Loveland Area Caches Gone

General Information About Geocaching

Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby tripman1 » Sun Sep 18, 2016 11:45 am

Well, I finally took the long drive and went to find the rare podcast, deadrop and other caches put out by Memfis Mafia. I had a very difficult time with them and when I emailed the CO , he said he removed them but never archived them. Next day all the caches were gone and he removed his user account. Too bad, I would have adopted them in a heartbeat.
ImageImage
tripman1
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:24 am
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby KnowsOpie » Sun Sep 18, 2016 2:21 pm

tripman1 wrote:Well, I finally took the long drive and went to find the rare podcast, deadrop and other caches put out by Memfis Mafia. I had a very difficult time with them and when I emailed the CO , he said he removed them but never archived them. Next day all the caches were gone and he removed his user account. Too bad, I would have adopted them in a heartbeat.


Now that the area is opened up you could place and maintain your own. ;)
Nutty as a Squirrel Turd
User avatar
KnowsOpie
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:39 pm

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby Mr.Yuck » Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:11 am

tripman1 wrote:Well, I finally took the long drive and went to find the rare podcast, deadrop and other caches put out by Memfis Mafia. I had a very difficult time with them and when I emailed the CO , he said he removed them but never archived them. Next day all the caches were gone and he removed his user account. Too bad, I would have adopted them in a heartbeat.


Sorry to hear about that! At the same time, I am happy he removed them. The MM archivals did not escape our attention, so we contacted him back then. Rest assured it wasn't a Geocide, or he hates us or anything. He was just cutting back on his GPS gaming.
ImageImage
User avatar
Mr.Yuck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2011
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:09 pm
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby tripman1 » Wed Sep 21, 2016 11:51 am

Now that the area is opened up you could place and maintain your own.


Good idea, I'll look into that.

Sorry to hear about that! At the same time, I am happy he removed them. The MM archivals did not escape our attention, so we contacted him back then. Rest assured it wasn't a Geocide, or he hates us or anything. He was just cutting back on his GPS gaming.


Yeah, he said he wasn't getting any visits so he archived them. Numbers game I guess.
ImageImage
tripman1
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:24 am
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby KnowsOpie » Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:42 pm

tripman1 wrote:

Yeah, he said he wasn't getting any visits so he archived them. Numbers game I guess.


I don't think it's a numbers game thing, I archived my caches here last year because of inactivity. I did leave one "vacation cache" virtual because there are a few more OCNA listings in the area.

I see it as a good thing, to remove listings if the member becomes inactive here. It's that stale data and dumped traditional caches that makes this site and others like it look bad.

If OCNA ever had a clean-up, I believe it would look more useable. But until then, it's just another site like Terra Caching and the others with listings and members that are no longer there.
Nutty as a Squirrel Turd
User avatar
KnowsOpie
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:39 pm

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby Bon Echo » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:50 pm

MPH, do you have facts and figures to back up your statements about stale data on OCNA or are you just making assumption? My DNF rate on OCNA pretty low. Just because the cache is old, just because it's never been found or hasn't been found in a long time, and just because the CO has become inactive does not mean the cache is not there. In the past couple years I've found many (a few dozen) old letterboxes and OCNA / Terracaches, nearly all of them sitting lonely for 2, 3 even 7 years. I found most of the ones I searched for and found most in great shape despite age, despite time since last found and despite owner maintenance. Furthermore, the OCNA seem to be engage wrt to archiving caches that are clearly missing and there is a process to automatically disable a cache:
" If a cache has 2 or more consecutive "Did Not Find" or DNFs, it will be flagged as Temporarily Unavailable so that the cache owner may check on it. It can be reactivated by the cache owner when they post a comment on the cache listing verifying that cache is intact and in place. This is a measure to prevent muggled, abandoned or orphaned caches from continuing to be listed."

As far as the MM caches, I think it was inconsiderate for the caches to be removed and not archived. Tripman1 seems to be taking int in stride but I know I'd be peeved if I made a trip to find those caches. Also, it's one thing to archive caches that you don't want to maintain (commendable in fact), but changing your user name to 'nobody' tells me there's more to it than just lack of interest.
Bon Echo
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:39 pm

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby KnowsOpie » Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:21 pm

Bon Echo wrote:MPH, do you have facts and figures to back up your statements about stale data on OCNA or are you just making assumption? My DNF rate on OCNA pretty low. Just because the cache is old, just because it's never been found or hasn't been found in a long time, and just because the CO has become inactive does not mean the cache is not there. In the past couple years I've found many (a few dozen) old letterboxes and OCNA / Terracaches, nearly all of them sitting lonely for 2, 3 even 7 years. I found most of the ones I searched for and found most in great shape despite age, despite time since last found and despite owner maintenance. Furthermore, the OCNA seem to be engage wrt to archiving caches that are clearly missing and there is a process to automatically disable a cache:
" If a cache has 2 or more consecutive "Did Not Find" or DNFs, it will be flagged as Temporarily Unavailable so that the cache owner may check on it. It can be reactivated by the cache owner when they post a comment on the cache listing verifying that cache is intact and in place. This is a measure to prevent muggled, abandoned or orphaned caches from continuing to be listed."

As far as the MM caches, I think it was inconsiderate for the caches to be removed and not archived. Tripman1 seems to be taking int in stride but I know I'd be peeved if I made a trip to find those caches. Also, it's one thing to archive caches that you don't want to maintain (commendable in fact), but changing your user name to 'nobody' tells me there's more to it than just lack of interest.


I was part of the review team here for a few months, so I have little experience here with the process.

There are only 12 traditional OCNA caches within 100 miles of me in a OHV park that I have visited several times since those caches were placed and the landscape has changed, it's a mining area. Similar to the local TC caches where the area has been underwater several times during flooding, they are gone and their owners left years ago.

If you enjoy looking for caches that are dumped and abandoned, that is fine. I prefer active listings that have been found in recent years. You are lucky to have a active OCNA community, I'm not. There are no other players locally.

I've just seen too many caches offered here because they were rejected by groundspeak because of proximity issues, and cross listings that have been archived on GS because they are missing
Nutty as a Squirrel Turd
User avatar
KnowsOpie
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:39 pm

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby Mr.Yuck » Thu Sep 29, 2016 10:18 am

Manville Possum Hunters wrote:I was part of the review team here for a few months, so I have little experience here with the process.


Yes, but just a little. :D

There are only 12 traditional OCNA caches within 100 miles of me in a OHV park that I have visited several times since those caches were placed and the landscape has changed, it's a mining area. Similar to the local TC caches where the area has been underwater several times during flooding, they are gone and their owners left years ago.


Have you looked for these OCNA caches? I found the listings, 2012 placements. Certainly no logs from you on them. You mean there are TC caches in an area where they have been underwater? Don't underestimate the durability of boxes in the woods under piles of rocks or sticks. We had a freak early October snow storm up here in these parts in 2006. Most of the leaves were still on the trees, and the snow was very wet and heavy, and tens of thousands of trees were either destroyed, or lost half their branches. Took us a couple years to clean up, especially the trails in wooded parks. There were people banging the drums in the local forum (and local forums were very active back then) that half or more caches could be lost. I don't remember a single one being lost.

If you enjoy looking for caches that are dumped and abandoned, that is fine. I prefer active listings that have been found in recent years. You are lucky to have a active OCNA community, I'm not. There are no other players locally.


Active Community? I think he's talking the exact opposite if he's talking about looking for caches that haven't been found in years. Last November, I found an OCNA exclusive micro in a rock wall that hadn't been found in 5 years and 3 weeks. It was in pristine condition. I too thought it was pretty cool to do such a thing, and I had done it way back in 2008 or so with 3 or 4 Navicaches in Rochester, N.Y. (The original home of Navicache) that hadn't been found since around 2004.

I've just seen too many caches offered here because they were rejected by groundspeak because of proximity issues, and cross listings that have been archived on GS because they are missing


Really? Since 2013, I'll say I've seen about 6 caches submitted here that were obvious Groundspeak rejections, i.e. less than 528 feet from one of their caches. Yes, I could have missed some. Or even many. So what you see right now that has been archived on Geocaching.com and still listed here? Right about a year ago, I did a sweep, and looked at all 300 or so cross listed caches (wild guess on 300, I could look it up), and I archived about 16 or 18. I actually got a nastygram from a guy in Utah who didn't want his archived here, and I archived 3 or 4 by another guy who was a pioneer on this site, (although everything he listed here was cross-listed from Geocaching.com) and he archived his one or two remaining. I also noticed a couple weeks later he unfollowed us on Twitter, as I use a third party service to look at that every once in a while. I said to myself "man, he must have really been pissed". :D
ImageImage
User avatar
Mr.Yuck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2011
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:09 pm
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby KnowsOpie » Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:04 pm

Mr.Yuck wrote:Really? Since 2013, I'll say I've seen about 6 caches submitted here that were obvious Groundspeak rejections, i.e. less than 528 feet from one of their caches. Yes, I could have missed some. Or even many.


Three of the last four traditional caches accepted here have proximity issues of less than 528 feet and the one marked OCNA only is cross-listed on GC.com.

Sure, I looked for one or two of those OCNA caches at the OHV park back in 2013. It was exciting to have another player in the area with similar interests. :mrgreen:

Some TC and Navi Caches in my area were on bridges that have been replaced and along a creek that is now a paved Green Belt. Geocaches don't last forever, and I don't seek out caches that I even suspect are missing or dumped.

I'm glad to know that you do a clean-up every now and then, it makes your site appear more useable to me. ;)
Nutty as a Squirrel Turd
User avatar
KnowsOpie
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:39 pm

Re: Loveland Area Caches Gone

Postby Mr.Yuck » Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:44 am

Manville Possum Hunters wrote:
Mr.Yuck wrote:Really? Since 2013, I'll say I've seen about 6 caches submitted here that were obvious Groundspeak rejections, i.e. less than 528 feet from one of their caches. Yes, I could have missed some. Or even many.


Three of the last four traditional caches accepted here have proximity issues of less than 528 feet and the one marked OCNA only is cross-listed on GC.com.


Per the bolding, wrong. Lets examine this more closely:

Traditional #1: Does indeed have proximity issues on the Froggie site, 459 feet, to be exact.
Traditional #2: A cache in Utah, has the OC Only attribute, and is indeed OC Only. It absolutely does not have a proximity issue.
Traditional #3: Is a cache by Bon Echo, who has posted to this thread. This is obviously an OC only cache, never intended to be listed on Geocaching.com, and I'm quite certain he's well aware of his "proximity issue".
Tradtional #4: Is cross listed, but has OC Only attribute. Cache obviously didn't appear on Geocaching.com until after it was submitted here. See DG's approved log. Yes, we could probably look later for such an instance in the future. I have removed the OC Only attribute, and added the GC.com waypoint.

I'm glad to know that you do a clean-up every now and then, it makes your site appear more useable to me. ;)

Just for you, I'll do one again. :D After all, summer is over (and where I live it's really over), so I was going to be devoting much more time to the site anywho. The current count stands at 260 cross listed and a status of "active" on this site, although our term is "ready for search". This is a search that takes about .006 seconds in the database.
ImageImage
User avatar
Mr.Yuck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2011
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:09 pm
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.

Next

Return to Geocaching

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron