Seems like the Austin geocachers had a lot of fun at Geowoodstock IV, but of course there's a fly in the ointment. Some of the many temporary caches that were created for the event, and some of the caches that were taken from their usual hiding spot to the event were forceably archived by certain reviewers. I don't know of any in Texas that were treated this way, but some from other states were. One guy even transfered his logs to another, archived cache by the same owner, only to have his logs deleted by the reviewer! Of course, now all the Austin cachers are upset. There's even this guy who maintains a "hall of shame" list for event temp caches and for caches that are taken to events, and (of course) he's trying to harrass the appropriate gc.com people into forceably archiving these caches.

The appropriate thing to do is, of course, to ignore the whole thing. Replace the archived caches with new caches in the same spot (no need to replace the log or container) and let everybody get a new smiley for an old cache. But people will fret about such things, so I offered a prize of a fully stocked ammo can to the two Austin cachers who can 1. Get the most caches on the "hall of shame" list, 2. Get the most logs deleted by the reviewer. I don't think anyone will take me up on it, but at least everyone has quit bitching about it. I think finding temp caches at an event is fun, if they're hidden like normal caches, and the same is true for temporarilly relocated caches. I'm not sure I would ever be the hider for such a cache, however. Once I place a cache, I want it to stay put. I'm certainly not going to go get it unless I plan to archive it. The same goes for temporary caches. I want my hides to be permanent.

In general, I think one should make light of other's bad behavior. If you let it get to you, you're the one who suffers, not the person doing the evil. Ignore it, make a game of it, but don't get upset.

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion