nwogeo.org

I'm all for posting something. It's just going to be up to individuals to heed it or not.

There's some interesting points that have been brought up in this forum. When I put my first 6 caches out, I admit, I did NOT think about public view & some were pretty out in the open. I have since archived the open ones. I agree that lamppost caches are not the best, but think about geocachers who can't walk .25 miles in the woods to grab a cache. Or the RV'er who would really like a quick find in the state of Ohio on the turnpike. I think that lamppost caches would be ok if they are OUT OF THE WAY lampposts. Not the 3rd lamppost right in front of the local Wal-Mart where everyone parks.
I've seen plenty of out of the way guardrails that would garner no attention if someone was searching around on them. I have a cache on one, there's another one behind Ft. Meigs (History's Backside).
I like the idea of designating the type of cache, but I am not sure that we should be very specific. I have a cache that if I had to use a designation of LampPost on it, it takes away a quarter of the fun! I do think that there could be a designation for say a Park cache like the SQ so that someone zipping through town & has a route going doesn't stop at a MetroPark on 24 at 2 a.m. & then realize they can't get to it. Or they hunt it anyway giving geocaching a bad name. I know that cache pages spell out the hours available, but I don't always check that when laying out a route, then get to that page on the route & say "darn, we can't do that one!"
In any case, the more rules & regs we put out there, the less people are going to enjoy this hobby. There ARE definite rules and those have been put forth by GC.com. If we all follow common sense (i.e. don't put a regular container under the trashcan in front of the local Wal-Mart) I think the hobby will continue on as is.
If you feel that a cache is REALLY dangerous or on private property or just too open, use the function through GC.com of e-mail user. Drop the owner a line. Why go to Keystone first before approaching the cache owner? Most of us are friendly, and will respond to an e-mail. I'd rather someone come to me FIRST before dropping a Needs Archived. Another cacher may see something I didn't, or need an explanation of why this is there.
All in all, common sense & courtesy go a lot farther than just quick judgements & bringing in the real "cache cops" on GC.com.

Hey maybe I'm just a jerk then

I do usually post a needs maint before needs archived.

The Geocaching guidelines say the following:

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

If people heeded that assumption that you have permission, then there would be no issues in most cases.

But the problem is people don't read and/or understand the consequences of their actions.

Here's a revised idea then, we post that story in the section and when people look at it they will realize what the consequences are!

And if we broadcast the page like we do the SQ page then many people will see it. I have noticed there are always over 10 people looking at the SQ page, therefore hundreds of cachers would see the story a day potentially!

This topic has been discussed several times in various forums in the past. I think that if this issue IS sensitive, but correct wording and an educational bent to some information on this site is helpful for the good of our corner of the geocaching community. A lot of how something looks is on the hider and finders' differing experience.

The topic has been added to the agenda of the first steering meeting TBA.

BlackBrownDog wrote: The topic has been added to the agenda of the first steering meeting TBA.

And this is a good thing.

I did my part by archiving 3 caches that may draw negative attention. Hope others do as well.

thunter16148 wrote:I did my part by archiving 3 caches that may draw negative attention. Hope others do as well.

Cheezits, now I'm going to have to remember where the heck mine are. This could take some time!

Just for clarification, we are talking about just caches that would draw unwanted non-geocacher attention, aren't we? Like LPC's, caches on private property that don't have specific permission (and even some that do), etc? Not necessarily guardrail caches at the side of the road and other such placements?

IMHO I suppose ANY cache COULD cause unwanted attention, but some are more LIKELY to have the potential to cause unwanted attention than others.

(This message brought to you by Captain Obvious)

To elaborate on the points that Captain Obvious made.

"Unwanted attention" can come from both the the cache owner and the cache hunter.

The owner can place the cache in a location in full view of "interested parties" or in a location that "if" someone sees "suspicious activity" would arise sufficent concern to alert the authorities.

The cache hunter - us - can fail to use good judgment (that screams for a definition) when hunting. Also the inept, like myself, might turn a 1D hunt into a 4D hunt and look in places where is shouldn't be placed.

Something that might be helpful in a "think before you hide" page, would be assembling a list of links to news articles about the multiple times that local law enforcement (rightfully or ridiculously) have brought in the SWAT to blow up some McToys, or other examples of why someone should "think first, hide second." Anyone care to start?

BlackBrownDog wrote:Something that might be helpful in a "think before you hide" page, would be assembling a list of links to news articles about the multiple times that local law enforcement (rightfully or ridiculously) have brought in the SWAT to blow up some McToys, or other examples of why someone should "think first, hide second." Anyone care to start?

Now that's one of the smarter ideas I have read. I like that one.

after extended holiday vacation, read this SERIOUS geo-bump discussion...head out to do local caching...finding a few naughty ones, but mostly good caches...here's my take:

BlackBrownDog wrote:Something that might be helpful in a "think before you hide" page, would be assembling a list of links to news articles about the multiple times that local law enforcement (rightfully or ridiculously) have brought in the SWAT to blow up some McToys, or other examples of why someone should "think first, hide second." Anyone care to start?

LET'S IMPLEMENT THIS SUGGESTION...ALSO JSLAGLE'S ABOUT USING THE NEEDS MAINT AND ARCHIVING BUTTONS...

ALSO, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THESE CACHERS' MENTORING IDEA...

GoodDog wrote:

cheechgang wrote:But seriously folks. I'm not sure why there is resistance to the suggestion that "Bearclaws" is making. It is a lot closer to "mentoring" than to Cache-copism.

Yes! Why any resistance?
Good point Cheech and Bearclaws.

let's move forward as a group having fun, perhaps embracing the newbies with more aggressive mentors to help steer away from these and other aforementioned problems...
THANKS FOR THIS THREAD TO WELCOME ME HOME...MISSED Y'ALL...