January 24, 2012 at 8:09 pm #638
We tried to find this new cache on sunday 22nd jan but after a good search couldn,t find it. I even climbed onto the large rock that the hint implied the cache was on top of. (hint now changed).
Got home and logged it as a DNF, only to see today that muddypuddles found it yesterday (23rd) and in his log says the cache was indeed missing (having spoke to the cache owner who had told him where it should have been). He then with the COs permission replaced it and logged it as a FTF (is that allowed?)
The cache was aparently put out over a year ago.
Why was the cache out for over a year before the listing was published and why didn’t CO check it was still there. On a lighter note at least i can go back and find it now.January 24, 2012 at 8:36 pm #641
Wow, something controversial at last!
There is a separate topic on “What is Your Criteria to Log a Find”, but this is cache specific so I will leave it here. According to the Groundspeak Rules, if you don’t find a cache it should be logged as a DNF, no alternative is suggested. In my opinion, if you replace a cache, with or without the CO permission, it is difficult to log a find on it, after all you’ve placed it, and you’ve done a good turn for the cache owner and the next visitor, but not for yourself. Twice my caches have been replaced without my prior knowledge and each time I have refused the finder’s Found log. Logging a FTF is even more diificult as it deprives the next legitimate finder of the FTF. In this case the cache had been visited the day before, so very unfortunate for those not finding, although reb10 clearly would not have found it and would have to have relied on the CO replacing it. Food for thought?January 24, 2012 at 8:48 pm #644
Having checked the cache page, this cache was placed on 2nd January 2012; so, unless this has been changed, it was only placed 3 weeks ago. Perhaps the cache owner would like to add a comment?January 25, 2012 at 6:59 am #647dartymoorParticipant
That whole thing is very odd. I’m not so bothered about replacing a container and logging it as a find if done with the CO’s cooperation, but the CO’s actions are strangest to me.
Placed a year ago and never found? Wasn’t even listed until this month as you say. And listed knowing it wasn’t there any more and had to wait for MP to take a container out? Thus the first people to DNF were deliberately misled?
Very interested to read Muddypuddles’ comments when they get a chance!
January 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm #650MissParticipant
- This reply was modified 10 years, 4 months ago by dartymoor.
So does this mean we, rather than Muddypuddles, can claim the FTF – Hobo having found this particular cache yesterday?January 27, 2012 at 12:19 am #657
Saw a link to opencaching on a cache page and thought i would take a look, while there i saw that phillpots cave was listed on that site on the 11th september 2010. But no finds logged to date, is that why it was moved to geocaching?January 27, 2012 at 5:48 pm #658muddypuddlesParticipant
Blimey, I didn’t realise this was going to cause quite such a stir! I can’t answer for the CO (I see he is a member here, so if he wants to reply I’m sure he will). I saw reb10’s DNF before I went, and the clue seemed pretty clear, which is why I checked with the CO before leaving home, and which is why I had the spare container with me. I can see that others hold a different view, but if I know for certain a cache has gone, and especially with the CO’s consent, I am happy to replace the container for them – I believe it’s good caching etiquette. I also cannot see the problem with logging the find in that case. After all, if this wasn’t allowed, then cachers wouldn’t do each other the courtesy of replacing the missing containers, as why should they? It costs money to buy the container and prepare it, and time to assemble the cache and walk out and place it. If you’re not even going to get a smiley for your pains, why bother? I’m afraid I don’t agree that it is wrong to log a find in this situation, FTF or otherwise. If the CO does disapprove of other cachers doing this to their caches then they will have to accept that all of the cache maintenance will fall to them, which might prove to be more of a nuisance than accepting the help when it is offered. Also, this is all just for fun, so if the CO and the finder are happy with their agreement, then it really is up them about how they go about things.January 27, 2012 at 6:50 pm #659
I think muddypuddles argument has changed my mind if you agree in advance with the CO to replace a cache, then I would agree, it is ok to log a find. If it happens to be a FTF, so be it. I really don’t think this applies when it hasn’t been agreed beforehand. Otherwise we could all carry spare caches and put a new one out instead of logging a DNF, which is what happened twice with my caches. With this particular cache the problem seems to be that it was placed over a year ago (possibly as an opencache) and the CO hadn’t checked to see whether it was still there when it was published. Unfortunately for reb10 and pearlywhirly it wasn’t still there and they were the unfortunates who checked on the cache when surely this should have been the CO’s job.January 28, 2012 at 7:32 am #660dartymoorParticipant
Ta muddy for the explanation, I’d have done the same.
Not something that should be done routinely just because not finding something does not mean it’s not there – and then you end up with two or more pots per cache, people signing one and not the other, other people calling them to task if they don’t spot their signature – Anarchy ensues!
The listing on opencaching.org.uk explains the delay, but relisting at gc.com without checking it was still present seems rash. I would be thoroughly miffed if I’d DNF’d something that the CO knew wasn’t there when I tried!
February 10, 2012 at 12:24 pm #775the urban rangerParticipant
- This reply was modified 10 years, 4 months ago by dartymoor.
Well having read all the interesting views on my Philpotts cave cache thought it was time to chip in with a few comments.This cache was indeed put out in September 2010.This was a 35m container hid on top of a boulder amongst a grassy turf.At this time i had problems getting it past the reviewer and to be honest after following as expected the letterbox code of practice i did put it on the backburner to sort out when i had the chance.In the mean time i did log it on Open Caching .unfortunately i never got back to the reviewer to sort it out and did forget all about it.Wasn’t till this year after looking at some of my older caches that i came across it,so i thought this one needed sorting out with the reviewer, needless to say it was published on 2nd January 2012.I did not use the original date just in case in caused any confusion Having checked that it had not been found on open caching i had no reason to doubt it was not there.The fact that it was not found by the first cacher did not concern me .Have several times checked my caches after a dnf to find its still there. Muddypuddles contacted me for details of the cache having noticed the dnf. I explained what to look for.He very kindly offered to replace it for me if indeed it had vanished.As far as iam concerned i am not to bothered who claims a FTF but my vote goes to Muddypuddles for the help.I would also like to say i never thought that i would need to check it again before it was published as it had not been visited in the 12 months that it was on open caching site.I am gobsmacked that a cache in the remote part of the South moor can go missing before it has even been found .On another note which has really disheartens me is all the red tape that you encounter at times trying to get caches published on Dartmoor. It seems just following the letterbox code is just the start of it, what with Dartmoor National Park, Dartmoor national Trust, Duchy of Cornwall etc etc.I would myself probably put more out when walking on Dartmoor but its just not worth the headache.This its not just a gripe from me as i know a number of cachers who think the same.I do realize that some cachers seem to have a lot of caches on Dartmoor so a assume that they must have good contacts as in e-mails address Telephone numbers for the different areas of the moor perhaps cachers might like to see some helpful information on this site .I am sure you would get a lot more caches out on Dartmoor.February 10, 2012 at 4:35 pm #776
Thank you urban ranger for your explanation.
The cache was published on the 18th not the 2nd, i would have thought the fact that it had been out for over a year and not found would have rung a few alarm bells (unless opencachers don’t log DNF’s). Having climbed onto the said rock twice i can see how a cache placed on top of it could go missing quite easily.
I still can’t get my head around placing a cache and logging it as a find.February 13, 2012 at 4:28 pm #782
“I still can’t get my head around placing a cache and logging it as a find.” I have a lot of sympathy with reb10, but it appears there will be no consensus on this. I personally don’t think you should expect a reward for replacing a cache, but neither do I think the CO should publish a cache that has been sitting out there for more than a year and rely on somebody else (in this case reb10) checking it out for him. The lesson I have already learnt is that I will no longer publish explicit spoilers so there will always be uncertainty on whether a cache is there or not.April 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm #1031
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.