View Full Version : first hide--not



ltlindian
07-31-2008, 10:56 AM
Darn--I was so excited to hid my first cache. It's filled with good swag and hidden in a nice spot. However, I didn't realize that there is a virtual cache just 400' from the place I wanted to put my cache. So, it's not being listed. :( I guess as I get doing this more I'll pay attention to where other caches are and avoid this in the future.

Oh well, keep looking and I'll have my own cache eventually!

attroll
07-31-2008, 12:59 PM
What a bummer. I did not realize that they would not approve a real planted cache that was 400' from a virtual. I don't see why they would not approve it? I don't consider a real cache and a virtual cache the same thing. Granted they are both caches. I am sure they have a reason. However I can not see why it can not be done because your not planting a real cache in the location as where a virtual cache is not a planted cache, just my thoughts.

hide_from_the_kids
07-31-2008, 06:50 PM
don't be discouraged one of ours when we placed it was right on top of another. we did not know it was there and the kicker is we placed it right on top of the other cache. i mean i put my hand in the spot i put it and pulled out two seperate caches. we found a new home for ours and signed the log for the other. now we take coords and input them to see how far they are from another cache. good luck with your cache

darterkitfox
08-01-2008, 07:08 AM
I have some counselors at the campground I work at that are very insistive that there is a cache placed on a nice scenic overlook on a hill nearby. They describe it and it sounds like a real cache, but it isn't listed, not even for premium members only, so I don't know what it's doing there. Guess there are caches everywhere, even where they are aren't supposed to be.

Sabby
08-01-2008, 07:44 AM
I have some counselors at the campground I work at that are very insistive that there is a cache placed on a nice scenic overlook on a hill nearby. They describe it and it sounds like a real cache, but it isn't listed, not even for premium members only, so I don't know what it's doing there. Guess there are caches everywhere, even where they are aren't supposed to be.


Perhaps it is posted on the navicache.com site. It is not as popular as geocaching.com but sometimes caches appear there that cannot be posted on GC.com

ltlindian
08-01-2008, 07:51 AM
Just an update--I received a note from the Maine Publisher that they didn't realize that it was a virtual cache and they have asked the owner to place a real cache. If they don't, they I can place my cache there! YAY!

hide_from_the_kids
08-01-2008, 08:53 AM
is this the cache with the name "point"? if it is then it is a real cache but with no cache container according to the owner. Point (http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=b028adb4-3915-4d77-bfc2-98a76353d8ab)this is the link. we went to do this cache and when we got there we read the palm to find out there was no container and that there was a virtual of sorts there now. we did not log it because we felt even though we were there there was no proof like a log book for us to sign. i hope either a container goes in or you can place yours it is a nice area.

Sabby
08-01-2008, 10:39 AM
Point does in fact appear to be the cache in question.

There was once a coffee can container there because I found it. It seems that the cache disappeared and the "owner" just said 'I can't be bothered to replace it' and writes in the description



Actual cahce has disappeared. The actual cache is now more virtual. This park is a wonderful hidden treasure.


Apparently all you have to do to log it is to say that you were there. No log book to sign. Even if it were a "Virtual" you would have had to send some information to the owner to show that you were there.

I don't feel that this cache has the slightest conformity with the "spirit of geocaching" reguardless of how far you try and streach the guidelines. In my opinion it should be archived by the Maine reviewer immediately.

I am also "disturbed" by the number of Maine geocachers, who I felt were "top notch", going out to find a cache and then just logging it and not trying to maintain "standards" for caches in Maine that so many who visit these forums feel are important.

This cache should be archived immediately and you should place a cache worthy of being a Maine cache there.

I feel better

brdad
08-01-2008, 11:16 AM
I am also "disturbed" by the number of Maine geocachers, who I felt were "top notch", going out to find a cache and then just logging it and not trying to maintain "standards" for caches in Maine that so many who visit these forums feel are important

As one of the cachers who match that description and having logged the cache, I am pondering my log now. I can't imagine logging a cache without signing the log book, it has been a rule of mine since I started (well, excepting having Lee sign my name on occasion since most people can't read my writing anyway). I do remember in the 'old days', sometimes a cacher would change a cache to a mock virtual and ask for proof you were there like the real virtuals were. But things are different nowadays.

Lee is quite certain there was a cache there when we went, in a tree. She is looking through her notebooks now. I suppose I could have thought the cache was a virtual. But my online log still sounds suspicious. I will be changing my log to a note if I conclude we didn't find the cache. To be continued....

EDIT: After looking through the other logs and Lee not finding her notebook from that day, I am assuming we either thought it was a virtual, logged it accidentally as a find, or had too much sun on the boat to Monhegan that day! We are changing our found logs to notes.

ltlindian
08-01-2008, 12:31 PM
Yes, Point is the one in question. I'll let you know what the Maine Publisher says once they hear from the owners. I'm quite excited to place my cache as it is a really nice spot!

Sabby
08-01-2008, 12:37 PM
Something else seemed fishey to me about this cache so I went to look at the logs.

A cacher named groove&co noted that when they first looked for it, it was called Folgers and that is the name that I found it under. Apparently the owner changed the name when they changed the write up.


BRDAD I think that you were there after the cache was gone and met the requirements of the cache as listed at the time.



Lee is quite certain there was a cache there when we went, in a tree. She is looking through her notebooks now. I suppose I could have thought the cache was a virtual. But my online log still sounds suspicious. I will be changing my log to a note if I conclude we didn't find the cache.


When I found it, it was a coffee can in the rocks along the east shore. I think the picture by Team Darcins Digs shows the cache location well.

lexmano
08-01-2008, 02:23 PM
Container or no container, the beauty of this sport is that I got to visit that place. What a hidden jewel!!

I am happy as long as there is a cache there to share the spot.

Haffy
08-01-2008, 04:37 PM
Indeed this is the old "Folgers" cache and it seems they managed to make it into a virtual without too much trouble. This is my old log when I found it"

July 31, 2005 by Haffy (1063 found)
This is a tricky one to get to, not because it is hard to find but because it is hard to get to with all the muggles around today. Finally was able to be discreet enough to not be seen and got the cache. Took the TB and left my new Maine note. TFTC Haffy6

I see the Maine Publisher has asked to have it either archived or a real cache hidden in the spot, so this should bring some attention to it now.

kayaking loon
08-01-2008, 05:23 PM
So if I "found" Point when it wasn't there, can I find the "real" cache when it gets placed too?? I'm in Boothbay Harbor a lot and there are so few caches to find that I'll take anything I can get! :p

And I know of another virtual that has a real cache within 400' of it and both count as caches found. But I'm not telling where it is.....

Haffy
08-01-2008, 07:33 PM
So if I "found" Point when it wasn't there, can I find the "real" cache when it gets placed too?? I'm in Boothbay Harbor a lot and there are so few caches to find that I'll take anything I can get! :p

And I know of another virtual that has a real cache within 400' of it and both count as caches found. But I'm not telling where it is.....

Just curious, how can you find a cache if it isn't there? :confused: And yes you can find the next cache if it gets placed there I would think, because it will be a totally new cache.

hide_from_the_kids
08-01-2008, 10:02 PM
we had found the place but no cache and with nothing to log we did not log it. it just didn't seem right. once an actual cache is there then we will go and sign the log book and then claim it as a find. it is a wonderful spot and we look forward to going back. so hopefully one is there soon.

kayaking loon
08-02-2008, 06:55 AM
Just curious, how can you find a cache if it isn't there? :confused: And yes you can find the next cache if it gets placed there I would think, because it will be a totally new cache.

Well, I was a newbie then, what did I know? It seemed a lot like a virtual and they were allowed then. I just took my GPS and walked until I got to the exact coords, enjoyed the view and logged it. A lot of people were logging it so I just assumed, in my "newbieness" (do you like that word?)that it was OK. I think the cache at Ocean Point is the same. It washed away and people (including me) still found it and logged it and probably still are. And that is a problem with putting a cache "above high tide". Some high tides, driven by storms and wind, are REALLY high.

That said, I'd love to see more caches in Boothbay Harbor. I remember saying once that if I still lived there, I'd have the place covered in caches. Now if I could just remember where I was going to put them I could offer some suggestions. I placed one, after much thought. I first tried to make it a virtual, discovered they were no longer allowed, and wrestled with the high tide problem before I went much higher with it. :)

hide_from_the_kids
08-02-2008, 07:38 AM
We like virtuals . . . and this seemed like a good place for one. We just felt a bit odd logging a traditional cache when there wasn't a cache container any more and there weren't any questions to answer.

kayaking loon
08-02-2008, 07:51 AM
We like virtuals . . . and this seemed like a good place for one. We just felt a bit odd logging a traditional cache when there wasn't a cache container any more and there weren't any questions to answer.

Well, Ocean Point Rocks is the same. The cache disappeared in 2002 and everyone has been happily logging it since. So maybe Itlindian can have that spot too. If "Point" is being challenged, "Ocean Point Rocks" should be too. But both caches have taken people to beautiful spots, that they might not have seen otherwise, and provided much entertainment. You can compare that to a litter covered area, with a GRC film canister and a soggy log and which one is the winner? :eek: I guess I'd take the "almost a virtual" in a beautiful spot. But neither meets the "true" spirit of a great cache. All that said, let's remember once again, that it's just a game.....

brdad
08-02-2008, 08:03 AM
Well, Ocean Point Rocks is the same. The cache disappeared in 2002 and everyone has been happily logging it since. So maybe Itlindian can have that spot too. If "Point" is being challenged, "Ocean Point Rocks" should be too. But both caches have taken people to beautiful spots, that they might not have seen otherwise, and provided much entertainment. You can compare that to a litter covered area, with a GRC film canister and a soggy log and which one is the winner? :eek: I guess I'd take the "almost a virtual" in a beautiful spot. But neither meets the "true" spirit of a great cache. All that said, let's remember once again, that it's just a game.....

The BIG difference with ocean point rocks is that it was officially changed to a virtual cache and bears the icon. The unfortunate part is, it was changed back when a cache owner could change the type themselves, without any approval from gc.com, so it was allowed without having to prove you were there.

But, nonetheless, it is a true virtual, which Point is not.

If the true reward is a great spot, then if you didn't really find the cache a note should be as worthy as a found it.

But, it's a just a game - the validity of a find should be between the 'finder' and the cache hider. But at the same time, how we act determines how others see us as a group.



Off Topic, regarding hide_from_the_kids avatar: cute pic, I have a niece that loves those stretchy things!

tat
08-02-2008, 08:03 AM
Ocean Point Rocks is different; the cache type was changed to virtual. The change was made before virtuals were discontinued. When virtuals were discontinued, existing virtuals, like this one, were grandfathered. Changing from a regular cache to a virtual is no longer allowed.

kayaking loon
08-02-2008, 08:34 AM
Ocean Point Rocks is different; the cache type was changed to virtual. The change was made before virtuals were discontinued. When virtuals were discontinued, existing virtuals, like this one, were grandfathered. Changing from a regular cache to a virtual is no longer allowed.

Yes, I just noticed that it was changed, back when you could do that. But unlike most virtuals that I have done (and granted I haven't done many) you don't need to answer any questions to "prove" you found it. You find a date and you can do the math if you like math (I do, so I did) but you don't e-mail the owner and have your "find" verified. And you don't even need to find the date, you can just wander and enjoy. But it is a very enjoyable place!

Sabby
08-02-2008, 08:46 AM
Ocean Point Rocks is different; the cache type was changed to virtual. The change was made before virtuals were discontinued. When virtuals were discontinued, existing virtuals, like this one, were grandfathered. Changing from a regular cache to a virtual is no longer allowed.


I agree that this is different in that it is a Virtual but it still should require that you do something to show that you were there. Post a picture of you and your GPS, a picture of the view that identifies you were there, a picture of an identifiable item, send the sign info to the owner, something, anything.

ltlindian
08-04-2008, 02:08 PM
Just an update--I was able to find another spot for a cache and now it is listed! Yay! Everyone rush out and find my first hidden cache! It's called Knickercane. I'm still waiting to hear on the Point cache so hopefully I can hide one there soon too.

firefighterjake
08-06-2008, 07:52 AM
Just an update--I was able to find another spot for a cache and now it is listed! Yay! Everyone rush out and find my first hidden cache! It's called Knickercane. I'm still waiting to hear on the Point cache so hopefully I can hide one there soon too.

Congrats on your first cache hide. Hiding a cache and reading the logs on line can be just as fun and entertaining as finding caches.

To me, hiding a cache is as important as finding caches as it is a way of "giving back" to the geocaching community (although to tell the truth I've slacked off lately . . . I've got to find some time and more places to hide a few more). The way I look at it . . . if no one bothered to hide a cache and everyone just wanted to find caches the game would get pretty boring and stale pretty quickly.

Bringing folks to a new place that they might never have seen or teaching them about some history or geology is part of the appeal to me . . . and reading the logs (especially the entertaining ones) can be pretty addictive. On the flip side, I absolutely hate reading logs that indicate the person was simply looking for a cache and not really looking at the place that I brought them to (i.e. #23 of 45 caches of the day" or "TFTC SL TNLN") -- to me this usually shows me that the person either didn't like the place or cache or simply didn't take the time to really look at the place that I brought them. Fortunately, most folks take the time to post more detailed logs and share some of their thoughts -- good or bad.

Medawisla
08-06-2008, 07:33 PM
Congrats on your first cache hide. Hiding a cache and reading the logs on line can be just as fun and entertaining as finding caches.

To me, hiding a cache is as important as finding caches as it is a way of "giving back" to the geocaching community (although to tell the truth I've slacked off lately . . . I've got to find some time and more places to hide a few more). The way I look at it . . . if no one bothered to hide a cache and everyone just wanted to find caches the game would get pretty boring and stale pretty quickly.

Bringing folks to a new place that they might never have seen or teaching them about some history or geology is part of the appeal to me . . . and reading the logs (especially the entertaining ones) can be pretty addictive. On the flip side, I absolutely hate reading logs that indicate the person was simply looking for a cache and not really looking at the place that I brought them to (i.e. #23 of 45 caches of the day" or "TFTC SL TNLN") -- to me this usually shows me that the person either didn't like the place or cache or simply didn't take the time to really look at the place that I brought them. Fortunately, most folks take the time to post more detailed logs and share some of their thoughts -- good or bad.

You've just been quoted for the newsletter! tehehe:D:cool::p

Macmo
08-06-2008, 09:13 PM
How many cache owners compare the written log to the online log? Anyone?

I have been removed from a virtual cache because I apparently didn't answer the questions properly. I was never contacted or querried by the owner, needless to say I never bothered to follow on it, or seek out any more caches by this owner.

hollora
08-06-2008, 09:36 PM
How many cache owners compare the written log to the online log? Anyone?

I have been removed from a virtual cache because I apparently didn't answer the questions properly. I was never contacted or querried by the owner, needless to say I never bothered to follow on it, or seek out any more caches by this owner.

On occasion I do compare my log sheets to on line. Usually there are far more in the cache log than on line. I can't remember removing one.

I have deleted a log(s) on one of my Earthcaches for failure to comply with posting some sort of a photo and no explanation of why that piece of the logging requirement could not be completed ~ when it is very clear in the cache page and description that is a requirement of logging.

Probably in the scheme of things - the loss of a virtual find is minimal but odd that the owner would take the time to delete it but not email you to ask a question. I hear you about not doing caches by this owner.

brdad
08-07-2008, 06:26 AM
How many cache owners compare the written log to the online log? Anyone?

I have been removed from a virtual cache because I apparently didn't answer the questions properly. I was never contacted or querried by the owner, needless to say I never bothered to follow on it, or seek out any more caches by this owner.

I think not so many, but we have a low number of cachers, which gives us a low percentage of intentional cheaters. I also like to believe Mainers are an honest group. But there are bound a few unintentionally logged caches. Heck, I logged the same cache 7 or 8 times in a row a few weeks ago!

I do look through my written log books when I replace them, or if I get an online log that seems suspicious. Sometimes people just log the wrong cache by mistake. Sometimes people log on the web site but not online, so it's nice to see those logs as well.

I had a finder remove his log from one of my caches a few weeks ago. I didn't have to check the logbook, he logged online that he found something a few miles away and that was good enough for him. But, I took the time to email him to make sure what I read was true before saying I could not accept that as a find. Communication is one of the points I mention in my Anatomy of a great cache hide (http://www.geocachingmaine.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1564) article, and it would have helped in the case of your virtual.

firefighterjake
08-07-2008, 07:32 AM
How many cache owners compare the written log to the online log? Anyone?

I have been removed from a virtual cache because I apparently didn't answer the questions properly. I was never contacted or querried by the owner, needless to say I never bothered to follow on it, or seek out any more caches by this owner.

I rarely compare the written log to the on-line log unless I have some questions as to whether the person actually found the cache . . . happily I have yet to be disappointed in my faith in the geocaching community.

I've only had one log deleted . . . but that was for the infamous Fitz cache. As for myself, I've never deleted a log . . . and never would unless something was just way too outrageous . . . and even then I would rather send a note to the cacher asking them to modify their log or remove it voluntarily. I have on a couple of occasions requested (key emphasis on the word "requested") that cachers alter their entry on-line . . . but only to not spill the beans on one of my cache locations (it's a cache that is written in a manner so that many folks don't expect to end up where they do.)

firefighterjake
08-07-2008, 07:33 AM
You've just been quoted for the newsletter! tehehe:D:cool::p

Which part . . . the part about me being a slacker and not putting out any recent caches?;):D

Medawisla
08-10-2008, 07:43 PM
Which part . . . the part about me being a slacker and not putting out any recent caches?;):D

haha, that might be what the advertisers want, but no. (Good thing we don't have advertisers huh?):p

Newsletter preview:
--Firefighterjake encourages you to go hide caches, “Bringing folks to a new place that they might never have seen or teaching them about some history or geology is part of the appeal to me, and reading the logs (especially the entertaining ones) can be pretty addictive.”

Macmo
08-10-2008, 10:02 PM
Maybe I am just lazy or the fact that I never even considered that someone would log illegitimately.

I think N1WTQ has not logged more caches that he has found then ones which he has logged (online). LOL

brdad
08-11-2008, 06:40 AM
Maybe I am just lazy or the fact that I never even considered that someone would log illegitimately.

Unfortunately it is true. Humans have a tendency to compete whenever given the chance. And just as you see with sports or any other competition, there is a percentage that feel they have to change the rules to be on top. Of course with geocaching, which has no rules concerning competition, these few will just say they are playing their own way.

I'd much rather see the game stay as a fun activity and keep the competition out of it.

firefighterjake
08-11-2008, 07:39 AM
Unfortunately it is true. Humans have a tendency to compete whenever given the chance. And just as you see with sports or any other competition, there is a percentage that feel they have to change the rules to be on top. Of course with geocaching, which has no rules concerning competition, these few will just say they are playing their own way.

I'd much rather see the game stay as a fun activity and keep the competition out of it.

(In my best Austrian voice) . . . Yah . . . that's why I am taking the steroids . . . it helps me cache better. ;):D

balinda
08-11-2008, 11:04 AM
When I first started out I logged into the logbook as "momofals" which I wanted to be my trail name. I had already joined geocaching.com but didn't understand the difference because I hadn't loged on the computer yet. Of the 12 I did before logging only 3 got removed and all by the same owner. No email to me. Just removal.

I don't know if I'm going to do the caches again. I don't care about the numbers but I am a little sad that the owner would remove me off three caches with out saying something. I could have explained. Be new to the sport I didn't figure it out till months later when I was going into that area again and the caches I knew I had done came up without smiley faces.

hide_from_the_kids
09-11-2008, 02:09 PM
Just an update--I received a note from the Maine Publisher that they didn't realize that it was a virtual cache and they have asked the owner to place a real cache. If they don't, they I can place my cache there! YAY!
the cache in question has been archived does this allow you to place your cache now? i would pm maine publisher and find out. it would be nice to see a cache back at this place.

ltlindian
09-11-2008, 03:21 PM
Yes--I asked about it last week and they let me relist it. We hid it last Thursday and seeblue was FTF! thanks for asking!:D BTW I finally found that micro I was having such trouble with at Head Tide. Thank God--I have been able to sleep now!