Vater_Araignee

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted. I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong. Cezanne Some numbers (and likely consequences) that I noticed: Worldwide number of geocachers (according to GS): 5,000,000 Number who voted "Bring Back Virtuals" in the feedback forum: 3843 (.0007% of total). GS announces Challenges as a replacement for Virtuals. Number who voted "Don't Make Completions the Same as Finds": 5358 (.001% of total). (Members can vote up to 3 times for a topic, so number of actual members likely even less than the amounts shown above.) GS relents and agrees to break out Challenges from total cache finds. Consequences: Virtuals are not going to be brought back and Challenges are now guaranteed to meet the same fate as waymarks. A couple of things come to mind: THE SQUEAKIEST WHEEL GETS THE MOST GREASE. TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY. The 99.99% of us who rarely or never post to the forums, participate in the feedback forum, or get involved in important community issues can all learn a very important lesson from this sad experience... Yeah, it is called get off your lazy butts and vote. Anyway... You can not find a challenge you can only complete it it. (just like a Virt, Earth or any of the FALSECACHES.) That means that completing should not count towards the find total. Hmm. Using that logic, you don't find events, you attend them. So should they count? Yes, if and only if you find and sign the log.Should you not sign the log or there was non, then it should not count because there was nothing to find.

I have yet to find a micro that could not contain a log. If I did then I would not claim a find because a container has to contain something to be called a cache by the definition of the word. It also helps that I can place my signature legibly within an eighth inch square, add the date and I still take less than a quarter inch square. It isn't a philosophy, one can call frog legs chicken all they want but it doesn't make them chicken.

By the way sbell111, Geocaching.com is not geocaching, so I don't care about how the game has worked here, what I do care about is refusing to participate in the changing the definition of words so that people can artificially inflate their egos using false information.

Are you familiar with the word Attended? Attending an event counts toward your count, as does finding one of the old virts. How is this any different? You're not wanting to change the entire way that the count has worked for over a decade just to fit your personal definition of the game, are you? I do believe I wrote "just like a Virt, Earth or any of the FALSECACHES." easily inferring that I think non of them should be counted. Events that have a log are another story, like I say "Technically a container is a cache but the log with my signature is the cache. I will not claim I found a cache that does not contain my sig." Before I stopped logging online I attended 4 events, I logged 1 only because it was my first and the only one with a log. Notice I have zero finds on Virtual Cache, Webcam Cache or Earthcache? That is because they are FalseCaches and therefor not going to be logged as real caches by me. But you already knew this about me because we have done this song and dance before so go use someone else to make your flawed point. ~~~edit~~~ added number 1

I do not think that it is a minority. Try to see what happens if you open a new feedback thread and propose to keep counting completed challenges towards the found count (if such a thread does not yet exist - I have not checked) and see how many votes you will get. I'd surprise me if you reach a comparable number of votes as the proposal to change the way challenges are counted. I am a fan of virtuals and yet I prefer the challenges to be counted separately. So your theory is wrong. Cezanne Some numbers (and likely consequences) that I noticed: Worldwide number of geocachers (according to GS): 5,000,000 Number who voted "Bring Back Virtuals" in the feedback forum: 3843 (.0007% of total). GS announces Challenges as a replacement for Virtuals. Number who voted "Don't Make Completions the Same as Finds": 5358 (.001% of total). (Members can vote up to 3 times for a topic, so number of actual members likely even less than the amounts shown above.) GS relents and agrees to break out Challenges from total cache finds. Consequences: Virtuals are not going to be brought back and Challenges are now guaranteed to meet the same fate as waymarks. A couple of things come to mind: THE SQUEAKIEST WHEEL GETS THE MOST GREASE. TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY. The 99.99% of us who rarely or never post to the forums, participate in the feedback forum, or get involved in important community issues can all learn a very important lesson from this sad experience... Yeah, it is called get off your lazy butts and vote. Anyway... You can not find a challenge you can only complete it it. (just like a Virt, Earth or any of the FALSECACHES.) That means that completing should not count towards the find total.

Nope I wont bother to log it because I have done it at least 10 times a year for the last 15 years. Besides the "roughly 5 miles" is incorrect even as far as roughly goes considering it is over 7 miles long. Get real. Oh wow a whole 30 feet! Can't that get you arrested for doing in public? BADUMPA TISH! None of it is geocaching, so no.

Finding the container is #1 for me.

Took me 15 or 20 minutes to acquire this information.I'll also point out that the only reason it matters to me is because it is fact, otherwise I don't give a flying woop about anyone's stats except for... PMOCs, how many at A, B, C and etc radii VS non PMOC Truth be told I don't like others having the ability to view any of my stats and the stats I have display control over are only being displayed for future challenge caches. The way I keep track of my finds is with GSAK and the delete feature setting the "Also stop future imports adding back in". It is great! It keeps me from having to keep track of what I found. I don't have an issue with statistics, I have an issue with people who mistakenly believe I am in some geocaching competition with them.

I think we all knew we were discussing challenges here. Its impossible to not get them intermixed if you just go by the name of them. I was about to get my pocket query. This is going to really muddle up milestones I think going forward. Our milestones are little more than figments of our own imaginations. We define them with our own set of rules so it's hard to see how they can get muddled. LOL You have to much confidence in that statement. Concider this, on your profile under "Your Statistics" there is a tab called "Milestones" and wile you can override the display, it doesn't matter because your tenth find is your tenth find and there is no "set of rules" that can change that, 10 is 10 not 6. Unfortunatly GS does let the false caches alter those numbers, after all one did not find a cache when they completed a Virt, Earth, webcam etc. But I doubt that GS is going to let challenges shift those numbers. GS is not letting challenges effect the milestones. I have an account that only had 4 finds listed on it and I used it for one challenge, so that would be 5 but it is only showing the first find and stating "Your next milestone will be awarded at 5 cache finds."

That is really sad! A reasonable good example of a challange, and people from all over log it without meeting the requirements. And when you try to report the cheeting, the only option is to flag it as "Prohibited" "Offencive" or "SPAM". Maybe you should flag all the fakes "Prohibited". In this situation, what does Prohibited mean? Forbidden from doing. In the case of false claims of challenges being met I would think that that should be appropriate to use though there should be a more descriptive flag. Note I said should, I don't think that GS ultimately cares or they would have given the issuers the ability to remove false claims.

only read OP. First impressions. Wooooooopty freaking dooo. Photo Challenge: Can you say Waymarking? Action Challenge: Lets all welcome back the stupid ALRs. Heck they are even encouraged, only difference is you no longer have the reward of a geocache at the end of it all. So like Virts, Earths and the other no cache having cache types (absurd isn't it?) it is all about showing up, not finding anything hidden. Other problems. 1. What is the search radius for "Search by Location"? 2. Why aren't my home coords tied in on a search? 3. Why is the devastatingly inaccurate Geolocation being used rather than... see number 2? 4. Why isn't there a map? 5. Why isn't this on Waymarking where it obviously belongs?

here is a positive for scout caches around me. If I exclude micros (I haven't found a micro scout cache) an consider the maintenance to be average on all the small on up caches then on a scale of 0-10 the scout caches range between 5 and 7. So that is average to above average. This could be simply due to age of the cache when I found them but one was at least 2 years old and it is the one I give a 7 to. Now if I add micros into the equation and re average the average then scout caches have to be 7-9. If a person starts judging exclusively from the condition of the log then scout caches are insignificant compared to the scourge that is the Ron Popeil of geocaching called the micro. "Just set it and forget it!" OK time to add to the geocaching lexicon. Ronco = micro

Not according to Geocaching.com's guidelines.Yeah, I know. So?Just as long as we agree that your definition of a cache doesn't line up with reality. . . What GS says is the definition and reality are two different thing, so maybe you should be saying... But then again you used the unsure emoticon so you probably knew that even if it was only subconscious. I prefer to not attempt to change definitions. My "cache without a cache" statement was to point out the absurdity of calling anything a cache that does not have a cache. It is as simple as that. A location has nothing to do with a cache unless there is a cache at that location. A bolder is not a cache. A statue is not a cache. Wait for it... A cache listing that lists a bolder is not a cache listing. A cache listing that lists a statue is not a cache listing. This mean that they are not geocaches, they are some other location based game being misrepresented as geocaches by a set of guidelines and mindsets that refuse to acknowledge the TRUE definition of a word. Definition of CACHE 1 a : a hiding place especially for concealing and preserving provisions or implements b : a secure place of storage 2 : something hidden or stored in a cache You can read that definition a million times and Virts and Earths will never fit it. This means that the activities that one has to perform in order to claim a found it in Jeremy's words "doesn't solve the location for the cache. It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through" Then to make matters worse they end up getting an increment that claims they found something when what they did was show up and do some task/s. At least a challenge cache is required to have a cache. Are the "Geocaching Challenges" going to and with a cache or be another grievous misrepresentation? One can hope even wile doubting.

ow ow ow ow ow ow Thanks! Basically +∞ What does any cache without a cache have to do with geocaching? I cant believe that I didn't see that as soon as I saw this. SO solving the "what ever a CO wants" for an EC or VC doesn't solve the location...It is just some arbitrary hoop you make a geocacher jump through for you to allow them a I went to your spot I mean found it on the cache listing.The lack of a cache forces them to have no more relation to caching than the next rock, statue or lamp post that I can get a set of coords for. Now I really wanna see how challenges are going to work because so far, from all the speculation the seem even more vaporous then the "Don't have a cache" cache types.

Will you let me armchair log them so I can favorite them? It isn't like it would improve my find count considering I don't track it here.

This is probably one of the best examples of a challenge cache that doesn't make any sense, since anyone in the world could attempt and complete it. So why do they need to travel to X location to log the cache? Couldn't someone create one in every city, town, or hobbit village? Why not just focus on a devious puzzle instead? Correct me if I am wrong but, because this is one of the challenges that has been proven it can be accomplished time and time again. This means CO does not need to do it to prove it can be done so anybody who wants to can list the challenge. Leading to... someone can create one in every city, town, or hobbit village as long as they can maintain the cache.They can even claim the Smiley after completing the challenge if they are so inclined. Might be bad form to claim your own cache but there isn't a rule/guideline/code snippet (hint hint) prohibiting the practice. kidding about the hint.

Water is only 1 aspect, a middle aged condom that is sticking to itself and an old age crumbling dusted one still has uses. When it comes down to "Wouldn't want to count on" aspects. I wouldn't want to count on a disposable lighter so I have waterproof matches in my pack too and I wouldn't want to count on them either so I have flint and steel, and a fire piston and the supplies to create several methods of friction ignition. Yet if the lighter fails, it isn't junk, it has alternate uses, as do the matches, F&S and the supplies I would use for a friction fire. But this is coming from the guy who has P.E.T. bricks reclaimed from water bottles in his storage unit just in case. As I was writing this I stated asking myself why I'm bothering to point all of this out? So to go back on topic. There is nothing "adult" about a condom except how you use it. The same hold true with matches and knives. I allow my 7 year old to have matches and a lighter in his B.O.B. in his room, but not a knife. I'll get to the knife in a moment. To many people are appalled by the idea and would never allow their children because they can't be bothered to tech the children safety and demand it. These are the same people who wont hesitate to give the kid a magnifying glass. What hypocrisy. Teach safety and demand it is why he is not allowed a knife. I'm teaching, I'm demanding, he isn't demonstrating the knowledge and willingness I demand. My daughter age 12 on the other hand, earned the right to a survival pack sans a rifle at his age. The girl is smart and responsible and for some strange reason she wont open a geocache. Well it isn't strange, it is the parents responsibility to make sure the child isn't exposed to something objectionable in a cache be it a knife or condom or satanist tract. It isn't my job to make sure anyone's kids are safe but mine outside of direct involvement so that they can be lax in their duty and it isn't anyone's job to force that onto me. Adults should take responsibility and teach it to their children so that we can have swag for different age ranges with minimal complaint. Unfortunately I'm constrained by an agreement to not put specific harmless items in a cache.

that is supposed to help me how? ouch! Ok how about "not where you think it is" Hmm GZ lead me to a nondescript tree. There is a nondescript tree every 10 to 20 feet in every direction for thousands of feet and nothing but nondescript trees for hundreds. GZ is probably more then 30 feet off because of the canopy. Hmmmm, ya know eventually I think it is at every tree within a 100 feet.Then I think it is under the leaves. Forget it I'm out of here. Stinking nano in the woods.

And BTW, the actual rules MiGO members use to get caches on the list may be different from those posted on the MiGO site. But on the site it says nothing about having to state your intention to be on a list or state you have abandoned the cache. The site says, which I quoted earlier but I will quote again for clarification, "When a cache is archived on geocaching.com, the approver reads the logs and tries to determine if the container for the cache has been properly removed. If the information is inconclusive as to the fate of the geocache, it will be listed here to ensure that it is on our "radar screen" and eventually a MiGO member will visit the site, verify that it is gone, and it will turn green" There is a second paragraph that tells you how to get your cache off the list. But from what is posted it seems that all that needs to happen to get your cache on the list is to not mention removal of your cache. Again, I agree that we SHOULD be able to remove abandoned caches. OTHERS, including the New Zealand reviewers are the ones calling the practice stealing. In order for the approver to bother reading the page you still have to meet 1 of three things Be a member Ask to be included State the intention to abandon. If one of those conditions has not been met then your cache will not be included. To claim that MIGO members remove caches outside of those conditions is to claim MIGO members are thieves. It gets no simpler than that. By the way, I call removal outside of those practices stealing because it is. Lets say I archived a cache. You come along 2 years later and find my archived cache and decide to take it. Did you check every single listing service? Did you go to every forum I participate in to see if I left it in place for them to use? Did you contact me to see if it is a cache where I drop the coords into other caches? Or use it as a teaching tool? Or any of a multitude of uses? You just cant guarantee that a cache is abandoned unless the CO has stated intent. A cache is not geolitter unless abandonment intention has been stated or it is obviously nonfunctional for quite some time. Why does this subject always seem to pop up in pairs?

I'm sorry but I do not see the connection between and the current topic. Could you expand on that a bit? Odd, it is suppose to say "The log is the cache, everything else is just swag, camouflage or container. Ya didn't find the cache if ya didn't open the container, and if ya did find the cache then prove it by signing it." It is a parody of the Midnight Bomber and what he ran around screaming.Now I wounder why it is showing up one place correctly an not another. Oh well I'm sure it will fix it self eventually.

I said nothing about NZ, what I am saying is that here in Michigan you have to state intention to be on the RM list or state that you have abandoned the cache. So what MIGO does is not stealing. What you have done is used a terribly inaccurate example and in the process called me and the other members thieves when we are not.

Now I know what the geocaching.com/my/challenges.aspx page was reminding me of! Thanks dude.

That's odd since that is precisely what MIGO does. MIGO Cache Rescue Mission I don't know that it's necessarily the reviewer's job to put out that call, but I see nothing wrong with picking up obviously abandoned caches that it's clear are not even suitable to be cross listed elsewhere. Not exactly, last I knew you had to (A)be a MIGO member (B)ask for inclusion or ©state your intention to abandon the cache.

I cant find where I agreed to adhere to any unwritten rules, guidelines or obligations. Any unwritten rules, guidelines or obligations that I adhere to exists only in my head and wile it would be nice for others to listen and adopt it isn't expected. But theft is theft and ignorance is no excuse. Personally, if I took my ball out of play here, then a week after archival I would be asking the reviewers to lock the listing. And I would be alerting people in the cache that they cant claim the find here. Assuming the cache is large enough. As for a note on the cache page it just wouldn't occur to me and I don't expect it of others. If I am lucky, maybe writing about it will make it stick. I wouldn't expect you to get bitten in the butt either. When a cache goes missing here, a persons first reaction isn't "One of those evil terracachers stole my cache!" it is other active members they have problems with or non players that come to mind first.

If I am caching by myself in the woods and I hear other people I hide from and in most instances stalk them. Haven't been caught yet.