MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Needs Maintenance log question
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dornole
Geocacher


Joined: 03 Apr 2006

Posts: 463

PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think I'm also going to limit my non-owner maintenance (beyond simple log replacements, adding silica paks and drying, etc.) or adoption requests to exceptional caches as well. Yeah we want caches to be designed with a long shelf life in mind, but that doesn't need to mean "forever." There's something to be said for some turnover.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobboTeam
Geocacher


Joined: 11 Jun 2006

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tonkaMN wrote:
You should be more reluctant to log a Needs Archived as I have seen caches that are still where they are supposed to be get archived because someone can't find it, they log a NA and the owner doesn't see the e-mail so it gets archived (Elvis is Everywhere).

I've only logged Needs Archived 19 times since May 2006. I've logged 1243 finds in that time, and almost 1000 of those finds have been since June this year.

Only four of the caches I reported as Needs Archived are still active, all others were archived. All four of those were reported only after watching the cache for two months, and first attempting to make direct connection with the cache owner via messaging. Only one of those was actually there to be found when I reported it, and in 11 months there were eight DNFs and no finds reported. Direct multiple messages to the cache owner were ignored, so I reported it as Needs Archived. I was wrong, but even there I don't regret my actions.

I also know how many caches have been archived at my recommendation and then returned to active status: None. Zero. Nada.

For the record, Elvis is Everywhere was originally my hide, but perhaps tonkaMN knew this when bringing it up? It was hidden in August 2006 and archived by a reviewer in August 2011. I did not receive an email notice of the Needs Archived log when it was made. Fortunately, BigChiefS4 decided it was worthwhile putting a new cache there, using the original container and hide method. I commend him for it, and I am glad a NA was filed to pull it out of the database and freed it up for another hide. Not my proudest moment to have abandoned it while I was not participating in geocaching, but there it is. To my way of thinking, an abandoned cache should be archived if there is no one to care for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
schmittfamily
Geocacher


Joined: 21 Sep 2012

Posts: 116

PostPosted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would finding two containers at the location be a reason to log a "Needs Maintenance"? I don't know why but it always bugs me when we find multiple containers at a cache site.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tonkaMN
MnGCA Board


Joined: 10 Jun 2009

Posts: 910

PostPosted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobboTeam wrote:
For the record, Elvis is Everywhere was originally my hide, but perhaps tonkaMN knew this when bringing it up?


I didn't realize that it was your hide. It was my idea to replace it, but I recommended BigChiefS4 actually re-publish it since he lived closer and it would be easier for him to do maintenance. It was a great hide and I would not have done something like that for a micro in a street sign or a crappy container in the woods.

In my opinion it shouldn't have been archived since it was exactly where it was supposed to be, but as you say, it was abandoned, so I guess it was the right thing to do (archiving it).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tonkaMN
MnGCA Board


Joined: 10 Jun 2009

Posts: 910

PostPosted: Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

schmittfamily wrote:
Would finding two containers at the location be a reason to log a "Needs Maintenance"? I don't know why but it always bugs me when we find multiple containers at a cache site.


Not in my opinion. If the owner has known about it for a while and hasn't done anything you should pick one of the containers up for them. I've had people say that I had two containers at one spot, but I could only find one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5704

PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tonkaMN wrote:
schmittfamily wrote:
Would finding two containers at the location be a reason to log a "Needs Maintenance"? I don't know why but it always bugs me when we find multiple containers at a cache site.


Not in my opinion. If the owner has known about it for a while and hasn't done anything you should pick one of the containers up for them. I've had people say that I had two containers at one spot, but I could only find one.


I have a cache in Duluth that has a true letterbox hide that is within reasonable searching distance from GZ. I've never found (or looked for) the other container but I know it's there from other logs that mention it.
_________________
Hmm...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
BobboTeam
Geocacher


Joined: 11 Jun 2006

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tonkaMN wrote:
schmittfamily wrote:
Would finding two containers at the location be a reason to log a "Needs Maintenance"? I don't know why but it always bugs me when we find multiple containers at a cache site.


Not in my opinion. If the owner has known about it for a while and hasn't done anything you should pick one of the containers up for them. I've had people say that I had two containers at one spot, but I could only find one.

I believe two containers at a cache location does merit a maintenance request—unless the cache page lets cache hunters know that the cache owner is aware of it. I would certainly log a "Needs Maintenance" if I found two containers, provided the cache page did not include something like, "Cache hunters beware, there is a second cache-like container in this area not planted by the cache owner. The correct log is a yellow waterproof booklet in a ziplock bag with the cache name written on the cover. If you do not sign that book, you didn't find the right cache container and don't really qualify for the find." I would want to make sure that the owner knows it's there, and I would want to warn other cache hunters that there is an unintended false cache or decoy in the area. Otherwise what's to stop a finder of the decoy from thinking the log has gone missing, replacing with a temporary log, signing that, and wandering off thinking they had done the right thing? It's all about clear communication between the cache owner and the cache hunters (as well as with those responsible for review).

I can tell you, if somebody planted a false container at one of my hides, I would go out into the field and remove it. I might also log a chiding "Owner Maintenance" log on the cache page, and if if it were possible to identify who placed the bad container, I would open a brief email dialogue with them to let them know their efforts were perhaps well-meaning, but poorly chosen. And to recognize tonkaMN's comment, I would probably first make contact with an experienced cache hunter who had found the false container, and have them describe as best they can where I might find it so it can be removed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aix sponsa
Geocacher


Joined: 08 Dec 2008

Posts: 149

PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I have a cache in Duluth that has a true letterbox hide that is within reasonable searching distance from GZ. I've never found (or looked for) the other container but I know it's there from other logs that mention it.


Jicknarson and I ran into a variation of this situation. At Serenity, GC192ZK, there a letterbox at GZ not the cache. The cache owner is not the letterbox owner. We found the letterbox quite easily but not the cache. A number of cachers had found the letterbox signed the log as one would a gecocache log then logged a find online for GC192ZK. The key is whose name is on the log book - walkingstick. It is Ice Age Mammals Series - Wooly Mammoth LbNA # 62889. From the letterbox page - This is not a geocache. Feel free to visit, but do not trade the stamp out of this box. I think it was acquiring swag from the geocachers stopping by.

Since the CO for Serenity (Mishkapup) hasn't been on geocaching.com since 2011, I doubt that the rusty, wet container has been changed. A few more people have found a hidden box after we posted a note but we wonder which container? Are these more finds for the letterbox or the cache? The "needs maintenance" and "needs archiving" might not get attention when cachers are logging a find. Perhaps, the cache container is there and we didn't find it. I doubt it since we searched quite thoroughly knowing two containers should be in the vicinity. How should this situation be handled? Just wondering. Maybe someone who found it recently could mention what they found. If I remember right the letterbox was a lock-n-lock under a log with a partial log in front of it.


Last edited by Aix sponsa on Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:55 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
schmittfamily
Geocacher


Joined: 21 Sep 2012

Posts: 116

PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Our general experience is when we find two containers the typical reason is the CO placed the second one thinking the first one was missing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tonkaMN
MnGCA Board


Joined: 10 Jun 2009

Posts: 910

PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

schmittfamily wrote:
Our general experience is when we find two containers the typical reason is the CO placed the second one thinking the first one was missing.


That happened to me on one of my caches (GC3CMY7). It appeared to be missing, so I placed a new container at GZ. Later I went to check on it and I found the original container and couldn't find the replacement. I guess my camo is just too good Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2442

PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There may be three ammo boxes Arrow here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Boreal Walker
Geocacher


Joined: 14 Aug 2008

Posts: 232

PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

schmittfamily wrote:
Our general experience is when we find two containers the typical reason is the CO placed the second one thinking the first one was missing.


Or, someone was in a hurry and couldn't found the original. Let a replacement. I have had to go out and pull these when the original container was still there.

I actually own two cache listings with multiple containers. I just don't care enough to get the extras. The point of the cache was not to be too evil, just get cachers to the particular location and enjoy it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobboTeam
Geocacher


Joined: 11 Jun 2006

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boreal Walker wrote:
I actually own two cache listings with multiple containers. I just don't care enough to get the extras. The point of the cache was not to be too evil, just get cachers to the particular location and enjoy it.

I can't tell if you are being flippant here or not. If not, I see that phrase in bold as a problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boreal Walker
Geocacher


Joined: 14 Aug 2008

Posts: 232

PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobboTeam wrote:
Boreal Walker wrote:
I actually own two cache listings with multiple containers. I just don't care enough to get the extras. The point of the cache was not to be too evil, just get cachers to the particular location and enjoy it.

I can't tell if you are being flippant here or not. If not, I see that phrase in bold as a problem.


My cache, my rules.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AustinMN
Geocacher


Joined: 21 Mar 2012

Posts: 110

PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobboTeam wrote:
Boreal Walker wrote:
I actually own two cache listings with multiple containers. I just don't care enough to get the extras. The point of the cache was not to be too evil, just get cachers to the particular location and enjoy it.

I can't tell if you are being flippant here or not. If not, I see that phrase in bold as a problem.


One of the original ideas of geocaching was to get people to go places they would not have known about any other way. I find his attitude in this case to be OK when viewed from that perspective.

Austin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> General All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.