Has This Happened To You?

May 16, 2005

I'm kinda new to Geocaching and I ran into a situation I'm confused about.

I've had a log deleted because of a reference to nearby Indian burial mounds.

Over The waspi

Has anyone else ever had a log deleted because the cache owner didn't like what you posted?

How would you handle this situation? Forget about it, get pi$$ed off, or laugh it off.

Whats Geocaching stand on log-nazis?

Any info would be greatly appreciated!

May 16, 2005

Over The Wapsi

Lets see if this link works.

3.9k · May 16, 2005

Sometimes posts are deleted because it might have given away a clue. Can you show us what you posted? Maybe then we can advise.

With that being said, I would write the owner and politely ask him/her why they deleted it.

El Diablo

20.7k · May 16, 2005

It happens. My advise is the path of least resistence. Relog it using verbiage which is more pleasing to the owner.

I'll admit that this is not a perfect solution.

20.7k · May 16, 2005

Did you ask Welch why he deleted it. I suspect it is something fairly reasonable. Most things like this can be resolved through communication.

11.3k · May 16, 2005

I think this link will work.

If that was my cache, I think I would contact the person and ask them to edit their log if it was too much of a spoiler or included info I didn't want known.

I wouldn't delete the log . . . unless the finder didn't edit the entry in a timely manner.

May 16, 2005

Did the owner ask you to change the log for the cache ? I did a log once and I referenced something that the owner wanted to leave as a surprise , so he emailed me asking me to change it which I did . If the owner didn't even ask drop them a email asking why didn't you just ask instaed of deleting my log , I would have changed it . Be nice even if the owner isn't , take the higher road . Welcome to cahing (your new obsession) .

May 16, 2005

good topic for a noob like me. keeping track. thanks

May 16, 2005

good topic for a noob like me. keeping track. thanks

May 16, 2005

Hello,

Im writing to request you rename the pictures on this http://tinylink.com/?H3yf8OStpC log.

Since so far noone visiting the has claimed to be an archeologist, or give proof other than 'they look like mounds'. So labeling pictures as INDIAN mounds would be careless. If you want to call them them that, then please clearify the pictures. 'mounds' 'weird/odd mounds' 'mounds that look like indian mounds to Me' etc, would be ok.

thanks

welch

This is what the cache owner emailed me last week, I was gone last week and didn't get it til the weekend. To late.

What ticks me off is the other references to the same burial mounds in other postings.

2k · May 16, 2005

laugh it off :lol:

9.4k · May 16, 2005

What ticks me off is the other references to the same burial mounds in other postings.

Why? His email seemed pretty even handed. In fact he was fine with mounds or "looks like burial mounds"

Your photo said "Dead Indian Mound" without any knowledge.

Posting someone's email here in the forums is pretty bad form, IMO.

20.7k · May 16, 2005

I agree with most of what the big guy said. Welch's email sounded pretty calm and reasonable to me. He also gave you plenty of time to respond before he took further action.

I don't, however, have a problem with someone posting an email to better explain the circumstances surrounding his/her angst.

38.2k · May 16, 2005

On the surface it sounds awfully picky of him but he may have a good reason.

Edited May 16, 2005 by briansnat

6.4k · May 16, 2005

This is what the cache owner emailed me last week, I was gone last week and didn't get it til the weekend. To late.
What ticks me off is the other references to the same burial mounds in other postings.

So, he asked you to change it, and when you didn't after several days (Weeks? Your log is from April 17th and it looks like he deleted it on Sunday, May 15th from his note on the page. How is he to know you are away and not ignoring him?)

The only other mention I see on the cache is a question asking if the mounds are Indian burial mounds or not. I think the email he sent you was a pretty reasonable request; especially in light of the situation in South Carolina right now (scan this forum for topics on SC. Be prepared to spend a few hours reading.) Also, if those were known true indian burial mounds, I think the cache owner would be skating on thin ice with the guidelines for placing a cache and would be at risk of having it archived. Since you don't appear to have any special knowledge that they ARE indian burial mounds, and not something else (I've seen the same sort of mounds cause by huge trees uprooting and then decaying away, or left by farmers clearing fields, or used to make charcoal just to name a few examples) I don't see how the minor change requested is such a big deal to you, but it could be a VERY big deal to the future of geocaching in your area. He even sent you a link to your log (you should have got another link when he deleted it) to make it easy for you to relog it with the requested changes.

May 16, 2005

I think he was wrong in archiving the log.

Looks like dead indian burial mounds to me.

Did he think that they are live burial mounds??? :lol:

Why not take a shovel up there and start digging! :lol: :lol:

Edited May 16, 2005 by idratherbeinthewoods

6.4k · May 17, 2005

I think he was wrong in archiving the log.
Looks like dead indian burial mounds to me.

Did he think that they are live burial mounds???

Why not take a shovel up there and start digging!

You just said "Looks like dead indian burial mounds to me."

That's all the clarification the cache owner asked for. Unless you are a trained archeologist, you don't know that they ARE indian burial mounds for a fact.

They look like old charcoal mounds to me.

charcoal%20mound.jpg

Especially since your log said:

Large flat area surrounded by indian mounds. The flat area had to be man made.

That's EXACTLY the way they made charcoal in the 1800's.

May 17, 2005

Interesting but not likely in these parts. The Hopewellian indians that populated this area would bury their dead in mounds, mostly cone or animal shaped.

6.5k · May 17, 2005

Since this is my cache, and I'm a log nazi I explain why I deleted the log. I requested idratherbeinthewoods change the picture names to something other than stating they were Indian Mounds (see above he's posted the email), I did not request he edit the log or delete the picture, just rename them. This request was like a week and a half to two weeks ago, I checked my email trash but don't have the copy for a specific time and date. I received no response, I still haven't received a reply email btw.

So far this afternoon idratherbeinthewoods has posted a note to the cache page, posted to the local groups forum, and sent me a PM threw the local forum, and now I see has posted here. I deleted the note on the page because it didn't add anything to cache, I sent idratherbeinthewoods and email explaining why I had deleted the log (that one I do still have and I will post it). The thread in the local forum was closed by a MOD there for being rude, and idratherbeinthewoods was advised to take in up in email or PM. The PM I also responded to, referring idratherbeinthewoods to the email I had already sent.

I'm sorry that idratherbeinthewoods is taking the deleted log so personal.

[GEO] Copy of email to idratherbeinthewoods
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 14:46:44 -0700

Show Full Headers Back To [Trash]

--This message was sent through the Geocaching.com web site--

-- Copy of email sent to idratherbeinthewoods --

because I asked you edit the pic names, you didn't and I didn't see a

link to delete just the pictures.

You're welcome to repost the log. yes there are referrences about the

'indian mounds' in other logs, but only you posted pictures saying

they were indian mounds.

I don't know what they are. they could be indian mounds. they could

be an early settler trash heap. they could be back fill from a now

gone cabin or shack built in flat area. they could a very odd one in

a million pile of rotten tree.

if you want to think they are indian mounds, then do so, but please

don't post pictures claiming thats what they are. Claim that's MAYBE

what they are.

welch

User's Profile:

http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=67...dc-4ce8b152a7d6

Oh, and since I'm sure someone will ask why...

I wanted the name changed because I was concerned that if some damage (I don't find the shovel comment very funny :lol: ) should happen to the mounds of whatever, some uninformed person might decide that geocachers had done it. Or at least encouraged some destructive person by posting pictures of Dead Indian Mounds. Yes, I realize its a very small difference in 'Indian Mounds' and 'might be Indian Mound', but it was a lot of difference for my peace of mind!

9.2k · May 17, 2005

It is important to note that the cache is hidden in an Iowa State Park, pursuant to a permit that Welch obtained from the park managers. I, too, am fairly picky about log contents for my caches where I know that the land manager is probably reading along. On the few occasions when I've asked someone to edit out a comment, I've had no problem. It's usually a cordial exchange of e-mails.

24.7k · May 17, 2005

Hello,
Im writing to request you rename the pictures on this http://tinylink.com/?H3yf8OStpC log.

Since so far noone visiting the has claimed to be an archeologist, or give proof other than 'they look like mounds'. So labeling pictures as INDIAN mounds would be careless. If you want to call them them that, then please clearify the pictures. 'mounds' 'weird/odd mounds' 'mounds that look like indian mounds to Me' etc, would be ok.

thanks

welch

This is what the cache owner emailed me last week, I was gone last week and didn't get it til the weekend. To late.

What ticks me off is the other references to the same burial mounds in other postings.

You have your answer. The nearby location may or may not be burial mounds. Read the thread on the state of SC House Bill to see the dammage that something seemingly small but very controversial can cause.

Edited May 17, 2005 by Renegade Knight

24.7k · May 17, 2005

Don't take it personally. You can still log your find you just have to make the tweak.

May 17, 2005

You emailed me Sunday, May 8th at appx 5:30 pm. I was half way to Chicago when it was sent. I returned Friday, May 13. Read your request on the 14th, log deleted early Sunday morning, the 15th.

I have emailed the Jones Co. Tourism Association,Anamosa Historical Society,

and park ranger Dennis Murphy, requesting more info on the "weird/odd mounds,early settler trash heap,back fill from an old shack,or a very odd one in a million pile of rotting trees". (yea thats what they are)

Will keep you informed.

See ya in the woods

9.4k · May 17, 2005

Get the chip off your shoulder. Bottom line is he has the right to delete your log. If you don't like it, (everybody now...)

May 17, 2005

So let me see if I have this right,Geocaching stance is that cache owner can delete any log for any reason.

9.4k · May 17, 2005

So let me see if I have this right,Geocaching stance is that cache owner can delete any log for any reason.

Yeah. Even if a jerk decides to delete logs in retaliation for his (or her) logs being deleted.

May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,

your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,
your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

Talk about hostile and juvenle for some little post that could easily be changed with the click of some keys. Too stubborn to do it? Or just too proud of your ignorance?!

24.7k · May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,
your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

If you are going to quit over your right to do somethoing other than the right thing, Good luck with that.

9.4k · May 17, 2005

You'll have to forgive me for a moment. I was not in any way indicating that you were a jerk. I assume that you're a nice guy and wouldn't retaliate in such a way. I was just indicating how someone would be a jerk if they did that. It's like being accosted by one guy and slapping some random person to make yourself feel better. It just isn't nice.

Generally there should be a certain cordiality that should be offered to another geocacher when they post a log. It's a nice thing to post a log and in many ways compliments the cache owner. Most owners live for such a thing.

When a log is deleted it is assumed that the cache listing owner would give a courtesy and email the owner of the log before doing so (unless it was particularly awful). It does seem to me that in this situation Welch was pretty nice about contacting you. Honestly it didn't seem like a big deal to me but I would empathize with having your cache log deleted. That does suck.

At this point you have two options: first, you could just copy and paste the log and, if you wish to upload the photos, change it to a more appropriate name based on what info you have. Or you could refuse to post the log. That is your choice.

Welch and any other cache owner has the right to maintain his cache listing as he sees fit. So I'm not quite understanding the problem here. Obviously you don't like the situation but there isn't really much else that can be done.

2k · May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,
your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

Founder of Groundspeak, actually.

9.4k · May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,
your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

Founder of Groundspeak, actually.

Yes. Chilehead is the founder of geocache, as are most geocachers here. But now we're just being silly (so don't take it seriously).

2k · May 17, 2005

Hey Jeremy,
your profile shows you to be the founder of geocache. Quite an honor. Now please re-emburse me for the remainder of my Premium Membership.

I don't need this shi........

Founder of Groundspeak, actually.

Yes. Chilehead is the founder of geocache, as are most geocachers here. But now we're just being silly (so don't take it seriously).

Actually I founded the internet first (with Al Gore), just to support geocache. But the internet seems to be used for other things, but I can't imagine why.

1.5k · May 17, 2005

Actually I founded the internet first (with Al Gore), just to support geocache. But the internet seems to be used for other things, but I can't imagine why.

Yes, but I time warped back to invent the GPS system to enable all of this nonsense!!!

:lol:

EDIT to make this on topic:

Seriously, you don't know for sure that they're burial mounds and rather than open the can of worms, the cache owner asked you to change your picture caption - not log, not delete the pictures, just slight text change.

You've taken offense and I'm sorry to hear it. I think this has been blown out of proportion and just take a deep breath...it's just a game and we're all trying to make it fun.

Edited May 17, 2005 by KoosKoos

May 17, 2005

Calling them Indian burial mounds would probally result in looters making a trip to the site. And they would bring shovels. Mabey the cache owner is just trying to protect an area that may or may not be of some future archeological importance. The rules about placing a cache on an archaeological or historic site can't be enforced for yet to be discovered sites. He might be thinking the same thing so is sensitive about referencing it in the log???

24.7k · May 17, 2005

...Has anyone else ever had a log deleted because the cache owner didn't like what you posted?
How would you handle this situation? Forget about it, get pi$$ed off, or laugh it off....

To answer your question.

Yes. I could not figure out the problem. I emailed them and they did not respond. So I wrote another log that was actually talked about the cache and that one got to stay.

I've also had two requests to modify DNF logs because they contained spoilers. They didn't help me find the cache but it was easy enough to comply. I don't have time to worry about it so I comply.

May 17, 2005

Calling them Indian burial mounds would probally result in looters making a trip to the site. And they would bring shovels. Mabey the cache owner is just trying to protect an area that may or may not be of some future archeological importance. The rules about placing a cache on an archaeological or historic site can't be enforced for yet to be discovered sites. He might be thinking the same thing so is sensitive about referencing it in the log???

Do geocachers loot archaeological sites?

This is in a State park built by the CCC in the 30's.

Trails lead upto and around "unknown mounds".

Its not like this is off the beaten path.

24.7k · May 17, 2005

...Do geocachers loot archaeological sites?
This is in a State park built by the CCC in the 30's.

Trails lead upto and around "unknown mounds".

Its not like this is off the beaten path.

No Geocachers don't loot sites. However had you looked into the problem with legislation in South Carolina one of their issues (they keep bringing up more) is that caches show the coordinates to certain locations that can be used by others who might.

May 17, 2005

No one is attacking you, man.

Don't be so argumentative. You need to look at the whole picture...There was a polite request to modify your post, so why not be polite, and modify your post.

It's only a game/hobby, and the deleter of the post has every right to delete your post... fair or not.

Just modify your post, and move on in life.

Just my 2 cents, take it, or LEAVE IT.

Edited May 17, 2005 by DJ Calamari

38.2k · May 17, 2005

Don't be so argumentative. You need to look at the whole picture...There was a polite request to modify your post, so why not be polite, and modify your post.

Are you insane? If people do stuff like complying with polite requests to modify logs, then how are they going to come to the forums to whine about log deletions?

6.7k · May 17, 2005

I'm still snickering over Jeremy being the founder of geocache, or Groundspeak (choose one) and it being "an honor"!

I haven't met Jeremy yet, but suspect that there are moments like this when he wishes he wasn't so honored!

And, the result of years of hard work, team building, shrewd investment, careful management, wisdom and a bit of good luck isn't honor - it's a huge accomplishment!

Have fun!

Ed

1.3k · May 17, 2005

Hey, if I delete all of the logs on my cache, I can get all of the FTF seekers interested all over again!

Seriously though, the request to change the wording to "possible" or "what might be" or "looks like" Indian burial mounds is completely reasonable. Why are you arguing over this request?

1.1k · May 17, 2005

Don't be so argumentative. You need to look at the whole picture...There was a polite request to modify your post, so why not be polite, and modify your post.

Are you insane? If people do stuff like complying with polite requests to modify logs, then how are they going to come to the forums to whine about log deletions?

LOL how true how true.

Then just TNLNSL and leave it at that. Why make yourself and the cache owner miserable.

cheers

2.1k · May 17, 2005

There was a polite request to modify your post, so why not be polite, and modify your post.

Agreed.

Any cacher can have a bad day once in awhile and get upset for what would appear to the rest of us as a small issue. I think the OP wasn't aware of the fact that cache owners can request logs be modified and can even delete them if they see fit.

idratherbeinthewoods appears to otherwise be having fun with this sport and has an excellent hide-to-find ratio. Great contribution to the sport.

Has This Happened To You?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation