+headmj Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I just found a geocache that was magnetic nano (about the size of a thimble) and I had to reach up into an operating soda vending machine to retrieve it. This just seems very wrong and is an excellent example of why I hate micros. Should this kind of hide be allowed? I think that this kind of hide should not be allowed. I should NEVER have to put my hand in an energized electric device. This includes light poles and other municipal equipment. I'd appreciate your input. Mike Quote Link to comment
+2hypergirls Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I am new too. That is totally uncalled for and just plain stupid. I would send an email to Groundspeak people letting them know of the situation. The one super tiny micro I found was on the underside of a picnic table in a park. Much more appropriate. Quote Link to comment
mresoteric Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I bet there are some nice caches in the woods in your area. We got tons of them here. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 While I agree that these hides are not a good idea there is nothing that says you have to reach into anything. You could have just walked away. Quote Link to comment
+the4dirtydogs Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I wouldn't put out a cache like this. You don't have to find EVERY cache out there. Do the caches you like and have fun finding them. There are a lot of caches out there that are inappropriate, but I guess the real debate is what is considered inappropriate. Quote Link to comment
+rav_bunneh Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. Quote Link to comment
+jmw61 Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I don't like micro's or nano's either, but nobody can MAKE me put my hand in anything. I'd have just passed this one by..... Quote Link to comment
+headmj Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share Posted April 7, 2011 I appreciate that I don't have to do this. I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda. This stuff is outside and I don't think we should be tempting the terminally dumb to do stupid things. Mike Quote Link to comment
+t4e Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I appreciate that I don't have to do this. I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda. This stuff is outside and I don't think we should be tempting the terminally dumb to do stupid things. Mike but, but...what would happen to the Darwin Award each year? Quote Link to comment
+Ike 13 Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 1) Not all micros are bad. 2) Some areas have more issues than others. 3) That cache is obviously on private property and probably lacks permission. Log a NA or send the GC code to the reviewer. Quote Link to comment
+the4dirtydogs Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 I appreciate that I don't have to do this. I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda. This stuff is outside and I don't think we should be tempting the terminally dumb to do stupid things. Mike I got a good laugh at the terminally dumb to do stupid things line. I laughed even harder because you actually found the cache So what does that make you? Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda.I'm not convinced that it's that unsafe. Believe it or not, vending machine designers actually anticipate people reaching into them further than is necessary to retrieve the product. Not that safety (or lack thereof) is a determining factor in whether a cache should be listed. Most genuine 5-star terrain environments are very dangerous to people who lack the necessary equipment and/or training. As rav_bunneh indicated, I think the most likely listing issue is a lack of adequate permission. Quote Link to comment
+Mom-n-Andy Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I appreciate that I don't have to do this. I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda. This stuff is outside and I don't think we should be tempting the terminally dumb to do stupid things. Mike but, but...what would happen to the Darwin Award each year? You have to actually die or be otherwise rendered incapable of conributing to the gene pool to get a Darwin Award. I am curious how the OP knew that the nano would be up inside a soda machine? Quote Link to comment
+Sharks-N-Beans Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Quote Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 The issue is not one of safety but rather one of permission. I seriously doubt such a cache had permission. ....and, if I may ask, why in the world did you stick your hand so far up in the machine that you actually found the thing??!!?? Quote Link to comment
mresoteric Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I appreciate that I don't have to do this. I think this is UNSAFE. You had to reach well past where you would have retrieved a can of soda. This stuff is outside and I don't think we should be tempting the terminally dumb to do stupid things. Mike I got a good laugh at the terminally dumb to do stupid things line. I laughed even harder because you actually found the cache So what does that make you? I gotta grab a paper towel and clean off my monitor now. Quote Link to comment
+KBLAST Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) A little searching and I found the cache. Sure enough, he got permission from the owner. Edited April 8, 2011 by KBLAST Quote Link to comment
+Sharks-N-Beans Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Permission, fun, good location if you like smoked fish and a favorite of someone...what's the problem? Quote Link to comment
+Colonial Cats Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I guess I should archieve my "Nano in the Wood Chipper" cache. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I guess I should archieve my "Nano in the Wood Chipper" cache. Stumpy says it's about dang time! (He'd type this himself but, well, you know what with the incident, and his fingers and all...) Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 A little searching and I found the cache. Sure enough, he got permission from the owner. 55 miles from home. I think I may check it out soon.It will be a nice cruise on the bike. Quote Link to comment
Keystone Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 ... I think the most likely listing issue is a lack of adequate permission. Now that KBLAST has located the listing, I think the most likely listing issue is a faint whiff of commercialism. The issue is not one of safety but rather one of permission. I seriously doubt such a cache had permission. As was shown here, you'd be surprised how often caches like this have permission. Well less than half of urban micros hidden with permission will have cache pages that say this. The owners are happy to tell me this privately, however... often with contact information. Since so many ARE hidden with permission, I can assume that the rest do until proven otherwise. Or until Wal-Mart adopts an official geocaching policy so I have to ask prior to publication. A little searching and I found the cache. Sure enough, he got permission from the owner. Thanks for finding the listing. The permission statement really ends the discussion, other than the safety angle. I will tell the New York reviewer to archive this unsafe vending machine cache, but only after I first archive every tree climbing cache in the State of Ohio. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I just found a geocache that was magnetic nano (about the size of a thimble) and I had to reach up into an operating soda vending machine to retrieve it. This just seems very wrong and is an excellent example of why I hate micros. Should this kind of hide be allowed? I think that this kind of hide should not be allowed. I should NEVER have to put my hand in an energized electric device. This includes light poles and other municipal equipment. I'd appreciate your input. Mike But apparently you DID put your hand in there. Why would you do such a thing? Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Careful, now... its only post #9. Quote Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Good to hear permission was obtained. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I guess I should archieve my "Nano in the Wood Chipper" cache. That's the one up in Fargo, ND, isn't it? Quote Link to comment
+Colonial Cats Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I guess I should archieve my "Nano in the Wood Chipper" cache. That's the one up in Fargo, ND, isn't it? Why yes it is! Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) Good to hear permission was obtained. Amazingly enough, this obnoxious, loud-mouthed, ammo box in the woods loving old-schooler has found the cache in question! A nano in a soda machine was actually very innovative in 2005. I specifically remember going for it because the cache page mentioned permission, and it's a nice location at a marina. Now out front of Wal-Mart near the front door in the 35 cent a can Sam's Brand soda machine, that's a whole 'nother thing. Edited April 8, 2011 by Mr.Yuck Quote Link to comment
+KBLAST Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 A little searching and I found the cache. Sure enough, he got permission from the owner. Thanks for finding the listing. The permission statement really ends the discussion, other than the safety angle. I will tell the New York reviewer to archive this unsafe vending machine cache, but only after I first archive every tree climbing cache in the State of Ohio. Holy cow!!! Are you trying to destroy all geocaching around Columbus, Cincinnati, and Dayton?!!! Quote Link to comment
+Sharks-N-Beans Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 But... but... We can't end it like this! It's an urban micro for gosh sake! Surely we can come up with something negative to say! How 'bout we question the validity of the permission giver? After all, most soda vending machines are not owned by the businesses they reside at. If the cache owner got permission for the hide from the business owner, but not the vending machine owner, we could continue bashing the hide, right? Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Yes it is. But for a cache on private property like this explicit permission should be the minimum adequate permission. In a public park with no rules to the contrary assumed permission may be adequate. Each hide needs to be evaluated on its own merits. Some hides require a written permit as the minimum adequate permission acceptable. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 But... but... We can't end it like this! It's an urban micro for gosh sake! Surely we can come up with something negative to say! How 'bout we question the validity of the permission giver? After all, most soda vending machines are not owned by the businesses they reside at. If the cache owner got permission for the hide from the business owner, but not the vending machine owner, we could continue bashing the hide, right? How about this. Soda vending machine hides should be banned because sugary drinks are bad for you. My God! Think of the chinldren! Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. Explicit permission is when someone with authority to do so, such as a property owner or land manager, gives formal permission for a cache. Adequate permission is usually when a hide is placed in an area that does not require explicit permission. An example of this is the parks in Seminole County Florida. These properties are governed by two different entities, Seminole County Parks & Recreation, and Seminole County Natural Lands. The former has stated that they believe Geocaching is a benign recreational activity with it's own methods of governing already in place. As such, they don't require any permits, notifications or even verbal permission. Feel free to hide caches there. You already have adequate permission. However, the latter has a rigid permit process in place for geocaches. Hiding one there requires formal permission. Quote Link to comment
+Hemlock Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I will tell the New York reviewer to archive this unsafe vending machine cache, but only after I first archive every tree climbing cache in the State of Ohio. While you're doing that, I'll archive all the caches in California where one might be bitten by a rattlesnake or a tick which carries Lyme Disease, which should be about 95% of the caches. Caches in California Total Records: 91467 - Page: 1 of 4574 - < Prev << <[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10]> >> Next > This is going to take a while Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Quote Link to comment
+Sharks-N-Beans Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Yes it is. But for a cache on private property like this explicit permission should be the minimum adequate permission. In a public park with no rules to the contrary assumed permission may be adequate. Each hide needs to be evaluated on its own merits. Some hides require a written permit as the minimum adequate permission acceptable. So I may have adequate permission to place a cache on say a newspaper box located on a city sidewalk which I am rightfully able to be at any time of day just by my right to be there, whereas a cache on a similar paper box located at the front door of a private business may require explicit permission from the property owner? Quote Link to comment
+JL_HSTRE Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 I think this is a bad hide because it's not a good idea to encourage people to stick their hands up inside soda machines. Not the same thing as sticking it on the outside of such a machine, under a water fountain, on a payphone, or even most LPCs. That said, being unsafe is currently not grounds for removal, especially with clearly stated property owner's permission. Probably a classic case of "Reviewer held nose while clicking the Publish button". I would recommend just refraining from hunting urban micros since they're generally not to your liking. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Yes it is. But for a cache on private property like this explicit permission should be the minimum adequate permission. In a public park with no rules to the contrary assumed permission may be adequate. Each hide needs to be evaluated on its own merits. Some hides require a written permit as the minimum adequate permission acceptable. So I may have adequate permission to place a cache on say a newspaper box located on a city sidewalk which I am rightfully able to be at any time of day just by my right to be there, whereas a cache on a similar paper box located at the front door of a private business may require explicit permission from the property owner? Not quite right. You should get explicit permission for that paper box as it is private property. Look at it like this. If you park your bicycle in a public bike rack would it be ok if I put my bike lock on it? It's on public property that I am allowed to access. Quote Link to comment
+the4dirtydogs Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Great guys now my daughter(7) thinks the Frog hates her. Quote Link to comment
+KBLAST Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Yes it is. But for a cache on private property like this explicit permission should be the minimum adequate permission. In a public park with no rules to the contrary assumed permission may be adequate. Each hide needs to be evaluated on its own merits. Some hides require a written permit as the minimum adequate permission acceptable. So I may have adequate permission to place a cache on say a newspaper box located on a city sidewalk which I am rightfully able to be at any time of day just by my right to be there, whereas a cache on a similar paper box located at the front door of a private business may require explicit permission from the property owner? Not quite right. You should get explicit permission for that paper box as it is private property. Look at it like this. If you park your bicycle in a public bike rack would it be ok if I put my bike lock on it? It's on public property that I am allowed to access. I hate all the quotes, but I don't want to go outside of context (though it is getting kind of pretty.) Anyway, I totally disagree with this response. I'm not arguing that the paper box does or doesn't need permission, but I disagree with the comparison completely. We are NOT affecting use of the paper box or restricting use of the box in any way by placing a cache there. It would be more like placing a nano on the spokes of my bicycle. I doubt I'd ever notice it, if I did I would just get rid of it, and if I decided to use my bike, your nano would most likely be GONE. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Great guys now my daughter(7) thinks the Frog hates her. You should NEVER let a frog talk to your daughter alone. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Since the advent of soda machines millions of people have reached their hand into them to retrieve their sodas. I'd be more concerned that soda machines are private property. So help me out here (seriously not sure of the definition). What constitutes adequate permission on a device placed for public use such as a pay phone, drinking fountain or, in this case a soda machine? Asking the owner or his representative if it's ok to do so. What I was looking for here was the difference between adequate and explicit permission. I have seen both terms used in this forum as if there was a distinction. Your reply seems like explicit permission. Yes it is. But for a cache on private property like this explicit permission should be the minimum adequate permission. In a public park with no rules to the contrary assumed permission may be adequate. Each hide needs to be evaluated on its own merits. Some hides require a written permit as the minimum adequate permission acceptable. So I may have adequate permission to place a cache on say a newspaper box located on a city sidewalk which I am rightfully able to be at any time of day just by my right to be there, whereas a cache on a similar paper box located at the front door of a private business may require explicit permission from the property owner? Not quite right. You should get explicit permission for that paper box as it is private property. Look at it like this. If you park your bicycle in a public bike rack would it be ok if I put my bike lock on it? It's on public property that I am allowed to access. I hate all the quotes, but I don't want to go outside of context (though it is getting kind of pretty.) Anyway, I totally disagree with this response. I'm not arguing that the paper box does or doesn't need permission, but I disagree with the comparison completely. We are NOT affecting use of the paper box or restricting use of the box in any way by placing a cache there. It would be more like placing a nano on the spokes of my bicycle. I doubt I'd ever notice it, if I did I would just get rid of it, and if I decided to use my bike, your nano would most likely be GONE. I knew it would go this way. I never said I'd lock the bike up. Just lock my lock to your bike. Same as using the paper box for your cache. It is private property. It wouldn't be right. If you hid a cache on a paper box without asking you are assuming permission. That does not mean that it is adequate. Quote Link to comment
+the4dirtydogs Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Great guys now my daughter(7) thinks the Frog hates her. You should NEVER let a frog talk to your daughter alone. ..................and police men too. Quote Link to comment
+The Jester Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Great guys now my daughter(7) thinks the Frog hates her. You should NEVER let a frog talk to your daughter alone. ..................and police men too. Why shouldn't frogs talk to police men - alone or in a group? Quote Link to comment
+The Jester Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 The other line in his log that I 'liked' - This is really a nano not a micro ... Maybe I shouldn't of said anything... Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 My God! Think of the chinldren! I thought we established years ago that Groundspeak hates chinldren? No, I don't think they do hate chinldren. They just don't care about them. Great guys now my daughter(7) thinks the Frog hates her. She sounds very mature for her age. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.