I Moved A Moving Cache (And Now I'm Getting Hate Mail)

June 20, 2015

So earlier this week, I noticed that GC8E37 would be within a 70 mile radius of home. This historical moving cache has a mission to visit every U.S.state. It was camped out near Reading, PA. It has camped in PA four times over it's span, and never once in NJ. So my caching buddy and I took the hour and a half trip, picked up the cache and found a nice spot for it here in NJ. Helping it along on it's mission, right? You would think I did a good thing for the good of the cache.

Well, as it would turn out, the cachers in the Reading area are very cross with me. To the point that I've received hateful "message center" messages and emails telling me that I'm selfish, a poor example of a geocacher, and a jerk.....among other things. They are complaining because they posted notes on the cache page earlier in the week that they wanted to find this cache and couldn't until the weekend. So does posting a note on moving cache hold it in place for you? Did I miss something here? LOL. Looks like most of the nasty notes written on the page have been deleted with the exception of one....but I'm curious. What do you guys think? Was I selfish in helping this cache along on it's mission, or did I do the right thing?

Edited June 20, 2015 by Traditional Bill

15.3k · June 20, 2015

It sounds like you did the right thing to me. The owner of the moving cache gets to determine its mission, and you helped it with its mission.

If the "hate mail" violates the terms of use, then be sure to report it to Groundspeak.

June 20, 2015

It sounds like you did the right thing to me. The owner of the moving cache gets to determine its mission, and you helped it with its mission.

If the "hate mail" violates the terms of use, then be sure to report it to Groundspeak.

None of the messages I've gotten are offensive or vulgar, just insulting to an extent. They don't bother me, so I haven't reported anybody to big green. It's just rather annoying that I feel like I did the right thing and people are getting bent out of shape about it. They're acting like a bunch of children that just got all of the candy that they were going to get taken away from them. It's a geocache for Flying Spaghetti Monster's sake. I guess this proves the power of the almighty smiley.

3.6k · June 20, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

3.6k · June 20, 2015

Many cachers that said...geocaching is just for fun are failing to follow the very words they said. :unsure:

2k · June 20, 2015

It's a moving cache.

You moved it.

The other people are jerks. You were not.

3.6k · June 20, 2015

It's a moving cache.

You moved it.

The other people are jerks. You were not.

Yes... but what I dont like is cachers find the moving cache and invite only their friends to a local park to log it and leave the rest out of it. We got a cacher in our area that hog all these caches and making sure it get out of the area so the rest of us can't get to it. I see plenty of moving caches that are passed on to another person. (yes, its placed, but their friends are right there to pick it up)

The OP did the right thing...thats fair all the way.

4.1k · June 20, 2015

It's probably easier for me to say, but a person's rude reaction to a moving cache being moved is not worth even being annoyed about. Posting a note on a moving cache that you would like to find it when it is convenient is a little like trying to reserve a "first" by noting that you will be there in the next week so please do not find it until then. A moving cache moves and anytime you look for one you take the chance that somebody will have taken it first. Someone could have grabbed it while the OP was driving out to get it. If there are people who feel like they missed a chance to log it, they can do what the OP did and make a trip to get it.

People take this game way too seriously.

Edited June 20, 2015 by geodarts

13.7k · June 20, 2015

By the owner's log (the entitled, "ME! What about ME?!" logs don't count) he seemed pleased it finally made it's way to Jersey.

After a coupla days, if it's still that big a deal (this isn't the Holy Grail...) one of the whiners can go pick it up.

Edited June 20, 2015 by cerberus1

15.3k · June 20, 2015

After a coupla days, if it's still that big a deal (this isn't the Holy Grail...) one of the cryers can go pick it back up.

Yep. A few years ago, there was a moving cache that would spend some time around here, until someone from Sacramento would find it and move it to the Sacramento area. Then it would spend time there, until someone from here would find it and bring it back. Lather, rinse, repeat.

If you want to find a moving cache, then you have to find it first after someone else moves it. Complaining that someone else found it and moved it is just silly.

19k · June 20, 2015

Good grief!! Trying to read the log history on that cache is a nightmare! Kudos to the cache owner for the effort to keep it going.

You did right. If they want it back in PA, then can come to NJ and take it. Thanks for helping it along on its goal.

13.7k · June 20, 2015

After a coupla days, if it's still that big a deal (this isn't the Holy Grail...) one of the big babies can go pick it back up.
Yep. A few years ago, there was a moving cache that would spend some time around here, until someone from Sacramento would find it and move it to the Sacramento area. Then it would spend time there, until someone from here would find it and bring it back. Lather, rinse, repeat.

If you want to find a moving cache, then you have to find it first after someone else moves it. Complaining that someone else found it and moved it is just silly.

Yeah, we liken 'em to trackables here. They seem to bounce back and forth between certain areas and not others.

Still like to know what the big deal is.

By logs, you'd think it was filled with silver, with a "take one" sign inside. :laughing:

June 20, 2015

After a coupla days, if it's still that big a deal (this isn't the Holy Grail...) one of the big babies can go pick it back up.
Yep. A few years ago, there was a moving cache that would spend some time around here, until someone from Sacramento would find it and move it to the Sacramento area. Then it would spend time there, until someone from here would find it and bring it back. Lather, rinse, repeat.

If you want to find a moving cache, then you have to find it first after someone else moves it. Complaining that someone else found it and moved it is just silly.

Yeah, we liken 'em to trackables here. They seem to bounce back and forth between certain areas and not others.

Still like to know what the big deal is.

By logs, you'd think it was filled with silver, with a "take one" sign inside.

There honestly wasn't anything special about it at all. It was just an ammo can. I did think it was especially cool that most of the trackables listed on the page were actually in the cache. You don't see that too often.

About an hour after I posted here, I did get a message from one of the cachers that sent me a nasty email with an apology.....So that's something.

5.7k · June 20, 2015

Looks like the only thing left for you to do is to log your find on the cache. Not sure if this was intentional or accidental, but you only left notes, no found it log.

June 20, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

19k · June 20, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

And to that commendation, I would add several reviewers that have had to deal with things such as being re-hidden in places where geocaching isn't allowed. It must be tough for them to keep an eye on these things as they move around!

June 20, 2015

Looks like the only thing left for you to do is to log your find on the cache. Not sure if this was intentional or accidental, but you only left notes, no found it log.

I have about twenty-five things to log still that I've found over the past month or two. I take forever to log stuff but the moving cache is definitely on that list.

4.8k · June 21, 2015

Proving once again that no good deed goes unpunished.

June 21, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

And to that commendation, I would add several reviewers that have had to deal with things such as being re-hidden in places where geocaching isn't allowed. It must be tough for them to keep an eye on these things as they move around!

That very scenario (given how much public land is now off-limits in NJ) came up during a chat with one of our local reviewers yesterday before I went out and logged the cache!

3.6k · June 21, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

I am going to disagree with you here about those grandfathered moving caches. I see them more of a hassle than anything else. When something over work the reviewers or GS, they are known to put the stop to it. Virtual caches are one of the things that reviewers got tired of. I had see one moving cache that got archived because GS got tired of it or something.

If you want to keep those moving caches alive, we all need to do our part of keeping that side game as fun and no hassle for GS and the reviewers.

Edited June 21, 2015 by SwineFlew

13.7k · June 21, 2015

Looks like it's on the move again already.

19k · June 21, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

I am going to disagree with you here about those grandfathered moving caches. I see them more of a hassle than anything else. When something over work the reviewers or GS, they are known to put the stop to it. Virtual caches are one of the things that reviewers got tired of. I had see one moving cache that got archived because GS got tired of it or something.

If you want to keep those moving caches alive, we all need to do our part of keeping that side game as fun and no hassle for GS and the reviewers.

Any idea how many moving caches are still in play?

13.7k · June 21, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

I am going to disagree with you here about those grandfathered moving caches. I see them more of a hassle than anything else. When something over work the reviewers or GS, they are known to put the stop to it. Virtual caches are one of the things that reviewers got tired of. I had see one moving cache that got archived because GS got tired of it or something.

If you want to keep those moving caches alive, we all need to do our part of keeping that side game as fun and no hassle for GS and the reviewers.

Any idea how many moving caches are still in play?

Last I looked, around 60.

I have 34 on watch.

June 21, 2015

Looks like it's on the move again already.

And the person who picked it up is already catching a rash of nasty comments, even though they're also knocking out at least one more state for the cache's mission

19k · June 21, 2015

Looks like it's on the move again already.

And the person who picked it up is already catching a rash of nasty comments, even though they're also knocking out at least one more state for the cache's mission

We had a moving cache in my area a number of years ago (Moving123) that garnered all sorts of angst and drama and anger. A lot (most?) of the nasty logs have since been removed, but there were times when cachers almost came to blows over it.

June 22, 2015

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I don't think we should eliminate an interesting artifact of prior geocaching practice because some people act inappropriately. I commend the CO on keeping this going (especially given the historical theme) and I'm glad I had a chance to log it today.

I am going to disagree with you here about those grandfathered moving caches. I see them more of a hassle than anything else. When something over work the reviewers or GS, they are known to put the stop to it. Virtual caches are one of the things that reviewers got tired of. I had see one moving cache that got archived because GS got tired of it or something.

If you want to keep those moving caches alive, we all need to do our part of keeping that side game as fun and no hassle for GS and the reviewers.

It is not a side game. These are valid caches with specific logging requirements, like webcams and virtuals. I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are. The hurry to move on to the "next great thing" has brought, in my opinion, more quantity and less quality to this game.

June 22, 2015

Tell them to "GET BENT!" Snooze, you loose.

19k · June 22, 2015

Tell them to "GET BENT!" Snooze, you loose.

Wow! I haven't heard that phrase in about 50 years!! :lol:

21.9k · June 22, 2015

I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are.

Why are you sure?

I have received more emails in 2015 about the cache being discussed in this thread than I have about any other cache, anywhere in my review territory. That's first out of more than 15,000 caches.

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

19k · June 22, 2015

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

But of course, then it would no longer be a moving cache.

21.9k · June 22, 2015

Zing!

3.6k · June 22, 2015

I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are.

Why are you sure?

I have received more emails in 2015 about the cache being discussed in this thread than I have about any other cache, anywhere in my review territory. That's first out of more than 15,000 caches.

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

My question to you, its really worth it to keep it going?

2.9k · June 23, 2015

I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are.

Why are you sure?

I have received more emails in 2015 about the cache being discussed in this thread than I have about any other cache, anywhere in my review territory. That's first out of more than 15,000 caches.

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

My question to you, its really worth it to keep it going?

YES! :lol:

7.5k · June 23, 2015

Well, as it would turn out, the cachers in the Reading area are very cross with me. To the point that I've received hateful "message center" messages and emails telling me that I'm selfish, a poor example of a geocacher, and a jerk.....among other things. They are complaining because they posted notes on the cache page earlier in the week that they wanted to find this cache and couldn't until the weekend. So does posting a note on moving cache hold it in place for you? Did I miss something here? LOL. Looks like most of the nasty notes written on the page have been deleted with the exception of one....but I'm curious. What do you guys think? Was I selfish in helping this cache along on it's mission, or did I do the right thing?

I would assume they were just joking about missing the opportunity. Yeah, I'm sure you got stuff that you absolutely and for sure can tell was not joking, but I'd still pretend they were all trying to be funny and send back responses to show I was "laughing along with them". There's really no other way to react to someone that becomes irrational over someone doing something entirely reasonable and expected.

5.7k · June 23, 2015

I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are.

Why are you sure?

I have received more emails in 2015 about the cache being discussed in this thread than I have about any other cache, anywhere in my review territory. That's first out of more than 15,000 caches.

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

My question to you, its really worth it to keep it going?

YES!

I say keep it moving.

3.6k · June 23, 2015

I am sure the total hassle factor for reviewers is minimal given how few of them there are.

Why are you sure?

I have received more emails in 2015 about the cache being discussed in this thread than I have about any other cache, anywhere in my review territory. That's first out of more than 15,000 caches.

You do get to a point where you wish to say "make it stop!"

My question to you, its really worth it to keep it going?

YES!

I didnt know that you are one of keystones socks.

3.8k · June 23, 2015

Looks like it's on the move again already.

And the person who picked it up is already catching a rash of nasty comments, even though they're also knocking out at least one more state for the cache's mission

We had a moving cache in my area a number of years ago (Moving123) that garnered all sorts of angst and drama and anger. A lot (most?) of the nasty logs have since been removed, but there were times when cachers almost came to blows over it.

Ah yes, Moving 1 2 3. I am glad to be a part of it but also glad that it's gone. I remember LOTs of angst but I don't remember anyone close to blows. I got the challenge of fishing it 40' off the bottom of a lake.

2k · June 24, 2015

I have never understood why there are so many rules on moving caches and many of them due to the COs and what they say is allowed or not, assuming one can even understand them in full. There are supposedly rules they can't be at events, but heck, there were like 4 or 5 of them at the Woodstock when it was in Seattle. I see nothing wrong while in between grabbing a moving cache and dropping it somewhere new you let some friends find it. The type of cache I have seen the most folks getting bent out of shape on are moving caches. I'd still be happy to sign one, but am not going to go out of my way to find one ever again. Too much drama. FTF drama is preschool to drama on moving caches.

Edited June 24, 2015 by lamoracke

3.2k · June 24, 2015

Based on some information on a local caching group's Facebook page it looks like a group expedition was planned for the weekend. I guess they didn't consider the fact that the cache was really a "moving" cache, and couldn't meet an hour earlier and drive to NJ.

9k · June 24, 2015

Maybe a 'nice' thing to do, were you of that mindset, would be to go and find the cache first (so you get your find in), then post a time frame after which point you'll return to pick up and move the cache. That way people watching it who want to find it will at least have some forewarning that it'll be gone by a date (though it won't stop the anger of those who can't get it by then of course), and even if someone comes along and moves it before then, you've got your find in already and you won't take the heat for its untimely moving

3.8k · June 24, 2015

The only thing lamer than a moving cache is the notion that fellow geocachers are SO upset about a moving cache actually having moved that it results in hate mail. I have no faith in humanity.

Edited June 24, 2015 by bflentje

19k · June 24, 2015

I have never understood why there are so many rules on moving caches and many of them due to the COs and what they say is allowed or not, assuming one can even understand them in full. There are supposedly rules they can't be at events, but heck, there were like 4 or 5 of them at the Woodstock when it was in Seattle. I see nothing wrong while in between grabbing a moving cache and dropping it somewhere new you let some friends find it. The type of cache I have seen the most folks getting bent out of shape on are moving caches. I'd still be happy to sign one, but am not going to go out of my way to find one ever again. Too much drama. FTF drama is preschool to drama on moving caches.

That they can't be at events for mass logging is a ruling put out by Groundspeak to prevent what was known as "pocket caches". Geocaches are meant to be hidden, not handed to people simply to log. That was happening with those so-called "pocket caches", and that is what a moving cache becomes when brought to an event to be signed. Doing so can cause the cache to be archived by Groundspeak.

Any other rules were decided on by the cache owner. That was just the way it went. They generally tried to come up with what they thought was the best way to prevent seeking conflicts (trying to find it once the cache has been moved, but before the find has been logged), maintenance issues (keeping it within a specific region) and so-on.

9k · June 24, 2015

The only thing lamer than a moving cache is the notion that fellow geocachers are SO upset about a moving cache actually having moved that it results in hate mail. I have no faith in humanity.

I'd say the issue is with the principle of the thing... similar as mentioned earlier to the FTF argument. It's more just the idea that "someone" doesn't have the decency to consider someone else. "Why did you have to do that...?" sort of angst.

And it. is. everywhere.

So I'm not surprised there would be people who feel like that.

But it's not worth it.

It's the sort of angst as when you're in a hurry and always hit the red lights, but never when you're not in a rush. Only here there are people to shake your fist at instead of mere bad fortune.

Definitely not condoning the hate mail but to say "no faith in humanity" when this kind of attitude is all over the place? *shrug* meh. People will be people. :unsure:

Edited June 24, 2015 by thebruce0

7.8k · June 24, 2015

Well, as it would turn out, the cachers in the Reading area are very cross with me. To the point that I've received hateful "message center" messages and emails telling me that I'm selfish, a poor example of a geocacher, and a jerk.....among other things.

Well, to be fair, you did unnecessarily poke the bear with this note. Had it been worded more diplomatically, I'm sure the hate mail would have been lessened (though not eliminated).

More reason why I feel that GS should stop all grandfathered moving caches.

I'm starting to feel that way too. When a moving cache arrived in my area several months ago, it began a chain of pocket-cache hand-offs between friends, both violating the spirit of moving caches and preventing anyone else from having a shot at finding it. I personally wasted half an hour searching for it at the coordinates posted by a finder, but it later turned out that was only the coordinates where they handed it to someone else and it was never actually hidden there. A day or two later, when I was contacted by another cacher offering to pass it off to me, I accepted with the sole intention of breaking the chain. After logging my find, I went out and hid it in the wild and posted the coordinates like you're supposed to, and gave everyone else an equal chance at finding it. After I ranted in my log that the pocket-cache behaviour could lead to the cache being archived by Groundspeak, it seemed to stop until the cache left the area.

The way I see it, these caches have become too rare and coveted. When they enter an area, cachers are stopping at nothing to log them, leading to conflicts between cachers. Having seen some of this first-hand, my opinion is that the caching community would be better off if the few moving caches were permanently stopped. If a moving cache's owner is still active, the cache should be sent home to them and they can hide it in a permanent hiding spot.

July 10, 2015

"That they can't be at events for mass logging is a ruling put out by Groundspeak to prevent what was known as "pocket caches". Geocaches are meant to be hidden, not handed to people simply to log. That was happening with those so-called "pocket caches", and that is what a moving cache becomes when brought to an event to be signed. Doing so can cause the cache to be archived by Groundspeak"

This particular cache was logged by several cachers at a Mega Event in NJ last November. The CO hasn't deleted any logs yet and Groundspeak hasn't done anything.

Andh honestly looking back at the logs before the Mega event, everyone that found it between August 2014 and the event found it while it in someone's possession.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Cache Raiders

July 13, 2015

.

Interesting discussion as I was unaware there were so many actual moving caches in play.

.

Edited July 13, 2015 by emmett

I Moved A Moving Cache (And Now I'm Getting Hate Mail)

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation