If cachers are concerned that a log entry reflects negatively on the sport, then after e-mailing the offender the cache owner should add a log entry stating his/her efforts to educate and prevent this crass behavior. Then groups like the McDowell Sonoran Preserve Commission would see those efforts in the log entries. It could undo the damage caused by the original entry.

>From: "Team Tierra Buena"

>Reply-To: listserv@azgeocaching.com

>To:

>Subject: FW: [Az-Geocaching] Hall of Flame Cache...

>Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:23:37 -0700

>Cody,

>I don't think you're overreacting to the seriousness of what these folks

>did, but I don't think archiving the cache solves anything (unless the

>property owners have asked you to do so because of what happened).

>I remember when Frobro Goose was just starting out (and I'm not picking

>on him), he logged the McDowell Cache during the fire closures. His log

>reads something like, "There was an 'area closed' sign, but I went in

>anyway." It's not my cache, but I happened to see the log. Frankly, it

>angered me so much at the time that I literally couldn't think straight

>about the situation. I just came here to the list server to vent just

>like you.

>Someone else (if I knew who I would publicly thank them) read my rant

>and did what I should have done instead of just squawking. They emailed

>Goose and pointed out that such actions could jeopardize Geocaching.

>What happened? Goose joined the list server, apologized to everyone

>here, got the other Frobros involved in Geocaching, and generally became

>a positive contributor.

>The downside, sadly, is that everyone on the McDowell Sonoran Preserve

>Commission, which is responsible for the land on which the McDowell

>cache lives, knows about his log entry. They interpret it as,

>"Geocachers not only don't obey the rules, they brag about breaking

>them". So it may be that in the case of "Hall of Flame" the damage has

>already been done.

>Regardless, my suggestions would be to assume that these cachers were

>unthinking rather than malicious, email them, and ask them to consider

>the potential for harm to Geocaching in what they did. If it's simply

>that they weren't thinking, you'll get them started doing so. And then

>we'll just hope that there isn't any huge fallout from their

>thoughtlessness.

>Steve

>Team Tierra Buena

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: az-geocaching-admin@listserv.azgeocaching.com

> > [mailto:az-geocaching-admin@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On

> > Behalf Of Cody Brown

> > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 3:24 PM

> > To: az-geocaching@listserv.snaptek.com

> > Subject: [Az-Geocaching] Hall of Flame Cache...

> >

>http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=24406

>This is in regards to our "Hall of Flame" cache that many of you have

>visited. We recently had a couple of visitors to this cache that

>blatently crossed the line as far as Geocachers go. This cache is on

>private property with specific visiting hours being listed on the cache

>page. This is a perfect example of where us as Geocachers get a bad

>name. This cache is now in jeopardy of being archived to protect the

>Geocaching name.

>Have I over-reacted to this violation or do I have a valid argument?

>Thanks,

>Cody

>Team CBX2

>_______________________________________________

>Az-Geocaching mailing list

>listserv@azgeocaching.com

>http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching