People Logging A Reset As The Mark

[Wintertime]

I was just going through the waypoints in my GPSr, deleting ones I don't really need in it. In verifying the location of one waypoint, I realized that it was at the location of the reset mark for HT1627. The reset mark is (1) not in the NGS database and (2) several hundred feet from the original mark.

 

The first several geocachers who looked for this mark used the "Destroyed" or "Note" functions in the Geocaching.com log options. Now I see that some people did not carefully read my note, and are "finding" HT1627 based on my photos and waypoint of the reset.

 

Should I post another note to remind folks that what they're finding is not the mark listed on that page? Or maybe write to the two "finders" personally? Or just forget the whole thing? I don't know whether these "found" reports could snowball to the point where someone who isn't paying attention actually files a recovery report with NGS, thus creating official misinformation. But even if that doesn't happen, it's disconcerting to see found reports for a mark that doesn't exist.

 

Patty

Edited April 11, 2005 by Wintertime

[ArtMan]

Patty,

 

In the past, when I've found similar irregularities, I've written privately to the person who posted the erroneous log entry.

 

Some have responded positively, even contritely. Others have ignored my note with the (apparent) attitude that "it's just a game."

 

If I post after an erroneous log, however, I will point out the the error in my log, just as I point out errors in earlier NGS reports.

 

-ArtMan-

[Bill93]

I would first edit the existing log containing the waypoint to be very specific that it was not the mark. Then I would email the "finders" privately and give them time to correct their logs. After a few days if there were still "found" logs I would post a new note at the top restating that there is only a reset in a NEW location nearby; the described mark is gone so it shouldn't be claimed.

 

It is a little strange that there is a reset, the old one isn't marked destroyed, and the reset isn't entered. But as we've noted before, people have a lot to do in their jobs and keeping the records updated sometimes falls to the bottom of the stack. The reset probably never got measured to the required accuracy.

[Gnikhog]

Personally, I really don't have a problem with what people are logging on this site. I think (hope) they are logging their finds here for fun. I have found and logged marks that others have previously logged incorrectly (ex. identifying a single RM find as a station while overlooking the actual station and other RMs). My thinking is that others can learn by my example if they are so inclined. (I have had email inquires for help.) Am I an expert? Certainly not! But I have become a student of the hobby and have a few tricks up my sleeve. I can tell when a mark that I have visited has been incorrectly identified by others - and that's good enough for me. I will not be contacting anyone to tell them that I disagree with their 'finds' and logs. I think it's important to remember what the Geocaching site is all about and not to confuse its purpose with that of the NGS.

 

/John

[evenfall]

Gnikhog, makes a point but I want to look at it from the take Patty made.

 

It is just a game. Some people think it is important to remember that this is Geocaching. I have been so reminded before myself :-D I feel it is also good to keep in mind that not everyone is playing just a game and may take action beyond the Game. That adds responsibility to it a bit eh?

 

Yup, Geocaching is just a game. Some people will gladly tattoo that point on our foreheads. If we are conscientious, we realize that our actions can go beyond Geocaching and they do. (it is the symbiotic nature of life but don't tell anyone, it is supposed to be unique to just them only) People often take many things from one context and use them in another.

 

Allow Me.

 

My Grandfather had a team of Horses on his Farm back in the day, and he used to tell stories about how old Molly would avoid you when she knew you were coming to put her to work. Oh she would work well! But you had to catch her first. Molly had her own ideas. Well, I am sure you can see where I am going with this. Patty posted something informational, and now they want to use the informational stuff as the game piece. Someone could take this out of context and try to report it to the NGS and be in error, just as Patty is afraid could happen. You can try writing to these people but they will be just like old Molly, They have something else in mind and that means you will be in the tail chase there.

 

I suppose we really need to be careful what we say and how we say it. Even if we are, other people will misread and misinterpret us easily enough.

 

I found some stations in Seattle that needed no help. They were being misinterpreted by themselves. The Ship Canal is a canal waterway that opens Lake Washington, Lake Union to the Puget Sound in Shilshole and Salmon Bays. Crossing this Canal, were and are some very tall towers used to carry high voltage lines over the canal. Very tall so as to accommodate ships.

 

Between now and the time the towers were originally triangulated, Seattle City Light built some new Towers next to the old ones, (actually in the 1950's to accommodate the building of Interstate 5) and ran lines. switched over and took the original towers down, but it looks like towers to the Geocacher eh? So they claim them as a find for the game and they are wrong. So too are the Power Squadron folks who keep recovering these towers. If we used Seventhings methods for verifying the landmark the truth comes out. If we look at the tower through the eyes of GPS or call the power utility, and they tell you the age of the towers too. Not as old as the monumentation on the datasheet Wrong towers, Rules be Damned?

 

I have another where a Church underwent remodeling in 2003 and the steeple was moved to the remodeled area of the Building. Yup it is the original Steeple too, but the Geodetic position is not the original. What do you say? Good for Geocaching and Bad for NGS? Many Geocachers will not care. They see the steeple and they are gonna claim it on you because it is there.

 

I find quite a few of these little slices of heaven, but it is just a Game... Hehehehe

 

Unfortunately even if we see these towers from a long way off, we could think they are legit and so we claim them. The same goes for the Church Steeple. One could say there is no harm done, it is just a Game. I have been so advised myself but here we are. but the truth is in how far we take it. It would be true if the possibility of anyone going beyond the game were not possible. If it were only just the game without further ramifications which have the potential of becoming possible, we would be wrong and we could be just like the Power Squadron, and claim to NGS they are there. How can we know when someone takes this more seriously than someone else? (It is not always just a Game for Some) Either way, We cannot save or protect everything.

 

Unless we try hard to verify and clearly report, but not over elaborate, we can cause things to happen that we didn't imagine. If instead we assume these towers or Church steeples are the real objects, We can assume a lot of things. But I know they are not. I posted notes to declare the position is incorrect, but it won't stop much. There are towers there and for some that is enough, oh, and who cares? :-) They will claim it, just as they do a monument cover in the street without looking inside for the, ah, Monument itself! We can't fix it all, and some players wont care. All we can try to make our posts on Geocaching as correct as we can while keeping in mind that we could easily be misread and misinterpreted. It happens.

 

In the case of The Steeple, I had the Local Knowledge and I posted to NGS before anyone else could misinterpret the location. If we think this is possible, we can do the same. Beyond that, there is not too much we can do about the playing of the game. I can tell you first hand that it rarely will work. There are rules, But people don't always like the rules and oversight here, and play the way they wanna just the same.

 

In the final analysis Patty, Feel free to file to NGS on the old station PID that a nearby reset has been made that technically could be misinterpreted as this station, and that this would be in error. Also add that there is no trace of the remaining of station, which is described under this PID. That is all the protection you can offer. The Pros will read your recovery very carefully.

 

Have Fun Anyway!

 

Rob

Edited April 11, 2005 by evenfall

[+seventhings]

Patty -

 

I generally do as ArtMan does except I only send corrective e-mails to hunters who I know to be (after checking their profile and a sampling of their posts) people who give a hoot about the integrity of a "FOUND".

 

Also, like ArtMan, I welcome any and all to correct my errors.

 

Will

[Wintertime]

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions. I have edited my original posting to add a sentence in capital letters indicating that my coordinates and photos are referring to the reset, not the mark listed on that page. I had already used the word "reset" several times in my posting, but I guess that didn't sink in with some people. So now I've made it explicit that the original mark is long gone and was not in that location anyway. Even though other people had already posted about its demise...

 

Rob, it might indeed help fend off future mistakes if I were to file an official report with NGS. Since I don't have NGS-quality proof that the mark has been destroyed, I could just say it was not found and then give a brief explanation, right? It's still pretty weird to me that NGS doesn't even know about their own reset...

 

Patty

[+Team Cotati]

Let's all be really really careful of what we say and how we say it......shall we? No matter how many words it takes.

Edited April 12, 2005 by Team cotati697

[evenfall]

Hi Patty,

 

If you like NGS recovery, Feel free to report, as it would update the status to what seems to be true, or most likely for now. A not found is a not found. But it allows for the status to become a found after the fact, if the Station is later found. It sometimes happens.

 

Do you feel a Professional from the Surveying field would have success finding it when you didn't? If I had to go looking for it at work, on the clock, I would appreciate knowing that you didn't find it. It may mean I will try another station. If you say there is no station but there is a reset, but the reset has no published data as yet then Guess what? Nothing there has any Value at this time.

 

The things we say on Geocaching, when we recover for the Game will be read by other Geocachers. Of those who do Benchmark Hunt, the attitudes towards this seem to run from it is just a game to it is serious work and everything in between. For some it may start out casual and become more serious as they come to understand it and enjoy it or both. So we never really know where their heads are. I hesitate to say it, but the technical details will likely be lost on many. The problem is that the devil is in those very details. Bottom line, the game to many is a "just a game" and a good many will never go beyond seeing it any other way, so plan writing while keeping the person who won't care about anything, in mind.

 

Rob

[GH55]

That is probably the best that can be done. However, it won't keep someone from "reovering" it in the future if they do not pay attention.

 

DAHMS has a recovery by the US Army Map Service that reports the station and RM 1 are destroyed and a new station and RM 3 were set nearby. Yet a Power Squadron volunteer recovered it in good condition in 1996.

 

The new station is Dahms2

 

There does seem to be a discrepancy concerning the dat of Dahms2. I will have to investigate!