Serious Questions, Serious Answers requested.

[Deceangi]

I'd like serious answers to the following questions.

This hobby is about the finding of Hidden Containers, and signing the log book contained within. I presume I'm correct with that statement?

So the questions are:

How can a find on a missing cache be made and justified, when all the finder found was the cache location? No container! No Log Book, hence no signature/stamp/mark in the log book by the finder!

And why would finders not at least Post a Needs Maintenance Log, rather than a Find log. If the CO had already ignored other false logs, why make a false log and not Post a Needs Archiving LOG. Which the cache actually justified! As the false find log and a failure to post a NM/NA log, was creating a situation where those who search for the cache after these logs. Are just searching for a container which is not there!

What happened to the Great Community we had? Allowing people to make a journey to a cache that the false finder deliberately knows is not there!

Here's some numbers to be going on with, before making a answer

First False Find Log, DNF,DNF, DNF's, Second False Find Log, DNF, third False Find Log, DNF, Fourth False Find Log, Five False Find Log, DNF. Those logs were made over a 16 month period. That's Five False FIND Logs, and SIX DNF logs. So that's Six correct logs, covering six visits which should have never taken place! If the First False Find Log, had been honest and posted a DNF and a Needs Maintenance Log.

And do you know what's more saddening? That this particular cache proves that a certain region, despite claims to the opposite, is just about Numbers! And to be honest it's numbers by any means As those who made the False finds have 16075 finds between them, so not inexperienced cachers.

Deci

[muttoneer]

You've sort of answered your own questions there, but...

How can a find on a missing cache be made and justified, when all the finder found was the cache location? No container! No Log Book, hence no signature/stamp/mark in the log book by the finder!

I'd say it could be justified in exceptional circumstances. For example, Cacher A hires climbing gear and treks sixteen miles to a cliff to tackle "Extreme Death Cache", a 5/5 with very few finds. He spends four hours climbing only to find an obvious hole at the coordinates which matches the hint exactly, along with evidence of searching. He takes a photo and contacts the CO with details of what he found, and makes a DNF log. Shortly afterwards another cacher logs to say he found the cache the previous day and dropped it down the mountain. In light of the effort gone to by the unsuccessful cacher the CO says Cacher A might as well claim a find (and while he's still got the climbing gear, could he please pop back up and stick a replacement there for him?)

In such circumstances I reckon a find on a missing cache can be justified. If it's your average bit of tupperware lurking amongst the brambles of a canal towpath then I have less sympathy.

And why would finders not at least Post a Needs Maintenance Log, rather than a Find log. If the CO had already ignored other false logs, why make a false log and not Post a Needs Archiving LOG. Which the cache actually justified! As the false find log and a failure to post a NM/NA log, was creating a situation where those who search for the cache after these logs. Are just searching for a container which is not there!

No excuse for not posting a NM log if you're absolutely sure the cache has gone. Any doubts and you should just post a DNF. Any owner should check on their cache after a flurry of DNFs.

What happened to the Great Community we had? Allowing people to make a journey to a cache that the false finder deliberately knows is not there!

Erm, that's down to the individual. Don't like this whole scenario myself...

[alicephilippa]

How can a find on a missing cache be made and justified, when all the finder found was the cache location?

In my mind, and I'm by no means as prolific a finder as some here abouts, it can't. If I've found the location and it is obvious that the cache has gone awol I'll post a DNF and an NM log. If the owner then were to tell me that I can claim the find I'd claim the find, that though is her call, not mine.

[JeremyR]

Signed the logbook = Found It log.
Didn't sign the logbook = DNF log.
Think it's gone = NM log.

Anything else is just playing silly beggars. People always say "they're only fooling themselves" but the problem is, as you described, once one person has false logged a cache, you can be sure more will follow suit and then it gets to be a problem, esp. if the CO is not inclined to maintain the listing and delete bogus logs (as they're required to do). It should be pretty clear to the CO if a log is bogus.

[Deceangi]

The cache in question was a D2 T1 and happened to be in the North West of England, hence me asking the questions on here. Only one person who logged the find even though they all admitted in their on-line log, that they were logging it as a find despite not finding the container had less than 500 finds. In fact that one person had less than 100 finds. The logs were made in the last 18 months.

It wasn't a Extreme Terrain cache, which if the owner agreed would justify logging a find with out signing the log. It's owned by someone with a major history of ignoring Maintenance. So it was obvious that False logs would never be delete.


~deleted~

Deci

[PopUpPirate]

It would probably help to know which cache.

[The Phantom Camel Train]

Signed the logbook = Found It log.
Didn't sign the logbook = DNF log.
Think it's gone = NM log.

Jeremy, I fully agree with you that if you don't find the cache you don't log it which is why we log so may DNFs. Today's figures of 10 finds and 2 dnfs are typical for us. When logging dnfs we have had COs tell us , yes its gone but you can log it anyway but we decline these offers. However, at this time of year we find many log books are so wet they are impossible to sign. We do usually inform the cache owner of this but if I've found the cache container then to my way of thinking this is a find.We do sometimes carry spare log books and replace the sodden log book but with the number of soaked log books these days this is difficult to do on every occasion. I'd be interested to hear the views of others on this.

A couple of weeks ago we had an interesting dilemma when we were in Italy, the only cache we could find was solidly frozen into a concrete wall. We could touch it but to extract it from its hole without damaging the cache was impossible. Would you log the cache?

To save Jeremy searching our records I will reveal that we did log the cache, this was possibly our only cache in Italy as the rest were buried under lots of snow and the first cache we had ever found whilst skiing.
Ray

[alicephilippa]

Knowing that little bit more. That apart from one they were all well experienced cachers does make me wonder how many more of their logs are less than honest.

I'd never claim a find if I haven't physically had the cache in my hands, it defeats the object of the game. There have been caches for one reason or another that I haven't signed the log, but I always have evidence that I've actually found it.

At one point I did wonder what the point of checking log books against online logs, but now it does tempt me to check.

[JeremyR]

Jeremy, I fully agree with you that if you don't find the cache you don't log it which is why we log so may DNFs. Today's figures of 10 finds and 2 dnfs are typical for us. When logging dnfs we have had COs tell us , yes its gone but you can log it anyway but we decline these offers. However, at this time of year we find many log books are so wet they are impossible to sign. We do usually inform the cache owner of this but if I've found the cache container then to my way of thinking this is a find.We do sometimes carry spare log books and replace the sodden log book but with the number of soaked log books these days this is difficult to do on every occasion. I'd be interested to hear the views of others on this.

Well, I suppose I could have written "Left some kind of permanent record of your presence and the finding of the cache" and still felt happy with it but it wouldn't have made for such a short and snappy post . Of course there are exceptions to 'logged it = found it' like leaving a temporary logbook, etc. I've even heard of muddy fingerprints on the log book in the absence of a pen before now. But ultimately, IMO if you can't leave some kind of record that you were there or upload a 'cache in hand' photo, etc, then it's a DNF in my eyes.

A couple of weeks ago we had an interesting dilemma when we were in Italy, the only cache we could find was solidly frozen into a concrete wall. We could touch it but to extract it from its hole without damaging the cache was impossible. Would you log the cache?

Me personally? I'd probably log a DNF but I'm well aware I'm a bit of a stickler . YMMV, though and it's between you and the cache owner & is perhaps not what Deci was on about since the cache was demonstrably there so you weren't in any danger of misleading future finders.

To save Jeremy searching our records

I wasn't going to

[The Phantom Camel Train]

Well, I suppose I could have written "Left some kind of permanent record of your presence and the finding of the cache" and still felt happy with it but it wouldn't have made for such a short and snappy post . Of course there are exceptions to 'logged it = found it' like leaving a temporary logbook, etc. I've even heard of muddy fingerprints on the log book in the absence of a pen before now. But ultimately, IMO if you can't leave some kind of record that you were there or upload a 'cache in hand' photo, etc, then it's a DNF in my eyes.

We did have a go at signing them but you wouldn't be able to read the name properly, but after that you would have to work out who the heck "TPCT" is

[ferreter38]

If you didn't find the container and sign the log (or take a photo of said log if it was too wet) it's a DNF. If COs would take notice of a shedful of DNFs this situation need not arise. All it actually needs is for the CO to check whether or not the cache is in situ - if they can't do it i.e. they are ill or away on holiday ask a previous finder if they could check it out. If a previous finder has stated that it is indeed MIA for heaven's sake take notice and disable or archive the cache, don't just do nowt, especially as someone has already done the work for you!

BTW I have given permission for a pair of cachers to turn a DNF on one of my caches into a find, they'd described the location perfectly and when I actually checked the following day it was MIA. I emailed them to give them permission to claim it as a find, by this time the replacement cache was in place, I also thanked them for the head's up regarding the missing cache. By return I received an email thanking me, in which they stated that they'd had a lousy day on that particular outing 4 finds and 6 DNFs - I've also been given permission to claim a find when the cache is MIA, however, I have not claimed it until the CO said I could and then I've made it clear in the log what has occured. The CO has then disabled the cache until they could replace it. In these instances I've been with someone who had found the cache previously

If I see a load of DNFs on a cache I wouldn't generally bother going looking for it... and if I do it could only be a short search especially if the cachers who'd been unable to find the cache were experienced, and that would only be if I was passing near to the cache - I wouldn't make a special journey to see if I could find it. I would also log it as a DNF.

[Ryuchan]

Signed the logbook = Found It log.
Didn't sign the logbook = DNF log.
Think it's gone = NM log.

I'm really simple, and go with the above, no signing of paper = no find. That's to me in my short career what is at the heart of caching : finding a box and signing a log!

I recently spotted some belgian cachers hitting London, happily logging finds while caches had vanished (i tried for one in the series and couldnt get to the area, hence me spotting this), I wonder how many more of their 3k+ finds are like this.
if its a trad cache, there is a log. See J's quote on how to proceed.

But, they can do whatever they like, I can't stop them, as unfortunately they are not my caches.

[LoznSte]

Signed the logbook = Found It log.
Didn't sign the logbook = DNF log.
Think it's gone = NM log.

I'm really simple, and go with the above, no signing of paper = no find. That's to me in my short career what is at the heart of caching : finding a box and signing a log!

I recently spotted some belgian cachers hitting London, happily logging finds while caches had vanished (i tried for one in the series and couldnt get to the area, hence me spotting this), I wonder how many more of their 3k+ finds are like this.
if its a trad cache, there is a log. See J's quote on how to proceed.

But, they can do whatever they like, I can't stop them, as unfortunately they are not my caches.

It may not be your cache but you could bring it to the attention of the CO that FALSE logs are being made and post a note on the cache page if there is a problem with access to the area. You may just stop any future cachers wasting their time

[PopUpPirate]

C'mon Deceangi spill the beans - we can't read between the lines!

[The Syllogiser]

OK Deci (me ol pal Dave ) Seriously -- I have left no stone unturned - then this log came to mind >>> and until this weekend -- longgggggg forgottennnnn

November 28, 2008 by The Syllogiser (1605 found)
Well .. if this is the 'flaw' the cache container was tucked up in ... the cache has gone .. so claiming it .. If you want to delete this log OK .. but it does give you time to replace or otherwise the cache .. nice interesting place for one ...


Your reviewer's note on this cache makes a lot of sense - I cached this with a person of 5000+ and both thought it was fair enough to leave it to the cache owner to respond <one way or another> It would seem that he (it) hasn't. It was "found" continuously until a few days before we 'nudged' the CO with our 'request'.
Strangely enough - on the same trip - the same thing happenned somewhere else , and the cache owner DID respond , and appropriate action taken.

I suppose your's, and mine, and no doubt many others thoughts are - having put a great deal of effort and finance into a day out - it's worth "asking"
I totally agree that "taking it for granted" is a bit of a "long shot" ...

I , like several others, who have not heard from the Cache Owner, have taken "the appropriate actions" and thank you Dave for your time and diligence in hunting out these "virtuals"
No doubt Stormydown will put a replacement cache near here, in her local area, to make up for it and keep us all happy

[Ryuchan]

It may not be your cache but you could bring it to the attention of the CO that FALSE logs are being made and post a note on the cache page if there is a problem with access to the area. You may just stop any future cachers wasting their time

A note was posted informing the co and whomever looked that the area could be shut for up to a week. I however do not wish to waste my time playing cache police. That's the CO's part. A few options here:

1, He'll see it and take action
2, He'll see it and not care
3, Be awol , nothing happens.

If I already have to mail him to mention this, chances are he already doesn't care(or is awol) about the 'fake' logs/cache being missing. If I am going for the cache I'll just whack a NM/NA on it.

[scubaclogger]

Well for me its cache = find, no cache = DNF. If a number of DNF's have been posted then NM will follow. Add to watch list and if no action is taken I will consider a NA log.
(I have logged a small number of caches without signing the log but have always taken a photo of the cache as proof of find)

I noticed two logs a couple of weeks ago on city centre caches where the caches were missing so the cacher at one left a nano and the other a piece of paper under a stone. The second one has now been replaced by the CO after a NA. This was done by a cacher who has 4000+ finds and i'm sure would delete logs if it was done to one of there own caches.

We have been down this road before I believe so will leave it at that.

[Deceangi]

I wasn't naming names, I was just so annoyed to see so many multiple Find logs by experienced cachers. On a cache which was missing. Yet not one posted even a NM log. That's not being the cache police, just looking out for the next person intending to go and find it.

There are a lot of moans on this forum about crap caches. People want good caches to find, yet they won't help improve the quality of caching in the UK. It took a low numbered cacher to point that cache out to me, I didn't and don't have the time to search for such issues.

Please help build up the quality in the UK, be active about posting Needs Maintenance logs, let the Reviewers know when a cache is turning into a piece of crap. There is no need to post a Needs Archiving log. Lets see if we can get standards up. By being pro-active about quality in the UK. We'll never achieve perfection, but we can make standards better in the UK.

icache has helped in that, despite many complaints against it. Including one person making a threat to complain to Groundspeak [I don't know if they did]

By Quality what do I mean? Something everyone can agree on on

Caches Active and ready to be found
Caches being Maintained by their owners, or a indication of why not and when it will.
No damaged or missing containers, wet or full log books on a long term basis.

As to locations and access to them ie: Drive By or Long Walks. That's not quality, but individual components. Each person having a person preference/ability about components. However a location covered in litter or dangerous items, can be considered to be part of Quality.

The UK Reviewer teams aim, is to get the status of Disabled caches down to less than 2 months. Unless there is a justifiable reason, with any cache going over that threshold being warned and actioned if needed. The community by posting Needs Maintenance logs straight away, and not leaving it for someone else to do. Can help improve the quality of caches in the UK. Lets lead by example, and hopefully the rest of the community and those joining the hobby will follow.

Lets see if we can reach a situation where the UK Caching Community, can be permanently proud. Because visitors from other countries go back to their communities and say. I've never seen so many properly maintained caches in a area before.

I was recently ashamed by a comment off a non UK cacher, who had done a search for a planned holiday here. Who stated, that he could not believe that there was so many caches Disabled for a extended period within 50 miles of where he planned to visit. At that time there was 1,300+ caches Disabled for over 2 Months. Hardly any of which had a NM log on them, despite having multiple finds. Long books were full, or wet. Containers were broken. That number should have been less than a quarter, if the UK community had posted NM followed by either a NA or contacted a Reviewer about the cache.

You want some sort of quality? Time to stop moaning, and start posting posting Needs Maintenance or Needs Archiving/Contact a Reviewer. And stop treating such actions as being the CACHE POLICE. Alternatively to a NA log, first contact the owner, then do it again. Then contact a Reviewer as a last resort!

I'll keep posting the same message, until the UK Community start getting off their backsides. And start helping to improve the quality of caching in the UK as described above]! it's down to the community and not just the UK Reviewers. At the end of the day there are just 6 of us, compared to the thousands of active UK cachers. 6 can make a small difference, but together the community can make a huge difference by working together!

Deci

[Lizzardman]

Ok, it has been brought to my attention by another cacher (who will remain nameless) that I am one of the guilty ones...

My post clearly states that the cache is not there, so other cachers would not be coming to attempt to find it unless they were illiterate!!!

It seems my crime is to have not posted a needs maintenance log, and for that I apologise.

However I resent the tone of your initial post...

As many people who know me would hopefully vouch, I am entirely honest (and have been in the 6 years I have been caching), and I stated on the log that I had not found the cache, and if the owner wanted to delete my log, they could do so...I had clearly found the hiding place but the cache was missing.

It is not all 'about the numbers' as you state most NW cachers are all about - I am passionate about geocaching and have reached my total of over 5,000 caches in over 6 years as a cacher - not like some other cachers who have been in the game for far less and have far more finds by collecting lots of drivebys.

Many of my caches have been up mountains and on long walks where I have only found a few caches in one day - so I find your comments not only wrong but offensive...

Deci - you do a great job for which we are all grateful but if you had a problem with this, you should have contacted the cachers concerned directly - not posted a deliberately antagonising post on the forums where I can only assume you are trying to 'embarrass' respecting geocachers (and I know the other cachers involved and would vouch for their integrity).

By the way, I have deleted my log - I hope you are satisfied.

[ferreter38]

Deci, does it matter whether or not the cacher posting an N.A. has actually been to look for the cache or is posting the N.A. because they'd actually like to do the cache but with so many DNFs they don't feel as though it would be worth their while?

[Ryuchan]

Deci,

Uhm, seeing as I am the one who mentioned not wanting to play cache police, allow me to explain

to me cache police : mailing people/co's etc, trying to resolve things

I dont bother, nor do I want to waste my time in such a mannor. I just post NM/NA if needed, to me thats MY part of what I can do and as far as I understand thats what they were designed for. I dont see posting a NM/NA as being cache police, it's just common sense as a cacher to do so. So perhaps you misunderstood what I meant.

hope that explains things, at least from my end with regards to the 'cache police' phrase.

[alicephilippa]

stated on the log that I had not found the cache, and if the owner wanted to delete my log, they could do so...I had clearly found the hiding place but the cache was missing.

That's the thing though. You'd found a location that you believed to be the location of the cache, you didn't find the cache. That to me is a DNF not a Find. 5 finds or 5000 finds it is still a DNF log.

There have been 2 or 3 caches where I've logged a DNF but I know with almost absolute certainty that I've found the location but the cache has gone missing. I would not presume to log it as a find, if the cache owner contacted me and said I could log it as a find then I would, but only then.

Deci, does it matter whether or not the cacher posting an N.A. has actually been to look for the cache or is posting the N.A. because they'd actually like to do the cache but with so many DNFs they don't feel as though it would be worth their while?

I know I wouldn't dream of posting an NA log if I've not been to GZ. Just seems wrong somehow. I'd be tempted to PM the CO and if no response PM the reviewer saying that I've concerns over such and such a cache.

[Lizzardman]

stated on the log that I had not found the cache, and if the owner wanted to delete my log, they could do so...I had clearly found the hiding place but the cache was missing.

That's the thing though. You'd found a location that you believed to be the location of the cache, you didn't find the cache. That to me is a DNF not a Find. 5 finds or 5000 finds it is still a DNF log.

There have been 2 or 3 caches where I've logged a DNF but I know with almost absolute certainty that I've found the location but the cache has gone missing. I would not presume to log it as a find, if the cache owner contacted me and said I could log it as a find then I would, but only then.

Deci, does it matter whether or not the cacher posting an N.A. has actually been to look for the cache or is posting the N.A. because they'd actually like to do the cache but with so many DNFs they don't feel as though it would be worth their while?

I know I wouldn't dream of posting an NA log if I've not been to GZ. Just seems wrong somehow. I'd be tempted to PM the CO and if no response PM the reviewer saying that I've concerns over such and such a cache.

The hiding place of the cache was a tiny crack in a wall - there could have been no other place it could have possibly been, so out of my 5065 finds, I have decided to make a call on this cache because I was so sure...

..as you can see on my cache page if you chose to, I have made many many DNF's over my time as a cacher - in some cases I have DNf'd a cache 3 or 4 times before I have found it (that happened about 4 weeks ago on a Sparrow Boys cache for instance).

So I made a mistake on this 1 cache, (which because of the circumstances, other cachers did the same thing apparently) and have deleted my log accordingly...

...can we move on?

[LoznSte]

Hi all

I remember this cache but not the name and I think we may have had a FTF on it

Sad when you remember a cache from Dons pic.

If I remember it was a micro hidden in the coping stone of a wall around a church and it was in that little hole. Not an easy find and not made easy because it was opposite a playschool or school of some sort.

We all know what peeps think when strangers are walking up and down outside schools

[The Syllogiser]

Hi all

I remember this cache but not the name and I think we may have had a FTF on it

Sad when you remember a cache from Dons pic.

If I remember it was a micro hidden in the coping stone of a wall around a church and it was in that little hole. Not an easy find and not made easy because it was opposite a playschool or school of some sort.

We all know what peeps think when strangers are walking up and down outside schools

I think we should be careful not to "justify" what we do / did. It's not too productive. As I posted above, and you have here, many of us know when we are BEATEN - and log a DNF - it's no shame - part of the fun ...
but
.. on a few occasions, when someone cannot 'do their duty' because of work / holidays/ divorce / health many of us pop a post to ask if there is a problem / why it's missing .. and most time I personally have had a PM returned thanking for the 'heads up' and their comment = log it or - hard luck you DNFed always worth a try you can expect a cheeky reply if you were right
However
As the reviewer points out - and I have intimated more than once - The cache state REFLECTS the person - If I invite you to tea and scones you would EXPECT a good reception - when a cache is placed - surely the same applies .... you EXPECT a good experience ........

Dangerous suggestion coming up Try being a little less diplomatic if you are not experiencing the "welcome" you EXPECTED when you found a cache. As the reviewer points out - the comment should be "welcome" and "helpful" -- if the CO does not take it that way ---------- they can EXPECT the consequences

[ChannelFadge]

Please help build up the quality in the UK, be active about posting Needs Maintenance logs, let the Reviewers know when a cache is turning into a piece of crap.

How long does it usually take for a reviewer to take action?
I only ask because a series I had done a while ago had many missing/damaged caches. Despite numerous NM and DNF logs, and eventually some NA logs, there is no sign of maintainance from the cache owner, they are still listed as active (some of them have been this way for almost a year). I emailed another reviewer pointing out these caches. It was about a week ago and still these caches are listed as active. Meanwhile the CO logs finds on other caches in the near area, so obviously they are active (especially when a FTF is involved they seem to be quite quick to shift their a*se).

[Ryuchan]

thats something I have been thinking about, it seems the current NM log is quite impotent when it comes to people just ignoring them.

How about if lets say 2 NM logs in the space of lets say 4 weeks (ie, there needs to be 4 weeks or more in between them) will trigger an automatic system NA request, flagging it to the reviewer?

NM gets ignored by a lot of cachers (including 'high profile' cachers) in favor of actually going out caching, which is the wrong way around. The long term x DNF/NM caches usually have a history of multiple NM logs, so why not build in this small step to trigger these events?

[ChannelFadge]

How about if lets say 2 NM logs in the space of lets say 4 weeks (ie, there needs to be 4 weeks or more in between them) will trigger an automatic system NA request, flagging it to the reviewer?

That could lead to a lot of difficult caches being diabled just because theyre hard to find. I recently found one that had multiple DNF's, I was the first to find in about 11 months. From reading the logs I thought it was missing for sure, but it was there, just well hidden.

[Ryuchan]

How about if lets say 2 NM logs in the space of lets say 4 weeks (ie, there needs to be 4 weeks or more in between them) will trigger an automatic system NA request, flagging it to the reviewer?

That could lead to a lot of difficult caches being diabled just because theyre hard to find. I recently found one that had multiple DNF's, I was the first to find in about 11 months. From reading the logs I thought it was missing for sure, but it was there, just well hidden.

That's only the case if the CO is absent, an Owner Maintenance log clears it eh?

*edit - I am talking purely about multiple NM logs, not DNF's, just to clarify

[PopUpPirate]

Dave, I think it's antagonistic and divisive to post on such an issue which relates directly to a well-known cacher here. That's why I deliberately didn't post a response as I didn't know the specifics of the case.

For the record, I don't think Lizzardman did anything wrong here. It was completely obvious where the cache was, so a Find would be justified imo - there are circumstances when it is acceptable - and yes personal judgement plays a part here. The old adage "we play it our own way" comes to the fore here. Now - that said - if a cacher gave up because of a serious case of CBA, then of course it shouldn't be a find. But when the cacher is 100% (not 99%) sure that the cache is gone, then in some circumstances, logging a find is imo acceptable. For instance, cache on the moors, clue "lone tree", with a stone at the base, and a perfect cache sized imprint beneath it. If my "found" log in this instance was good enough for the cache setter then that's good enough for me....

....followed by a Needs Maintenance - or, better still, with a temporary replacement. I know the issue of temp. replacement caches has been contentious, and I am completely against false logging. Tbh community maintenance is like walking on eggshells at times, and "why should I bother" would be a reasonable response. Many of those who have community maintenance performed on their caches are grateful for the karma effect. Speaking of karma and putting something back into the community, well, this is something which Lizzardman most certainly does. And something that Lizzardman certainly does not have to do is to explain himself on a public forum.

There are many issues that could and should be tackled to improve geocaching. Reduce the proliferation of micros, reduce the proliferation of grotty urban hides, encourage people to trade fair (Legend caches all had 3 trades at time of hiding, hardly any have now), increase the quality of cache containers. All contentious issues worthy of a valid debate.... on another thread.

Let's move on...

[ChannelFadge]

How about if lets say 2 NM logs in the space of lets say 4 weeks (ie, there needs to be 4 weeks or more in between them) will trigger an automatic system NA request, flagging it to the reviewer?

That could lead to a lot of difficult caches being diabled just because theyre hard to find. I recently found one that had multiple DNF's, I was the first to find in about 11 months. From reading the logs I thought it was missing for sure, but it was there, just well hidden.

That's only the case if the CO is absent, an Owner Maintenance log clears it eh?

*edit - I am talking purely about multiple NM logs, not DNF's, just to clarify

Oops sorry i misread you first time. Thought you said DNF's, not NM's (I get confused with all these abbreviations!). In that case, it sounds like a good idea. Is there not something already in place that alerts reviewers when there have been a few needs maintainance logs?

[pete37038]

And that was serious ? blimey, I fell into a snow drift today waist high and just managed to climb out, that's serious. And, I dnf'd the cache there.

[The Bolas Heathens]

I'll hold my hand up to being the last of the finder logs on this cache.

I've not had chance to reply here yet as we've only just got in from a day out and was out caching until quite late yesterday. I do have quite a few issues with the way this has been handled, some of the implications that have been made a few other items, which I'll expend on when I've got more time tomorrow.

[pete37038]

I remember the one, it is (was?) in Kirkham , I don't think I logged it, but I can honestly say I don't give a s##t if I did, I'll be happy to delete it if I have, wooo 1 cache less, I remember going again at some point too looking for it while in the area so maybe I didn't, can someone please PM me the link please been looking to see which one it is but can't figure it out, I think the way that this has been billed as 'serious' beggars belief. The fact the Ian has spent his time constructing a post on here about it is a waste of his time, reading this has been a waste of mine,I DNF'd one cache in Macc today, 3 months worth of DNF's and an NM, no action, a waste of my time, surely more newsworthy than this tripe.

[Jungle Goddess]

I got seriously bored reading it too Pete and gave up and found something far more interesting to do, like going caching, which for most of us is what it's all about. I don't mind how anyone else chooses to play the game ... I play it my way, and if anyone has a problem with how I play it, well that's their problem, not mine. Whilst out caching today, Mark and I found a cache. We couldn't open the cache to sign the log though. Fortunately I had the cache setter's telephone number so was able to text them to let them know the cache container was jammed tight. Within less than thirty minutes of my text to them, the cache setter had been to the cache location with a wrench and sorted it. And yes, we will be logging the cache as a find, having gained the cache setter's permission to do so. Won't be any need for a NM log of course.

Edited to add: Out caching yesterday, not that many caches, but quite a few wet logbooks. All replaced with new books in polybags. No effort, but a warm fuzzy glow We've had a long, wet winter ... stands to reason there are going to be more wet/damp logbooks than you would normally expect

[The Syllogiser]

I think the reviewers see things is a different light - often WITHOUT any background knowledge - which we may have ....
That's why I posted MY LOG and MY PHOTO - I like John have deleted my log ... (Pete# - u didn't log it) = that's THREE well known cachers
As Ian said - it is OBVIOUS from my log and his what has happened --
We as cache hunters are NOT to know what "activity" a cache owner undertakes.
In a way, Pup is right - is it really "our" job to question it. Dave knows we have a network of cache maintainers who go unsung and keep many "dead" caches alive - but - just where do we draw the line ..... support a "busy" cacher through a bad patch - or prop up a "slacker" who according to the reviewer - should be prodded with a stick ????

I'll say it again = I think we should be careful not to "justify" what we do / did in a single case. It's not too productive.

Dave, I think it's antagonistic and divisive to post on such an issue which relates directly to a well-known cacher here. That's why I deliberately didn't post a response as I didn't know the specifics of the case.

For the record, I don't think Lizzardman did anything wrong here. It was completely obvious where the cache was, so a Find would be justified imo - there are circumstances when it is acceptable - and yes personal judgement plays a part here.
Let's move on...

[Foinavon]

Just my two cents. I don't know why people want to log caches that they haven't found. This not any individuals but in general, so many people do that its is wrong to single someone out (and Deci didn't actually mention anyone in his post) , but your number is caches found, not "places been". If you want to log "places been" then go on waymarking! Having said all this its certainly not something I bother about. (honest ) , in fact I often get people pm'ing me asking me if they can log my caches that they have not found, asthey have taken the trouble to write I always give permission (and if I think the cache has gone I will disbale it) I just don't get why they want to! In the example Lianne describes thats fine you have found the cache. I have often logged nanos where I have been unable to get the paper out! If think if you have set eyes on the container you can say you have found it, otherwise you haven't and your total is not right if you log a find. That's just my way I don't mind how others do it.

I think a far worse crime than incorrectly logging a find when its a DNF is when people for what ever reason don't log a DNF at all (i.e. don't make any report). Now that is far more common than logging DNF's as finds and to me its far more annoying!

[MBFace]

If think if you have set eyes on the container you can say you have found it, otherwise you haven't and your total is not right if you log a find. That's just my way I don't mind how others do it.

Provided that the reason you can't sign is due to a sodden log, seized up thread, etc. rather than not having solved a puzzle to open a padlock, brought equipment specfied on the cache page (the recent Philips screwdriver thread on the dark side) or climbed a tree to reach the cache .

[The Syllogiser]

Whilst out caching today, Mark and I found a cache. We couldn't open the cache to sign the log though. Fortunately I had the cache setter's telephone number so was able to text them to let them know the cache container was jammed tight.

Try here for help >>

[pete37038]

Lets be honest - this should never have been posted on here at all, End of. As it turns out I wasn't one of the people who logged it - I thought I might have been, the posts on here would have been considerably more to the point if I was, I can see some folks in the community being considerably annoyed by this.

[Foinavon]

Lets be honest - this should never have been posted on here at all, End of.

why not? If someone's got something to say about geocaching this is the place to do it wether you agree with what's said or not.

[pete37038]

Lets be honest - this should never have been posted on here at all, End of.

why not? If someone's got something to say about geocaching this is the place to do it wether you agree with what's said or not.

I agree to an extent, but lets look at the thread title and what this is, serious.... is this serious ? if it is my life is in total turmoil with more 'serious' things, it's utter bollocks Paul that's what it is. Ok you can term things 'serious' purely in the geocaching sense of the word and it still pails into obscurity when compared to bigger more important issues that are/have been ignored for the sake of the incessant unnecessary nitpicking , at the end of the day people have been upset by this and felt the need to reply, people should not, and do not, have to justify their actions. A PM to anyone who was concerened would have gone a long way, none were sent, no details of the cache were given despite several requests, so people were replying on a subject that they did not know the full details of because they were not offered, if I want to bring an issue up I will do so, I will name names, name caches, name the problem, and have no issue standing by what I say, but I won't lead people up the garden path with a half hearted 'question' not giving full details of what is actually being discussed, if you are going to bring something up do it properly, and have the balls to say exactly what is on your mind or just don't bother, at least people know where they stand. People know where they stand with me as I say exactly what I think, I'm also happy to admit when I'm wrong,

[Jungle Goddess]

Boxes of tat in the woods? Pete you are so right - it's not serious, it's a game FFS! I thanked the good Lord above tonight when I tucked my little five year old girl up in bed, because there's a mum in the news at the moment who is praying for the safe return of her five year old lad ... kidnapped in Pakistan. Well yeah ... life goes on while all this stuff happens around us. And we all carry on caching and it provides exercise, relaxation, a reason to get out in the fresh air, an escape from the everyday cr*p going on in our lives. If geocaching isn't doing that for you, then you are either not doing it right, or perhaps need to find some other way of spending your time.

[El Aguila]

I think you can only justify claim finding a cache when the cache log is/was too wet to sign - I have had one or two of these in Spain and now I always take a photo of the cache container and log book to prove I have been to the cache and, as I usually now carry spare 'emergency' logs, I place one in the container if it is not damaged and letting in water. I now always photograph healthy caches too, especially if they are on mountains or out of the way places to show that I have been there as they can be damaged by animals rooting about.

I have been to caches and not found the container and so informed the owner who has then replied later that the cache has been replaced as it was 'muggled' and then I have gone back and found the 'new' cache and only then claim it as a find. This happened to me recently with two caches which happened to be owned by the same person.

The really annoying thing is when you inform the owner that the cache is damaged or missing then they do absolutely nothing to repair or replace the cache. I have had this happen in another county here in the UK where it seemed the owners were more interested in putting out as many caches as possible but did not bother to maintain the older ones they had set - again the numbers were more important to them.

I have known of a cache which was a film canister which when one visitor obviously could not find the original, left a new one in the same area only for them both to be found by later geocachers - no doubt the person who placed the 'new' cache claimed it as a find when it should have been a DNF!!!

Surely the whole idea of this 'game' is to go out and have fun, visit places you might never have gone to or see things you would never have seen - unfortunately to many geocachers now it has become a 'numbers' game and so they claim to find caches when in fact they haven't - reminds me of when I went out on bird twitches and some claimed to have seen the 'current' rare bird when in fact they had been nowhere near the place it was seen and was proven by others later. It is a great pity that people find it necessary to cheat just to increase their 'finds' tally - but we can all take solace in the thought that the only person they are fooling is themselves and what sad buggers they are???

[Foinavon]

Boxes of tat in the woods? Pete you are so right - it's not serious, it's a game FFS! I thanked the good Lord above tonight when I tucked my little five year old girl up in bed, because there's a mum in the news at the moment who is praying for the safe return of her five year old lad ... kidnapped in Pakistan. Well yeah ... life goes on while all this stuff happens around us. And we all carry on caching and it provides exercise, relaxation, a reason to get out in the fresh air, an escape from the everyday cr*p going on in our lives. If geocaching isn't doing that for you, then you are either not doing it right, or perhaps need to find some other way of spending your time.

That's so true of course but the problem is saying "its only a hunt for a box in the woods" means that there's no point in having a forum and discussing geocaching because the only posts you should make are positive positive happy ones, and lets face it,it would be a dull forum. Many people don't go on forums at all (or just lurk) and enjoy themselves in the woods looking for boxes, and obviously they share this sentiment, the rest of us well we take so many things for granted in the wider world that we can come on here with our moans and grumbles, there's me with my power trails, and Pete with his earth caches and Sheila with her micro's that don't have clues! It applies to other hobbies as well. I am on various football forums where things get far more heated than they do on here and you could say "in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter becuase its just a load of blokes kicking a ball about". Of course that's true but it doens't stop my weekend being ruined when Bolton lose (I was in a good mood yesterday!). On here despite all this I think we have a very good balance (say compared to the groundspeak forum) on discussing the hobby we all love and not getting too carried away and I hope that will continue.

[Jungle Goddess]

Now Paul .... don't you go getting me started on grown men kicking a bag of wind around a big bit of grass with white lines drawn all around it!

[alicephilippa]

Now Paul .... don't you go getting me started on grown men kicking a bag of wind around a big bit of grass with white lines drawn all around it!

For one thing the ball he's on about is the wrong shape. The round ball game is for wusses.

[ferreter38]

That's so true of course but the problem is saying "its only a hunt for a box in the woods" means that there's no point in having a forum and discussing geocaching because the only posts you should make are positive positive happy ones, and lets face it,it would be a dull forum. Many people don't go on forums at all (or just lurk) and enjoy themselves in the woods looking for boxes, and obviously they share this sentiment, the rest of us well we take so many things for granted in the wider world that we can come on here with our moans and grumbles, there's me with my power trails, and Pete with his earth caches and Sheila with her micro's that don't have clues! It applies to other hobbies as well. I am on various football forums where things get far more heated than they do on here and you could say "in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter becuase its just a load of blokes kicking a ball about". Of course that's true but it doens't stop my weekend being ruined when Bolton lose (I was in a good mood yesterday!). On here despite all this I think we have a very good balance (say compared to the groundspeak forum) on discussing the hobby we all love and not getting too carried away and I hope that will continue.

Got another moan now, after a fairly longish walk (well for me anyway) the CO sticks the cache down a steep slope, or at the bottom of a retaining wall I'm then left the problem of how to reach the damn container without falling. A couple of weeks ago I nearly ended up in a bloody stream and half ripped a nail off my thumb and it was a DNF as well! Last week I slipped on a muddy slope and hurt my bad hip and leg.
OK you could say that I should go caching with someone, but quite honestly I get damn fed up with being left so far behind the person(s) I'm supposed to be out caching with. WTF is wrong with just strolling around the countryside and chatting as you do it? What the hell is the bloody rush? The cache is either there or it isn't and arriving at GZ five minutes later isn't going to make all that much difference.
BTW I can also see where Deci is coming from as well... I'd be as mad as hell if I'd made a wasted journey to find a cache which had a string of DNFs and then a couple of false finds when the cache wasn't actually in situ!
I've had a look for a cache twice last week... I've posted a DNF and I think a NM, I'll have to check that out the NM though. BTW I didn't really make a special journey the second time as I was passing by the second time and decided to have another look because of the additional info I had.

[ferreter38]

Now Paul .... don't you go getting me started on grown men kicking a bag of wind around a big bit of grass with white lines drawn all around it!

For one thing the ball he's on about is the wrong shape. The round ball game is for wusses.

You missed out the bit about being grossly overpaid wusses

[The Syllogiser]

Guess this thread is now DEAD > as ALL the GENTLEMEN concerned have DELETED their logs

OK Deci -- What's your next 'bitch' going to be about ?

Oh - it's only 16075 - 3 = 16072 finds between them now , so not inexperienced cachers