYONE and presumed to lecture them based on that.

 

I am officially rather pissed at you for doing it.

 

Spiff

Link to comment
Thus the question under discussion:  If we already know that people are using subjective standards for removing items not found in the guidelines... (porn, knives, aspirin? lighters?)  Then one must ask... if these people are not "stealing" and are being "ethical", to protect the integrity of the cache, then is there a clear basis for rejecting other proposals for protecting the integrity of the cache that call for the removal of other items as well? 

These items ARE included in the guidelines. There's nothing subjective about it:

 

Geocaching Listing Requirements/Guidelines: Cache Contents

 

OK... where is the mention of porn? Aspirin? Lighters? You say they are spicifically in the guidelines... I don't see them.

 

Subjectivity is further suggested by what is IN the guidelines:

 

"contents should be suitable for all ages." Subjective in the extreme. Are comic books for teens suitable for five year olds?

 

It even goes on further about "questionable items" which is the essence of subjectivty!

 

"If the original cache contents list any of the above items or ***other questionable items***, or if a cache is reported to have the ***questionable items***"

 

Gimmie a break... ok? Please, I'm asking nicely.

Link to comment

Lastly, caches need not be set up with porn and drugs to eventually contain them, so my point still stands.  I can get a nice cache listed, yet problematic items DO make their way into caches.

 

Now, my smart but abrasive friend, how do you deal with it?

 

I did mention that the majority (and I'd wager vast) majority of experienced geocachers remove these items - often trading them out.

 

BUT YOU STILL HAVE NOT DEFINED A BASIS FOR REMOVAL! (for those times when they are NOT traded out, as you already admit "experienced" cachers do!)

 

You are *really* failing to make any contribution here...

I have REPEATEDLY pointed to the guidelines (which are treated as rules for all practical purposes) for cache contents.

 

Here's the basis:

 

Geocaching Listing Requirements/Guidelines: Cache Contents

 

You have not explained "real trash", yet caution me about subjectivity.  Don't you see the problem with that?

 

Example:  An item is located in a cache... and visited, yet not taken, several dozen times... and in the process is dropped, stepped on, rolls down the hill in the mud... but is continually returned to the cache.  When, exactly, does it become "real trash"?  How destroyed must it be?

 

I, at least, have tried to offer a philosophical basis for defining when that moment occurrs... where its removal reasonably improves the cache.

 

If you truly have to ask this - I'm not sure I can answer it for you.

 

Then maybe you should not have responded, and simply watched the discussion...

or at least asked more questions.

 

You truly are missing the point. Someone shouldn't have to tell you what trash is.

 

As DaveA has stated - your posts suggest that items that aren't up to your standards are trash.

 

I don't think anybody has a problem with somebody removing obvious garbage. If somebody has to tell you what that is you have bigger problems than trying to help cache content quality.

 

Actually, you did brought up the topic of dangerous items and implied they shouldn't be allowed in caches:

 

If a thoughtful, yet admittedly subjective mind, percieves that the value of a cache will clearly improve by the sole act of removing something, then it should be removed.

 

This covers: Dangerous items, Porn, Food, trash, etc. This is not perfect, but we don't live in that kind of world anyway.

 

You are not understanding... I make the point that my notion was compatible with the common and preexisting traditions of barring: dangerous items, porn, food, etc... and made no actual case for legitimacy of the practice. I merely acknowledge that the practice exists, and am saying that my notion was compatible with it.

 

They are not compatible. They are apples and oranges. Dangerous/Offensive items are excluded for legitimate reasons.

 

Trashing out the contents of caches because the contents don't meet your standards is not a legitimate reason.

 

And please don't try to confuse the subject by asking "what is garbage?". If you don't know - I can't help you.

 

My suggestion:  don't work off your perceptions of what you believe people are "implying".  If you have to base your comments on your perceptions of "implication", then perhaps it is better that you simply ask, especially before you offer them unsolisited "suggestions" of how to correctly use this forum.

 

"Are you trying to make a case for removal of dangerous items?" would have been more than sufficient, don't you think?

 

Thanks for your help in devolving the discussion.  And especially the comments on how bizzare that a father and son would persue Geocashing together on this site, suggesting that they separate their accounts.  Thanks for invading my personal life.

 

Or maybe you should not have done a background check on ANYONE and presumed to lecture them based on that.

 

I am officially rather pissed at you for doing it.

 

Spiff

 

Please show me WHERE I said it was bizzare that a father and son persue Geocaching together? I didn't suggest you have seperate accounts. You said the cache was your sons. You did not say you shared the account. That suggests there is another account. I found that bizarre (EDITTED TO ADD:) that you would post under your son's account if you had one of your own. I did not mean to "piss you off" - but as my mother has always said 'It's better to be pissed off than to be pissed on". :rolleyes: (That's a joke, not an insult - lighten up - I'm not stalking you).

 

Regardless of how many finds you have - you clearly state you are new. You are not the first new person to suggest this and I wonder if your opinions on trading, as well as your zeal for this cache content crusade will be the same after several hundred finds and many months of geocaching.

Edited by southdeltan
Link to comment
Do what you think is right

 

But in a subjective hobby, don't try to coax, cajole or shame ME into doing what YOU think is right.

 

Interesting... but isn't that basically what you are doing with this post... attempting to define some level of my participation?

 

You will not find much company for this view, I think, as I have had very many people tell ME what THEY think is the right thing to do.

(and I'm ok with that).

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Link to comment

Just to re-iterate my thought to your original post. I don't think you have the right to CITO a cache that does not belong to you under ANY circumstances. There are no referees in this game - self-appointed or otherwise. It would be sad if there was really.

 

I guess my biggest fear is that you come across one of my caches, decide it is "junk", haul it away. It just doesn't seem very respectful. If you e-mailed me and told me that the cache was full of water and broken junk -- I'd probably just go and fix the problem. What are some of the trading items you like to find in a cache?

Link to comment
Thus the question under discussion:  If we already know that people are using subjective standards for removing items not found in the guidelines... (porn, knives, aspirin? lighters?)  Then one must ask... if these people are not "stealing" and are being "ethical", to protect the integrity of the cache, then is there a clear basis for rejecting other proposals for protecting the integrity of the cache that call for the removal of other items as well? 

These items ARE included in the guidelines. There's nothing subjective about it:

 

Geocaching Listing Requirements/Guidelines: Cache Contents

 

OK... where is the mention of porn? Aspirin? Lighters? You say they are spicifically in the guidelines... I don't see them.

 

Subjectivity is further suggested by what is IN the guidelines:

 

"contents should be suitable for all ages." Subjective in the extreme. Are comic books for teens suitable for five year olds?

 

It even goes on further about "questionable items" which is the essence of subjectivty!

 

"If the original cache contents list any of the above items or ***other questionable items***, or if a cache is reported to have the ***questionable items***"

 

Gimmie a break... ok? Please, I'm asking nicely.

You asked:

 

Cache Contents

 

Use your common sense in most cases. Explosives, fireworks, ammo, knives (including pocket knives and multi-tools), drugs, alcohol or other illicit material shouldn't be placed in a cache. As always respect the local laws. Geocaching is a family activity and cache contents should be suitable for all ages.

 

Food items are ALWAYS a BAD IDEA.  Animals have better noses than humans, and in some cases caches have been chewed through and destroyed because food items (or items that smell like food) are in the cache.  Even the presence of mint flavored dental floss has led to destruction of one cache.

 

If the original cache contents list any of the above items or other questionable items, or if a cache is reported to have the questionable items, the cache may be disabled, and the owner of the cache will be contacted and asked to remove the questionable items before the cache is enabled.

 

Aspirin = DRUG

Porn = ILLICIT

Lighters = Flammable (and while not expressly listed, I know cache approvers ask them to be removed - the fireworks and explosives set a precedent here)

 

It also clearly states if these items are in the cache it won't be approved - and if reported later the cache may be disabled.

 

How much clearer do I have to get?

 

You can argue all you want about how things are worded - I know how things are enforced here. If that's too subjective for you - how about you create a cache and clearly list that it includes Pornography, Aspirin and a selection of lighters. I wonder if it will get approved. :rolleyes:

 

sd

Edited by southdeltan
Link to comment

Thanks DaveA...

 

a very good post!

 

I appreciate your concerns and your practical nature, and I apologize for having to highlight your examples of how tricky this all is... like the used candy wrapper, and a swiss army knife! But they certainly strike at the heart of it all... and still, there is no emerging philosophy that I can see in all of this...

 

It seems to come down to... "I know what trash is... and so should you, because its obvious athough I can't explain it" :-) (as condensation of the whole thread)

 

Your concerns about my intent are well founded... and you do understand my basic slant... but may be missing my very early proposal to use trade to accomplish it.

 

I think that you state the subtlties of the issue quite well.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Edited by SpiffJr
Link to comment

oops. I spoke too soon earlier -- the referees in the game are the cache approvers. I meant there are no field referees watching what is placed into the traded in caches.

 

One challenge that has not been mentioned is CITO a cache for less-obvous reasons. You don't like the person that placed the cache, you hate micros, you want to place your own cache in the location. Allowing CITO's of caches opens a whole can of worms.

 

My personal thought is that when a cache owner places a cache, they are sort of "staking a claim" to the GPS co-ordinates listed. If it turns out they are not maintaining the cache, then the sheriff should be called (geocaching.com) and if they have indeed left the area (stopped maintaining the cache) the co-ords should be returned to the pool of available locations.(archive it)

 

If someone stakes a claim and builds a house or has furniture you don't like -- too bad for you.

If someone stakes a claim and illegal or offensive stuff starts to occur at the site -- let them know and give them a chance to fix it. Don't take it upon yourself to "fix" or "improve" their claim.

Link to comment

It seems to come down to... "I know what trash is... and so should you, because its obvious athough I can't explain it" :-) (as condensation of the whole thread)

 

So where do you stand on removing another persons cache completely? Would you advocate removing any items you do not like without trading for them?

 

It may be that I am mis-understanding your intent. I thought you would remove a cache you felt was full of junk and I thought that you considered a half-chewed army figure to be junk.

 

Please clarify. Sorry in advance if I got it wrong.

Link to comment

Perfect response... just what I'm looking for...

 

Thanks!

 

And fear not... your caches will not be "junked" by me... although they may slowly be getting conveted to something near that if cashes listed in N. California are any indication! (one item at a time)

 

My post: What to do about it.

 

I wonder: since people here generally believe that one should naturally have an objective view of what trash is... then naturally, people already have a working definition of what is NOT trash! (I specifically spoke of things that should be in the land fill).

 

I agree with this. And therefore I worry not that people Cito'ing caches will make any more mistakes than they would with items "banned" for other reasons (which is really just a different slant on Cito)

 

So it seems a little odd to me that on the one hand, people fear that caches will be "junked", yet at the same time, fully believe that people have a built in understanding of what "trash" is.

 

Either you believe in people, or you don't, it seems to me.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Link to comment
oops. I spoke too soon earlier -- the referees in the game are the cache approvers.  I meant there are no field referees watching what is placed into the traded in caches. 

 

One challenge that has not been mentioned is CITO a cache for less-obvous reasons.  You don't like the person that placed the cache, you hate micros, you want to place your own cache in the location.  Allowing CITO's of caches opens a whole can of worms.

 

My personal thought is that when a cache owner places a cache, they are sort of "staking a claim" to the GPS co-ordinates listed.  If it turns out they are not maintaining the cache, then the sheriff should be called (geocaching.com) and if they have indeed left the area (stopped maintaining the cache) the co-ords should be returned to the pool of available locations.(archive it)

 

If someone stakes a claim and builds a house or has furniture you don't like -- too bad for you.

If someone stakes a claim and illegal or offensive stuff starts to occur at the site -- let them know and give them a chance to fix it. Don't take it upon yourself to "fix" or "improve" their claim.

Oh, and I agree, and want no misunderstanding.... I have no inent of advancing a Cito of an entire cache!!!! This is NOT about objectionable caches, but rather content.

 

Spiff

Link to comment
It seems to come down to... "I know what trash is... and so should you, because its obvious athough I can't explain it" :-) (as condensation of the whole thread)

You know, that's a pretty biased view on my statements. If you truly don't know what garbage is, you can look up in one of the many online dictionaries. Of course, I know you know what garbage is - so why do you have to ask?

 

It's obvious what garbage is. I shouldn't have to clarify that.

 

However - maybe it's not clear that you know what garbage is. From your first post:

 

I'm sure it's a matter of time before I find a "pretty rock" that someone picked up along the way.

 

I personally think rocks are cool. Who are you to say that they are garbage?

 

Broken, damaged, destroyed items may be garbage.

 

Items you don't find interesting may not be garbage.

 

That's been my point. It's not about the obvious things - it's about the endless possibilities. If you have to debate wether or not it's garbage - it's probably not garbage.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

It seems to come down to... "I know what trash is... and so should you, because its obvious athough I can't explain it" :-)  (as condensation of the whole thread)

 

So where do you stand on removing another persons cache completely? Would you advocate removing any items you do not like without trading for them?

 

It may be that I am mis-understanding your intent. I thought you would remove a cache you felt was full of junk and I thought that you considered a half-chewed army figure to be junk.

 

Please clarify. Sorry in advance if I got it wrong.

Sure... and as you see from my previous... I in no way advocatate removing a cache! Not at all. I see their "claim" exactly as you do.

 

This all comes down to philosophy... and perhaps I can state it with a hypothetical example.

 

Say you were an especially cleaver guy... and decided to Cito the wilderness while heading toward a cache.

 

Then, having noting to trade with, decide to place your Cito material into the cash, and completely exchange the contents!

 

Now... here is the problem...

 

It's OK to Cito the wilderness, but once it goes into the box, its sacred, and nobody can touch it!

 

My question: why not? If things you would Cito from the wilderness are found in the box (regardless of how they actually got there, not necessarily the scenario I describe above), then why not Cito them, and perhaps leave one (or more) "real" swag(s) in it's place?

 

If we're expected to Cito properly, then why would we get confused the moment we opened the box?

 

The reason why I bring this up is that there is a subtle difference in this act. It is not a "trade" in the truest sense. It is a willing act of maintenance akin to Cito, that presumes that YOU, the Cito'er, know what should be and should not be found or left in a given context.

 

If you take something in trade from a cache as a "cache angel" of sorts... specifically to REMOVE something(s) as opposed to the assumed reason for the trade... taking something you value, then that is a philosophical difference that I suspect might deserve discussion.

 

Is one not arrogant to play the role of "cache angel", presuming what is "trash", and depriving another of it?

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

Edited by SpiffJr
Link to comment
This is NOT about objectionable caches, but rather content.

 

Spiff

Okay -- I can live with that.

 

My "challenge" (and mostly because it is both late and I am rather thick-headed), is understanding what we are trying to define as bad content.

 

My fear is that if I place an army figure into my cache, it will be seen as bad content. I know some kids that trade items which they consider out-right precious into a cache and which others might look at oddly. My daughter found a hideous plastic bug that she loves. It was missing a couple plastic legs and was pretty faded.

 

If something is seen as "bad" then people are welcome to trade it for what they consider "better", but I would prefer if they didn't just remove it altogether. If my cache starts getting "junky" chances are I'll catch it myself (I visit my caches about once a month)

 

Sadly, if you want to get cache quality to a higher standard, I think you are looking at a pretty endless pit. I always spend $30 or so on a cache and after about three weeks it has a "mix" of items that are both old, new and somewhere in-between -- ussually not to the original value. As an owner I both accept and appreciate that most people are really just there for the find and not for the "stuff". I've also placed books into my caches that I have asked to stay with the cache and people have done that.

 

I think most people aren't interested in some sort of Investment to Return model for the hobby. The real investment is time and the real return is experience. I'd be content if there was no trading, but it does make it a little more fun.

 

Selfless plug -- I currently bought 20 model kits for a multi-cache I'm creating -- it will be a blast for the first 20 people and fun for those that follow.

Link to comment

 

It's OK to Cito the wilderness, but once it goes into the box, its sacred, and nobody can touch it!

 

My question: why not? If things you would Cito from the wilderness are found in the box (regardless of how they actually got there, not necessarily the scenario I describe above), then why not Cito them, and perhaps leave one (or more) "real" swag(s) in it's place?

 

If we're expected to Cito properly, then why would we get confused the moment we opened the box?

Okay - no argument from me. Remove the word "perhaps" from your trading statement and I think we're on the same page.

 

If you want to place a flashlight in the cache and take out a broken dinosaur that is perfectly in-line with what I consider the spirit of the game.

 

I just would be in opposition to removing items without placing something in the cache. (although, I have to admit I wouldn't care too much either -- I mostly just want the cache logbook and the cache container to remain. If someone arrived at one of my caches and saw something they absolutely had to have, but didn't have a trade item with them -- it's theirs!)

 

I think I was erroneously envisioning my caches being trashed!

Link to comment
The reason why I bring this up is that there is a subtle difference in this act. It is not a "trade" in the truest sense. It is a willing act of maintenance akin to Cito, that presumes that YOU, the Cito'er, know what should be and should not be found or left in a given context.

 

If you take something in trade from a cache as a "cache angel" of sorts... specifically to REMOVE something(s) as opposed to the assumed reason for the trade... taking something you value, then that is a philosophical difference that I suspect might deserve discussion.

 

Is one not arrogant to play the role of "cache angel", presuming what is "trash", and depriving another of it?

Looks like we're both up late... I just saw your edited post.

 

It's up to you if you want to trade for value or trade for "angelic" motivation. I'm okay either way. It's not really cache maintenance -- it's more of a trade-sacrifice.

 

"I'd rather have that gold coin, but I'll go ahead and trade for the broken dinosaur to improve the quality of this cache" -- go for it!

 

People get funny (myself included) when they think someone is "maintaining" their caches. Most people don't really care what you trade for what. I have some themed caches and occasionally get items not in scope with the theme -- I don't really care.

Link to comment

Broken Window Syndrome:

 

'In a 1982 Atlantic Monthly article titled "Broken Windows," James Q. Wilson and George Kelling argued that disorder in a community, if left uncorrected, undercuts residents' own efforts to maintain their homes and neighborhoods and control unruly behavior. "If a window in a building is broken and left unrepaired," they wrote, "all the rest of the windows will soon be broken. . . . One unrepaired window is a signal that no one cares, so breaking more windows costs nothing. . . . Untended property becomes fair game for people out for fun or plunder."

Link to comment
I, at least, have tried to offer a philosophical basis for defining when that moment occurrs... where its removal reasonably improves the cache.

What you don't seem to understand is, that "point" is different for a great many different people. What if you found a McToy that had a crack in it? Someone would call it broken, and garbage. But what about the kid who wanted one of those, and doesn't care about a crack? Sure, if it's in 30 pieces in a cache, it's trash...and of no value. But such obvious instances have already been agreed upon by yourself and the other people in this thread.

 

Aside from something that obvious...just leave the dang thing in there. Like others have said, it's not your job to be the cache police. What you intend as being a helpful thing you are doing, can easily cross the line into being unethical.

Link to comment
What I am beginning to discover is that most people, even experienced GCers don't really know/agree on a basic philisophical tool set for cache contents except in the easy cases.

The fact that there is a lot of differing opinions on what is legitimate geocache material, is exactly why you should not take it upon yourself to trash out something, unless it's obvious trash or something obviously dangerous (as listed in the guidelines).

Link to comment
I think that this test about what people believe and do leaves me with one final conclusion:

 

Do what you think is right with regard to protecting and improving the sport, because in the end, nobody seems to know just what to do... and is in reality only doing what they think is right anyway... allowing themselves to belive in "rules" that don't in actual fact, exist.

 

Peace,

 

Spiff

so let me get this straight...

 

Almost everyone in this thread that has told you that obvious trash (candy wrappers, etc) is ok to remove, and other things that are not so clear, can be traded for....all those comments....have led you to THIS conclusion?

 

Then, I must conclude that you will accept only an answer that agrees with that you believe to be the right answer. It seems less likely, at this point, that you came here to get advice, and more likely that you came here to subject everyone to your opinion and argue with them if they don't agree.

 

You've, more or less, received your answer in as clear a manner as possible, from people trying hard not to show frustration with your iron will. Whether you choose to accept the answer, is something only you have control over.

Link to comment
Say you were an especially cleaver guy... and decided to Cito the wilderness while heading toward a cache.

 

Then, having noting to trade with, decide to place your Cito material into the cash, and completely exchange the contents!

 

Now... here is the problem...

 

It's OK to Cito the wilderness, but once it goes into the box, its sacred, and nobody can touch it!

Gyuh....People have said over and over, that obvious trash (and ANYONE of reasonable intelligence should know what obvious trash is) is fine for removal...and if you're not sure, then trade for it. You know that, and have repeatedly stated you would do that. So....what is your point? Seems you're arguing to argue...since it's all been said (ok...so I'm adding to it).

 

If you found trash in the woods and picked it up to take out, then it's still the same trash when you find it in a cache. No one said it was sacred once it's in the cache. In fact, pretty much everyone has said that taking out obvious trash is fine. Yet, still you argue against....well....what? I don't know anymore. You seem to be selectively ignoring the answers, in an effort to keep the argument going....no?

Link to comment
BUT YOU STILL HAVE NOT DEFINED A BASIS FOR REMOVAL! (for those times when they are NOT traded out, as you already admit "experienced" cachers do!)

 

You are *really* failing to make any contribution here...

 

(I read about this on the forum). In one state Park Rangers found a knife in a geocache. They banned all geocaches from their park system, because of the knife. Now geocaching has a black eye in that park system.

 

Also caches may be stumbled on by young children playing, or even by inmates on work crews. Do you really think items like knifes are ok for caches.

 

As for porn, let's leave morality out of it, and remember that this is a family friendly sport. Families don't want their children seeing porn.

Link to comment

 

Regardless of how many finds you have - you clearly state you are new. You are not the first new person to suggest this and I wonder if your opinions on trading, as well as your zeal for this cache content crusade will be the same after several hundred finds and many months of geocaching.

I wouldn't worry about that SD. We've all seen his type before (probably last Christmas) and we'll see it again (next Christmas). He'll never make it to several hundred finds. I doubt he'll make it to several dozen. He'll find 10-12, hide one, then lose interest and move on to something else. His one abandoned cache hide will soon turn into exactly the kind of cache he would trash out (if it doesn't start out that way).

 

Come on people, don't feed the troll!

Link to comment

Welcome to this game SpiffJr! I can see already what a valued contributer you will be! With your refreshing attitude and willingness to accept the opinions of others that have been at this game for a while I'm sure we will be willing to help out in any way in the unlikely event that you find something you don't already know. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
What you don't seem to understand is, that "point" is different for a great many different people.

 

My god, man...

 

of course I know what subjectiveity is... it's been discussed ad nauseum. (maybe you have not read the whole thead?)

 

If you think that this is what this conversation is hinging on, then perhaps I can convince you to assume that this is a FAR more subtle topic that is examining a far, far deeper philosophy than you are thinking about...

 

s

Edited by SpiffJr
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...