justintim1999
-
Posts
2427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by justintim1999
-
-
28 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.
It seems that your pretty sure of the ones that are bogus. Are you not as certain of the ones that are legit? I looked at just one of your caches that had something like 169 finds. Are you telling me that at least 85 of those finds are fudged? I'm not questioning the observations you've made regarding your local caching scene. I'm sure you have a pretty good idea of who's not playing well with others. What I am questioning is your assentation that the majority of cachers and cache owners in your area are purposely disregarding the rules and gaming the system.
Is it more likely that 1 person is cheating 169 times or 169 people are cheating once?
-
4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
I don't know - and nor do you.
But of those I know locally and through cache logs - the majority of them bend the rules whenever it suits them.
That's my personal experience and all I've ever pointed to because - guess what - that's all either of us has to go on.
Of course you do. You know your caches better than anyone. In your opinion of all the people that have found your caches are most of those finds bogus or legit?
-
1 minute ago, Team Microdot said:
You cannot make that claim with any veracity whatsoever.
Or is it just that you're looking for it not to be the norm? Or not even looking at all.
Your own argument cuts equally both ways.
That really depends on the true net gain.
So I'll ask you directly. Do you think most Geocachers out there are trying to game the system or do most try their best to play by the rules?
-
On 10/27/2018 at 12:18 AM, Barnyard Dawg said:
In a last attempt to get back on-topic, what could HQ do to make life a bit easier for cache owners?
I don't see anything wrong with your idea other than some may find a way to game it which IMO is not a reason to brush it aside.
I'm not sure if GS could do something that would make being a cache owner easier but they could do something to make cache ownership more prestigious.
-
.png)
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Team Microdot said:
How they see it, or how it is?
If they're following your advice they probably won't be paying any attention to what's going on around them anyway.
Perception can be deceiving. Picture this. Your walking along a trail and you come upon someone on their hands and knees behind a bush. Most people automatically jump to something sinister when in fact it's only a Geocacher looking for a cache. It's human nature to have a bad experience and allow that experience to color your perception.
If your looking for injustice, you'll see it around every corner whether or not it's really there. The funny thing is when someone eventually discovers this injustice you get the "See I told you so" attitude as if the actions of one person out of a thousand vindicates their beliefs. I have no doubt that some experience bad cachers on a regular basis. What I'm saying is I don't think for a minute that these cachers are the norm. We defiantly shouldn't allow those who willfully play the game wrong to have any bearing on whether or not we implement something that would reward those who play the game right.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Team Microdot said:
I find it less satisfying to be part of something that doesn't live up to the way it's described in the brochure.
Hence why if I ever tell people I do geocaching these days it's in something of an apologetic manner.
Geocaching offers an opportunity to experience something exciting. Every individual, who enjoys the activity, will find something in it that appeals to them for one reason or another. the brochure describes the game as it was intended to be played. If everyone who played took it seriously and tried to play by the guidelines, the reasons for not liking Geocaching would be personal and have nothing to do with the game itself. It was through Geocaching I developed a love and respect for nature. I found an activity I enjoyed doing. I continue to be involved in Geocaching because I want that experience to be around for others to discover.
-
On 10/26/2018 at 3:27 PM, Team Microdot said:
Not quite.
What you've actually resorted to is ad hominem attacks because the experience of others contradicts yours.
Yes I'm basing my opinions on what I've seen as are others that have not had the same experiences. The question is which version of reality is closer to the truth? Are the vast majority of players trying to game the system or do most players try to play the game according to the guidelines? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we should poll the question to get a better idea of how others see the issue.
-
On 10/26/2018 at 3:29 PM, Team Microdot said:
Now that made me smile ?
I'm glad it did but that statement really describes what I think the problem is here. Some see monsters around every corner and base their caching beliefs on that. When stopping the monsters trumps making the game better for the vast majority of players that get it, we wind up loosing something and IMO the game suffers. I'm not advocating hiding under the covers and ignoring bad behavior. I also don't think we should allow bad behavior to dictate how the game is played. I think people put too much stock in those that choose to game the system and forget to concentrate on things that make the game better.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
Sage advice.
I'll add to that - don't dismiss facts just because they don't support your position. That's equivalent to a child covering its eyes and claiming nobody can see it.
As a kid the blanket over my head always prevented be from being eaten by the monsters.
-
7 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:
Don't make the claim that people are "obsessing" about how things can be gamed. That is part of the discussion.
Your right and I'm discussing why I don't think it's worthy of consideration when it comes to this topic.
-
10 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:
The way I see it, it's similar to life. We need enforcement of a norm of conduct for this pastime. The current norm of conduct provided by GCHQ helps to create a more favorable pastime for all. People will always look for loopholes for personal advantage. Those loopholes once discovered are usually fixed.
I thought norm of conduct was posting appropriate logs and allowing reviewers to use that information to make decisions? Hasn't it always been that way? I didn't realize that I was suppose to be hunting these criminals down and seeing they are duly punished? That was a joke but for some not far from the truth.
Are there loopholes the can be reasonably closed that GS doesn't know about? Armchair loggers take advantage of the fact that most cache owners don't check physical logs with the paper logs. Do we need to get rid of finds because of this loophole? That's another silly joke but not as silly as thinking that GS could somehow make Geocaching bullet proof from cheaters and rule breakers. Here's where I go off the rails. The General Laws of Massachusetts has 5 parts. Part 2 has 3 Titles. Title 1 has 16 chapters and chapter 183 has 69 sections. This is just the general laws.
Point is you can't legislate morality.
Geocaching has a set of guidelines. What do you expect?
I guess the question is, dose providing an incentive to cache owners worth it knowing that some will Inevitably try to take advantage of them?
-
2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:
You make it sound like any attempt to thwart "slackers and cheats" is a complete waste of time.
I do? Didn't I say "If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on. " The move on part is what I'm trying to emphasize here. It's amazing how many "examples" of bad caches and bad cache owners have been posted here. I'm guilty of it myself on these forums but only to make a point. I get the impression that some actually go out of their way to keep track of such things on a daily basis and obsess on how to best fight these injustices.
I'm for playing the game according to the guidelines and if I see something that I think is not right I'll make it right or post a log that will make the problem public. What I won't do is obsess about it and spend countless hours documenting examples and complaining about unfair practices.
Back on point. I haven't seen anything negative in offering cache owners some sort of perk other than fear some among us will use it to cheat the system.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
More like delerium.
That too but my doctors tell me I'm much better now.
-
.png)
2
-
-
Just now, Team Microdot said:
Good grief.
That's some powerful imagination right there.
Let us know when you come back to reality.
I've been in reality brother. All this right here is imagination.
-
Just now, justintim1999 said:
No not blind. Obsessed. For you and others it's become a cause. To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats. As if you could. I hate to break this to you but you can't. You can't! They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream.
Now you're ready to crucify those that rule bend? I can think of a dozen times I've had the power to bend the rules and did so for the right reasons.
It's bad to dwell on things like this to the point you forget to actually have fun caching. It's ok if a cheater has 5000 more finds than you do. It's not the end of the world if an owner doesn't maintain a cache. If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on.
Have you had your blood pressure checked lately? I'm beginning to worry about you.
If exaggeration is a cheap shot this is an outright low blow.
-
4 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
Apparently those of us who see rule bending as a matter of routine, week in, week out must be blind?
No not blind. Obsessed. For you and others it's become a cause. To rid the Geocaching world of slackers and cheats. As if you could. I hate to break this to you but you can't. You can't! They're going to continue doing so regardless of how much you kick and scream.
Now you're ready to crucify those that rule bend? I can think of a dozen times I've had the power to bend the rules and did so for the right reasons.
It's bad to dwell on things like this to the point you forget to actually have fun caching. It's ok if a cheater has 5000 more finds than you do. It's not the end of the world if an owner doesn't maintain a cache. If you see something wrong fix it or report it and move on.
Have you had your blood pressure checked lately? I'm beginning to worry about you.
-
Just now, 31BMSG said:
WTH? Just because you've not seen it means you don't believe it could be possible somewhere else? The majority of cachers I know speak Spanish, is that true in your area? If not then you don't believe me?
I believe it happens all the time everywhere. I don't think it represents the majority of people out there playing and I don't think we should be dismissing ideas because we're afraid the vast minority will abuse something.
-
28 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:
Participating in geocaching for 17 years has been an eye-opening experience in human nature. Especially once geocaching morphed into a game rather than a pastime. Competition, numbers-behavior, group behavior, peer pressure, dominance, greed do strange things to good people. Based on your experience, I think the game is still in the pastime stage in your area. May it always be so.
Maybe your right. Maybe my 100 mile radius of Geocaching experience is unique to the world. I'd rather think that your past experiences has blinded you to everything that's good about Geocaching and your so focused on who's getting away with what you fail to see those that are having fun playing the right way.
I truly hope I'm wrong on both counts.
-
24 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
Don't twist my words. That's rude.
The majority of GEOCACACHERS I know will bend the rules / cut corners to suit their particular goal if it suits them.
Not trying to be rude. I just don't believe that the majority of cachers you know would grossly abuse the guidelines. If that's true I feel sorry for you because that's not what I've seen. Not even close. I've seen many instances where someone has broken the guidelines because they're new and didn't understand them.
People spend all kinds of time thinking of way to game the system and for what? I'd rather not waste my time trying to stop them and use that time for more constructive things.
-
1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:
If you've seen my posts, you'll know I do that. My comment you quoted was based on having already weighed both the benefits and drawbacks, and that was the opinion to which I resolved.
Also, "Everyone plays their own way"
Everybody can play their own way......There's plenty of room to do that within the guidelines.
-
2 hours ago, Team Microdot said:
Keep in mind I'm talking about people I know and who know perfectly well what they are doing.
In other words erm - nope.
And how many people is that? The majority of the people you know are untrustworthy?
-
2 minutes ago, Team Microdot said:
I'm inclined to disbelieve that based on personal experience, in which people will game ANY system they can.
Even people who I expect to play straight rarely if ever do.
It's only a game = it doesn't matter what I do.
Keep in mind there's a difference between making mistakes or not understanding the right way to play and intentionally ignoring the guidelines. In my experience there are very few of the latter.
-
On 5/25/2011 at 2:29 PM, stiab3 said:
Why would one want to do this?
I have a trackable and I'm new, but I can't figure why I would want to 'dip my trackable'?
Let's say I pick up a trackable and a couple of days later I go caching again. I may not find a cache suitable to leave the trackable in but I'll mark it as "visited" that cache so the trackable gets credit for the mileage between where I picked it up and the cache I just found. It's ok to do this until you find a cache that your comfortable leaving the trackable in or a cache that's may be specific to the trackable's goal. I don't "visit" the trackable at every cache I find before I drop it off. For example If I go caching in an area where there's 8 or 9 caches I'll only mark the trackable as visiting one of them so it gets credit for some mileage. Another reason I do this is so the trackable's page isn't filled up with "visited" logs.
A visited log also lets the trackable owner know it's still active. The key is not to hold on to it for too long. Try to drop it in a cache within a week or two.
Another feature is the discovered log. If you find a cache that has a trackable in it but for whatever reason you don't want to pick it up. Write down the tracking code and log it as "discovered" on the trackable page. This lets the owner, and other cachers, know that the trackable is still in the cache and waiting to be picked up. It also adds it to your list of found trackables.
I have a travel bug I carry with me that belongs to a little girl. She doesn't want me to drop it off in another cache. She asked me to keep it with me and "visit" the various caches I find and take pictures of her TB so she can watch it travel and see it in different places. Many of the pictures I've taken with the TB are from places and things that have nothing to do with Geocaching.
-
I'd leave the caches out until they develop a problem. In the mean time I'd look to see if I could find someone who would adopt them or agree to do maintenance on them if the need arose. If the time comes when a cache needed maintenance and your unable to fix it yourself or find anyone to do it for you, I'd archive them and try to figure out a way to retrieve the containers.
Adoption would be the best route. Finding someone who will help you with maintenance will work as long as your willing to monitor the caches and post the Owners Maintenance Logs when repairs are made.
-
2
-
.png)
.png)
Excessive owner maintenence logs!
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Nope. Log one every time you visit the cache to check up on it. It lets finders and reviewers know the cache is being cared for. I myself often look at owner maintenance logs on a cache before dropping a trackable. I feel better knowing the owner is active and watching over things. In my opinion too many is better than not enough.