LaughterOnWater

Got it. Actually, some Moodle user probably coined the term "Moodle Moot" from the term "Entmoot," used originally in Lord of the Rings to designate a meeting of Tree Herders (Ents). Hence, my earlier reference to Ents and Entwives. I realized after I posted that it's likely that most geocachers both hide and seek, so cachemoot might still be useful as a general meeting of geocachers.

Granted, roads change, and it's not always precise. But for some urban areas in the US, Google maps can come off as freakishly precise, down to which side of the road you're walking, and whether you're in the street or on the sidewalk. Open Street tends to be much less accurate in most places, but again, they've got it down to the lane on some cities, like some of the sky ramps for the interstates in downtown Tampa, Florida. But that's urban examples. The same maps, when brought into walking paths at the local botanical gardens are far more imprecise. Sometimes the map shows you walking in the middle of the river, even with little tree canopy and no cloud cover. I see where you're coming from. And I'm more likely to place hides in remote, tree-covered areas, so GPS-waypoint-averaging it is.

While WAAS has pretty decent accuracy, I'm (perhaps wrongly) assuming that Google Maps and Mapnik, etc., triangulate their coordinates with survey markers on the ground and average waypoints continually, using more complex and accurate methods rather than just depend on some sky readings. Wouldn't that make a difference?

Okay -- very clear consensus here! In the case of the mural, it would have been better to either make it a mutli-cache or simply add an additional waypoint and say, "About thirty feet away at the additional waypoint, you'll find this cool mural." The GPS for the cache is within thirty feet of the cache -- entirely within the realm of possibility. While it is an urban scene, it's entirely possible the CO averaged the waypoint on a crummy day or when there was a crummy satellite constellation. It's not like there are that many urban canyons in Athens, GA where the buildings themselves block out too many satellites. But if CO's want to be entirely precise, isn't it just easier in urban situations to go to Google maps or mapnik and get the specific coordinates of the corner of a building in satellite view and use those?

Never place spontaneously. If you see a spot for a cache, take some coords for that spot, some pictures and GO HOME. Use the available tools on Geocaching.com to check for cache saturation, not just in the sense of the rule enforced by the site, but in a general sense. Is the area lousy with caches already? what's going to make yours special? What's the best container you can use? does it need any special camo? If you still think it's a great place for a cache, if it calls to you enough to make a return trip (one where there may not be any caches for you to find), then go place it. Never place a new cache if there's pending maintenance on a cache you already own (exceptions for caches disabled for causes outside your control, like construction projects or seasonal closures, etc). Try to get to any maintenance issues mentioned in logs ASAP. Don't procrastinate, it won't heal itself. On the other hand, relax about the occasional DNF. You'll make yourself nuts if check after each one. Numbers owned is not a useful metric, in my opinion. In 2003, I thought 30 would be a max. I now own 100+ and don't find this to be an issue. You posted this just prior to my writing another post, so I didn't see this. These are great suggestions. Thank you. Chris

And it can, but not on a Groundspeak site. What I think as the OP is irrelevant. Chris My mistake... sorry. I mean to say "CO" (Cache owner) not "OP". Got it. No Worries...

When you're in an urban area especially, you can lock down your coordinates with great precision to the edge of a building or a parking lot lamp post. In practice as a cache finder, ground zero as reported by CO's is what you expect, more often than not, almost precisely where you expect to find the cache. But that doesn't always seem to be the case. In this previous post, the question was asked, "how far can a cache be from ground zero?" with the emphasis being on the precision of the GPS instrument and decent attempts at waypoint averaging by the CO. But maybe, sometimes, CO's intentionally place ground zero in a spot not quite where you expect. One cache had GZ facing a fantastic mural across from a business, but the actual hide was thirty feet away. No emphasis on the business was placed in the cache description. The emphasis was placed on what the mural says. The CO could have placed GZ right at the corner of the building, exactly where the hide was. Instead, he placed it across an asphalt path about two feet in front of the mural. The find would have been much easier if I had known to go to the exact corner of the building on the other side of the asphalt. On a clear day, GPS has about a four-foot WAAS lock with some satellite constellations. I think GZ was intentionally placed a little away from the hide to make the search a little more difficult and to emphasize the mural. Just to narrow the scope of my questions, I'm talking about traditional caches, and not necessarily multicaches or other puzzle-type caches with multiple waypoints. I imagine it would be inappropriate to intentionally obfuscate true GZ in a remote area with dense tree canopy because it's hard enough already under these circumstances just to get an accurate GPS lock under the trees. But in urban situations, or where the hide might be too obvious and the sky has clear GPS access, maybe the rules slide a little. How often do you place your hide exactly at GZ as provided by your diligent GPS waypoint average? Are you ever tempted to place GZ a little away from the hide to increase the search challenge or to emphasize a specific view? Are there ethical considerations in placing GZ away from the hide, or is this a non-issue for you? What's the farthest away from a hide you would be willing to place your ground zero intentionally, and why? When would it be bad/rude/unethical to place GZ away from the hide? Please feel free to use examples from your own caches. Cheers, Chris

All, Thanks for your feedback on how you manage your caches. So ten to fifteen individual/quality/scenic caches seems to be a limit, but p&g caches along a path seems to be another less-intensive method. Urban caches tend to be higher maintenance than idyllic/remote caches. Most of those who have responded have been at it for many years. I'd be curious to hear from CO's who have only been "cacherds" for nearly a year or two. (Hey, I coined another word!) It's amazing that anyone could have hidden 8000+ caches. Surely, this is a full-time occupation, because room104 has more than twice as many hides as finds. He would have to hide 3.2 hides a day every day since August 2008 until today in order to do it, and still have time to find almost one and a half finds per day. Apparently one day in February of this year, he hid 173 micro caches in a single day. Or maybe he hid them over several days and just posted them that day. I imagine someone loading tennis-ball-shooter with micro caches and shooting them out of a car window into the brush along a roadside every tenth mile, but that's probably not what happened. Since they're all along a trail or a road, I guess that makes it easier to find them. If they're all about a tenth of a mile apart, that would make the entire trip no less than 17+ miles. I imagine this would be most fun with one or more friends biking together, because alone it might be boring. I've set up a development moodle site, but have not actually used it for a class, so I'm not making the leap from what I said to your moodle reference. If you could help me bridge the gap? Chris

It sure does! Also on random debris that is near the GZ for a missing cache. I imagine technically, that's a DNF, right? They don't know for sure the cache is actually missing. If this were your cache, and the cache were actually missing, would you count it as a find or a DNF? Chris

I'm confused. How will the subsequent seekers find a dated log useful? Or did you mean the subsequent finders would find the dated log useful? But even so, I don't think I've ever looked at the dates on the physical log, except maybe the few times when I've sat down and read some of the old handwritten logs. But on a typical log sheet? Never... As a newbie, I'm interested in previous log signers. It gives me an idea who else might be in my area, playing recently. If there's an obvious order, I'll sign after the last signed date. On several occasions I've found either two logs with competing log lists by date, or scraps of paper each with names and dates in a jumble. From an anthropological standpoint, it's fascinating. If the logs are well-managed and in order, people tend to sign where they're expected and include the date, just like a guestbook in a fancy inn. If there doesn't seem to be any maintenance style, we'll sign just about anywhere. I still haven't found any signatures in permanent marker on the inside of an empty cache, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens. I suspect that if the CO maintains the cache, providing clean, dry logs and removing old logs and debris, we sign in orderly fashion, one guest after another with the date. If the cache is not well maintained, chaos ensues. We rise only to the expectations of the cache owner. Chris

Some CO's have a few caches. Others have a hundred or more. While some CO's seem to have a very close relationship with their caches, I wonder if others are more like slum lords, creating them and then forgetting them. The number of caches owned isn't necessarily an indicator of slumlordliness or consummate stewardship. Cache's aren't like cats (capricious, playful) or goats (stu- u- u- upid a- a- a- and brow- ow- ow- ownian in motion). So caches should be easy to shepherd, more like trees, right? Maybe being a CO is like being an Ent or an Entwife (from Lord of the Rings). When CO's meet, maybe it's a cachemoot. (Hey, I coined a new word!) As a CO, what's a manageable number of caches for you? What's too many? If it's happened to you, when did you realize you had too many caches? Did you make any changes to how you manage your caches? I'd be grateful for any insights from long-term cache owners and new/beginning cache owners alike. What are some things cache owners should know that aren't in the rules or might not be obvious before they start creating caches? Cheers, Chris

And it can, but not on a Groundspeak site. What I think as the OP is irrelevant. Reviewers are the judges. I had no stake, one way or the other when I first posted. I was unclear of the rules. I asked others what I should do, got feedback and proceeded -- apparently the wrong way. So I learned some things: Vote with your feet. If you're not comfortable pursuing a cache, find another one. If a cache is inappropriate, find a local reviewer and tell them. Don't contact the cache owner unless you have a well-established relationship with the owner. Different nations/regions have different skews on what is acceptable with regards to the guidelines, and reviewers in those countries/regions make their own unwritten local rules that better suit them. I can choose to report or not report problems. More often than not, I'll likely choose not to report because it causes pain and stomps fun out of the game. If something is hazardous or terribly illegal, I'll probably tell a reviewer. There is a tacit tug-of-war between the rules/guidelines as written and as followed, very similar to people driving 80mph in a 55mph zone on I-85 just north of Spaghetti Junction in Atlanta, GA. Pertaining to the game, an example might be: You're not supposed to be a cache cop, but at the same time, you're supposed to NA a cache that is placed where it is clearly stated, "No Trespassing." So gamers don't report the cache. Since the game started, gamers have slowly grown hesitant to DNF, NM or NA caches themselves. I also learned a little about property rights and trespass. I have little or no control over what others outside my local community do within the geocaching.com interface. For instance, just talking about a questionable cache on this forum will likely cause others many states away to seek it out and archive the cache. This will make me hesitant to bring up any specific questionable cache in the future, again because it will stomp fun. This reviewer has taken a reasoned, balanced approach. It's out of my hands. I've shared some embarrassing moments with a public forum in hopes that other new geocachers will find something helpful in this discussion. Chris

Everyone, thanks for these frank responses. It highlights one thing that is very cool about the sport. Most people seeking geocaches grasp intuitively that it would be an empty victory to merely post "found it" from their desktop without having actually found it. There is also a lot of difference in style as to how people approach log confirmation, all of which seem equally valid. I'm not sure exactly how I'll approach log confirmation when I start, but hearing how other people do it gives me some perspective about what's acceptable. Again, thanks! Chris

In offering strong opinions, I am hoping to get others to think outside the box. Where I have bad ideas, I acknowledge them and move on to the next bad idea. I am sorry for upsetting you. Worse, if you are that guy who is putting business cards or religious-or-non-profit pamphlets into caches, I must be your worst nightmare. If so, then we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and I'm not sure how to reply without seeming like I'm world-bashing. Geocaching.com can't afford status quo. The internet moves too quickly today. Status quo steadily devolves into status senes. Banning things is not a fun policy. But forcing agendas into a sport that's supposed to be an agenda-free, family-oriented outing is disappointing. That's why I'm asking what would be a better policy. At 6500+ finds, surely you have some better ideas?

From this previous post, I see that different people have different experiences and strategies. Well, it's 2015... Seven years hence. Do you confirm online entries with those who have signed the logs in your caches? How often? How often have you removed a "found it" because you couldn't find it in the physical cache log? Do you wait until you see a NM before you change the log, or do you take a more proactive approach?

I'm ignorant. So I'm questioning the status quo. Are you happy with the status quo? When you're done laughing, why not educate me? Why not convince me why it's right and good to leave someone's expired pizza coupons, moldy business cards and religious and non-profit pamphlets in a family-friendly cache that is supposed to be agenda-free? What number of finds makes me qualified to make change-of-rules suggestions to the forum? 100? 1000? If as others have suggested, number-of-finds is the wrong measure, what is the right measure? Chris

So if I go to a conference,and I collect a bunch of trinkets from various vendor booths, and I use those trinkets (which display the various vendor names, of course) as trade items, then you think there is something wrong with that? Mmm... Outside of geocaching.com, are you endorsing a particular business, religion or non-profit by placing those trinkets? It would appear not. Game on. Now if you were placing pamphlets on how to buy those trinkets in caches, I might suggest you have an agenda.

What and how would you measure? Agreed. I'm suggesting a tag maybe four inches in length, an inch in width. Not shiny or pretty -- just a waterproof, durable tag that clearly states the purpose of the attached trackable -- something brighly colored, but smaller and inexpensive, like a bendy action figure. Yes, there are apparently two bowling balls as trackables out there. That's someone else's goal. Incidentally, Buster Ball II is not in the cache where it's currently supposed to be located. Chris

Cascade Reviewer, Narcissa, Arthur and Trillian, I stand corrected. Apologies. I was reading this guideline: I unfortunately assumed that gamers should be held the same standard as the CO's. So businesses can pay someone to set up a few non-agenda caches, and then pay someone else to populate the same caches (or more easily, just stuff existing close-by caches) with their "non-guideline-busters". Isn't that just... wrong? Against all temptation, what's to stop well-funded Super PAC groupies from stuffing voter appeals for the next election as "swag"? If hasn't already happened, I'm guessing we'll see it in the next big election season. Agreed, sometimes it's nice not to draw too many lines so we don't stomp the fun out. But seriously--why is this not a guideline for cache finders?

You are very kind! This is terrific feedback. Thank you! Okay, so maybe it needs to change depending on the location. Prikstok caches are allowed in Belgium, even if it's technically against the rules. Maybe there need to be rules based on cache density. Where cache density is high, make new gamers collect a respectable number of that kind of cache before they can place their own. So maybe the idea of "acquire 100 finds" itself is not so great, but in combination with a rudimentary geocaching "driving test", new CO's could learn acceptable hide methods. Point taken. What would compel cache owners to find joy in maintaining their caches? I find the geocaching stats cards designed to look like baseball cards pretty cool. It doesn't make sense for new gamers to create one for themselves though since they don't have any decent stats yet. Yes, one man's trash, etc... Except when it's a soggy cache. Then it's all just a friable mess. CITO. I'll quote from the recently deceased author Terry Pratchett's Tiffany Aching Discworld series. "Everything is a test." Each day we are tested by circumstances and how we respond. We must compell ourselves to be the ones who demand our own excellence from ourselves. I'd consider buying just the trackable ID, then permanently printing them on ugly-but-durable tags that could be attached to a swag item. The tag would be larger than the item it's attached to, sort of the way they tape a long plastic plant leaf to pens in the post office so you don't walk off with the pen in your pocket by mistake. Good point. See my specific replies to similar comments from niraD above. Mind, I did say "cheap" marbles. Good marbles are awesome. I recently acquired a bunch of relatively-collectible European kid's toys. Some are wind-ups. Others have moveable parts. Others are more like McToys. Still, I'm pretty careful where I choose to put them. I seldom take anything from a cache except garbage. If the cache is small or there's any sog-factor, I leave only the log. Once I moved one piece of swag from one cache to another. I actively remove advertisements, business cards, religious pamphlets, and pizza coupons from caches since agenda-based items are against the rules. I also remove used football game tickets and used theater tickets because they're trash. I don't remove religious icons like a stone with an etched cross in it, or a rosary, or Mardi Gras beads. I don't remove paperclips, clothespins, bobby pins or those little hair bands. Though I'm sorely tempted... Chris

Arthur and Trillian,This is a discussion that seems to be about methods for enabling a better experience for geocachers, beginners and old-hats alike. Is your disagreement with me reason enough to endorse censorship? Why not tell me why I'm wrong with logic and reason? When there weren't that many caches, it seemed like a good trade-off to let anyone create a cache so long as they followed the rules. Now there are a lot of caches and a lot more cache traffic. Trackables used to be respected. Now they're just swag for the under-educated/under-experienced. The game has changed. Why shouldn't the rules change to manage a better experience? Chris

narcissa, I pay close attention when you've posted, because more often than not, you have something useful to say, but at times, your comments have a bitter edge that leads me to think that you might be unhappy. You have strong opinions. Having strong opinions does not necessarily constitute unhappiness. I'm reminded of usenet/newsgroups in the early years of Ye Olde Interwebbes. Academicians who had established newsgroups like sci.biology.lepidoptera.new were outraged when newbies posted stupid questions, didn't stay on topic, rage-posted, or generally left divots in the playing field that was Usenet. Now, people have moved on to Google Groups or Yahoo Groups or PHPBB, where they can create their own place to channel stupidity or enlightenment as they please and with whatever amount of engagement they prefer. Venues had to change to accommodate the popularity of the internet. And with great success! Geocaching.com likely introduced the app to stave off imminent loss of popularity of their website. What's worse than becoming a friendster or myspace? The app is geocaching.com's response to rapid change. But like Google Groups, etc., the app has also drastically changed the constituent player base by bringing in large numbers of people who are new to the game, like me. We make really stupid faux pas. Many of us have never hiked and couldn't even identify poison ivy if our lives depended on it. (I do, I can.) Many of us barely understand GPS. Some of us barely qualify as more socially-adept than our pets. Many of us are parents with children. Many of us are children. We have grand ideas that have probably been posted a thousand times before on the same forum, and as someone who had those same starry eyes years ago when you joined the game, I see reflected in your response some sense of futility at trying to make people understand that "the more things change, the more they stay the same". I'm willing to have my terrible ideas shot down because they're terrible. But if they're not terrible, maybe there is a germ of usefulness that could help future gamers have a better beginning experience and make them more respectful long-term members of the caching community. So please -- rather than suggest that I go make or find another game, why not tell me why my suggestions are so terrible? Chris

Pie-in-the-Sky ideas and thoughts after just a few finds. As a new user, I'm concerned with what I have seen so far. I'm in favor of some changes. New users should be required to find at least 100 caches to get an idea of what works before being allowed to even create a cache. I may be new, but I would rather find quality caches than caches that require hazmat gloves. So far half have contained garbage crammed in with a log. One had a bullet. Two had items I regret having touched with bare hands and am loath to describe. Half the logs I've found so far have been soggy. New cache owners should be required to check their caches on a regular schedule. Education is Key New cachers should be disallowed from, or perhaps strongly cautioned against, leaving any paper items other than a log. Also disallow bobby pins, paper clips, clothes pins, cheap marbles, money, plastic beads, mardi gras necklaces or craft junk they merely bought from Michael's Craft Store. Home made crafts are fine. Plastic dinosaurs are fine. Matchbox cars are fine. Just not those tiny foam snowflake stickers you just bought by the thousands merely to drop in every bleeping cache. If I owned the cache, I'd trash all that stuff on each maintenance run. There needs to be more critical video lessons describing best practices in contrast with bad practices. Tell newbies what sucks as swag. Stop being wishy washy about it. Yes, it's a game, but a good game should demand a level of excellence from its players. Good games attract players who want to play by the rules. These kinds of changes might persuade people with very short attention spans choose a less-demanding hobby, like watching soaps. Get rid of trackables. Magpies are collecting these like swag. I'm never going to pay five or ten bucks just so someone else can collect and keep my trackable. Not. Happening. Either that or make trackables unattractive to magpies.

+1 and +1 for the rest of the post. +1