[Az-Geocaching] What do you think of this idea?

[Trisha Radley]

I agree, Michael. Two weeks is ridiculous and all the work you did was
wasted. It is really frustrating to go after something in a cache and it
isn't there. I've been surprised by how many logs I see in my cache's logs
that are not posted online. How hard can it be, after all (especially for a
traveller, that effects other people!) since the people had to log on to the
geocaching website to get the coords in the first place!
I picked up a traveller about three weeks ago here in Prescott, and since I
knew I'd be going to Reno (today) for a week, I planned to put it up there
to move it along. But I posted a note to that effect, to let everyone know I
had it and it wouldn't be placed right away.

peace,

~~trisha "Lightning"


----- Original Message -----
From: "Baja Fleg" <fleigle@hotmail.com>
To: <az-geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] What do you think of this idea?


> Tell me about it.  That locutus thing really got to me when I was in
Austin.
>   Story goes I went searching for it on a multi-stage cache that I really
> didn't have time to complete and did't know the area well enough to do but
> spent a week of my three week business trip/geocaching trip figuring it
out
> just so I could get this travel thing and bring it back to Phoenix in
> February.  Well I finally solved this multi-stager only to find the stupid
> thing was gone and had been gove for TWO WEEKS!!!  The nice people who
moved
> it didn't log it on the geocaching.com website, they only put it in the
log
> book.  Because I usually don't read all the logs in the log books I didn't
> know that until I got a nasty email from them in response to the MIA post
> that I put on the Locutus cache page.  Now it looks like it made it to
> Phoenix after all only to have the same thing happen.
> These traveling caches and travel bugs with there own pages only work if
the
> people log them when they find them.  If people wait and log them when
they
> feel like it then people like me (who lets people know what I think of
them
> when I get nasty emails) gets a little upset  ;).  If people find these
> things they should respect the other cachers that might go looking for it
> enough that they post that they have taken them or re-hid them ASAP, no
> exceptions.
>
> Michael
> Team TJ
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Scott Nicol" <arizcowboy@hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: az-geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com
> To: az-geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com
> Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] What do you think of this idea?
> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:16:38 -0800
>
> HHHMMM.
>
> I like it and I don't like it. I like the concept behind the moving cache.
> Sounds like fun. What I dont like about it is the fact that several other
> cachers could go looking for it before the last finder can get to a
computer
> to log the find. I have seen many caches around here that have had several
> visits in one day. Usually, each time a find is had, it usually doesnt get
> posted until later that day or even that night. I sometimes will get a
cache
> while driving across town or whatever and will not get to log it until I
get
> home. That could be several hours or all day.
>
> We went up to the Payson area last weekend and didnt log those finds until
> nearly midnight that night.
>
> So, with that said.. I dont like it. I don't like the idea of going after
a
> cache and not finding it simply because it isn't there.
>
> There is a travel bug/cache here in PHX called Locutus of Borg. I guess,
> from what I can tell, it is a travel bug that is displayed on
geocaching.com
> as a cache. Once the last cacher finds it, they log it and the coords of
the
> next cache it is placed in becomes the new coords and thus the new cache.
(I
> think this is how geocaching.com used to move travel bugs and now TB's
have
> their own pages). The reason I bring this cache up is because it is
> currently not active. Yet, still shows up as a cache that is available for
a
> find (it is in papago park and is the present site of the Sign of the Past
> cache). The last finder apparently didn't place the travel bug in another
> cache. Either that, or they didnt post that they did place it in another
> cache. Once placed elsewhere, that 'cache' location should archive. It
hasnt
> as of yet.
>
> The same thing could happen with this traveling cache. It could sit in
> someone's hands for a while and not be logged. In the meantime, other
> cachers are going looking for something that isn't there.
>
> It is kinda like the Wyle E operative TB's. You see it posted in a cache
and
> so you go to that cache hoping to get the TB. Unfortunately, someone
already
> got to it before you could. All is not lost though, there is still a cache
> there to log into (unless you have already been to that cache, I guess). I
> have not gone after a Wyle operative yet. I am waiting until one is placed
> in a cache I havent found yet. I might then quickly go out and try and get
> it and log another new find. I don't want to go back to a cache I have
> already been to (unless it is right near my house). (I do think that the
> Wyle A B C D Operatives are a cool idea for getting the clues for a
cache!).
>
> Otherwise, the idea of the cache sounds like a fun new idea. Worth a try?
I
> guess so. Everything has to have a first try. The one good thing about
this
> traveling cache is that the same person can continually find it and thus
log
> another cache find! (however, is it possible someone could hide it and
then
> 'find' it again next and keep logging finds?!) Perhaps we can watch this
> cache and see how it progresses.
>
> Scott
> Team Ropingthewind
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list
> Az-Geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com
> http://listserv.snaptek.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>