[GeoStL] Re: input please
- From: Bart Cross <bartcross@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 09:42:33 -0600
They have 130 caches but all of them are in one month. They just started
caching in November. I would still call them new. I would congratulate them
for joining the world of Geoocaching and advise them that a DNF is probably
the best log (rather than the needs maintenance) if you did not find
something. As for the damp logs. That seems clearly like a proper use of
needs maintenance.
Just my $.02. Happy new year everyone...
Bart
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Glenn <potbellystove@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Reported"? whats that mean and reported to whom? It is a needs
> maintenance icon that denotes that it needs maintenance. A cache that is wet
> needs maintenance. Seems like everything is as it should be.
>
> Then when you replace the wet log you say so and remove the needs
> maintenance icon. That is the way it is supposed to work.
>
> When I go out I may not want to find a bunch of wet broken stuff and I can
> filter out everything that has been tagged with a "needs maintenance icon".
> The icon is real handy for that kind of stuff.
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2011, at 7:29 PM, Arlene Jones wrote:
>
> I agree Glenn that it should be mentioned. Reported? Not sure I agree
> with that. Damp logs happen. Dale will be replacing it asap.
>
> ------------------------------
> From: potbellystove@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [GeoStL] Re: input please
> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 19:24:39 -0600
> To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> i would think that if the log is wet you would want to know so you could go
> replace it so it is all good for the next guy. If no one mentions it, how ya
> gonna know?
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2011, at 7:00 PM, Arlene Jones wrote:
>
> a new cacher (less than 130 finds) did some of our caches today.
> They seem to have gone crazy reporting them for having a damp log, the place
> being up for sale, and after not finding the cache. The one they didn't find
> was our how-it-zer ever gonna find
> it!<http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=d2ce18ce-ed2d-4ab7-bcb2-04cc5c93cbb6>
> and
> those of you who have done it know it is a harder one to get. I sent them an
> email explaining that generally you don't report caches for such little
> things. What do you all think? How would you have handled it?
>
> Arlene (JonesCrew)
>
>
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
