Newbies only

Team Piggy · Post by **Team Piggy** » 31 August 08 11:43 pm

richary wrote:So maybe lets come up with some new cache ideas. You can only log this if you live more than 50km away as I want people to make the effort to get to it. Or you can only log this if it is your FTF as I want finders to remember it, no matter how lame the hide is.

Does deleting someone's log also take one back off their find count?

How about my personal favourite, you can find it but you cant log it

Yep, it drops a point when a smiley is deleted.

I get heaps on the travel bug cemetery where you are NOT allowed to log it.. But the point hunters do love to try..

tronador · Post by **tronador** » 31 August 08 11:53 pm

Oh no, i hope something i did to one of their caches hasn't sparked this "debate". Refer to my logs and their responses GCEDE7. I had to move one of their caches because I found it had been washed away in a deluge, lying out in the open about 50 meters from where the GPS was pointing. i told them of it's plight and even wrote a pleading log for it to be fixed. ....any way you can see the response on the cache page. it appears to this date riblit has also not received any contact from them. So maybe I am to blame for MOVING their cache and TELLING them what to do.

Again I apologise

Richary · Post by **Richary** » 01 September 08 12:27 am

Tronador - doesn't sound like you could have done anything else with it apart from taking it away and logging that.

Chances are that in 5 years they changed email addresses and weren't getting the logs - until they regained interest in the hobby and updated their details. Either way I doubt relocating one of their caches because it was 250 metres downstream would be considered anything but a favor (and yes, I too have replaced a couple of caches back in SA with no thanks from the owner even though he is still active - I just decided next time I found one of his broken it could stay that way and would just put a maintenance log. One had a cracked lid from sunlight exposure and the other was muggled with the contents scattered around and both about 150km north of his home location).

Map Monkey · Post by **Map Monkey** » 01 September 08 8:35 am

Any more drama in these caches and logs and we'll see Channel 9 making a mini-series out of it.

It seems that all those "non-participating cachers" are just as bad as each other ....

mm

The Spindoctors · Post by **The Spindoctors** » 01 September 08 12:27 pm

Tronador, it's certainly not your fault. As Bear_Left highlighted, it is a long running issue with the porcine geocacher.

Richary · Post by **Richary** » 01 September 08 3:00 pm

Definitely not out to make friends. An old one of theirs (GCC03) I was previous finder on and there were no issues with it (only 3 weeks ago). Now they have disabled it with a log that says

Disabling cache pending resolution of long-standing problems with overzealous groundspeak administrator.

And not even a reviewer log in between!

totalube · Post by **totalube** » 01 September 08 8:33 pm

It appears that they are a bit upset and have disabled all their caches. They also don't realise that i,riblit is just a reviewer account

tronador · Post by **tronador** » 01 September 08 9:09 pm

totalube wrote:It appears that they are a bit upset and have disabled all their caches. They also don't realise that i,riblit is just a reviewer account

Should someone go rescue the TB before it is lost forever?????

Alansee · Post by **Alansee** » 01 September 08 10:12 pm

While one of the things that I love about caching is that there are relatively few rules and so a certain amount of anarchy occurs. However I do have concerns about the couple of new caches highlighted in this topic that essentially say that one lot of cachers have to do something different to another lot of cachers, based purely on an arbitrary criteria.

What's next -

- Interstate cachers have to do something different to locals?

- single cachers do something different to teams?

- workers vs Retired? Tall vs short? Fat vs skinny? Names starting with S?

There is a danger that a whole can of worms opens up here!

Set whatever rules you like on your cache - they just should be the same for EVERYBODY!

I might start putting out some caches restricted to those who have already done a thousand at least. Better still, it has to be your 1,000th. Actually I won't but you get the point.

Richary · Post by **Richary** » 01 September 08 10:18 pm

tronador wrote:Should someone go rescue the TB before it is lost forever?????

Seeing as I put it in there I was thinking about that, not that I had plans of being up that way this weekend. Might be able to swing something after work (Chatswood) if I can knock off early one day.

pjamesk · Post by **pjamesk** » 01 September 08 11:11 pm

Can you log a disabled cache?

a cacher has just logged Black Cat GC1FQXX

I wonder if they will delete the log as it is disabled

tronador · Post by **tronador** » 01 September 08 11:15 pm

pjamesk wrote:Can you log a disabled cache?

a cacher has just logged Black Cat GC1FQXX

I wonder if they will delete the log as it is disabled

Yes you can it's been done before. The coords are still active but the question remains if the cache is still there. If you know the name of the cache you can still search for it, GCA is great like that, put in a query and you get everything, or filter stuff out.

Richary · Post by **Richary** » 01 September 08 11:36 pm

You can even log an archived cache if you know it's GC code. That's where GSAK comes in useful if you have the records.

Disabled will still show up in the listings if you do a search on nearest caches.

Team Rubik · Post by **Team Rubik** » 02 September 08 11:44 pm

It appears all is well now. Happy logging.

Richary · Post by **Richary** » 02 September 08 11:47 pm

It seems to have all blown over obviously thanks to some behind the scenes work by riblit.

As discussed on your other unpublished cache (which had this requirement on it _before_ publication...), this needs to be listed as a mystery/unknown type because of the Additional Logging Requirement.

But now that requirement has disappeared from their other caches so it looks like all is quiet again. With a couple archived for non maintenance issues. Thanks sir for sorting it out offline! Good to see the reviewers sorting things out behind the scenes without butting in here, and I should probably have sent a query to the placer and the reviewers before making it public (though someone else would have jumped in) but thought I would guage public opinion on this before trying to drop anyone in the sh*t

<img src="http://bp1.blogger.com/_6Q9wAorJq9c/Rux ... p+-+BW.jpg" align="left">