JPreto

Curiosa observação a do prego/parafuso na árvore, eu fui bastante criticando por alguns geocachers da região de SP por denunciar alguns caches que não deviam ter sido publicados, pois não respeitavam as regras do geocaching, em situações iguais a esta... aliás, as regras não são regras mas sim "guidelines"... traduzindo seriam "orientações" e como tal alguns se acham no direito de não cumprir essas "orientações" porque não são "obrigações". Concordo 100% em que o geocaching não tem de ser ou associar-se a vandalismo, isto é, que existem tantos locais e tantas formas para colocar um cache que realmente não vejo necessidade de "furar" uma árvore, fazer um buraco no chão, etc... como alguém me disse um dia, o único impacto do geocaching na natureza deveriam ser as nossas pegadas!!!! Mas como alguns jogadores não compreendem e não pensam assim, aí vêm as regras... que para mim deveriam ser bastante rígidas, para respeitar a natureza e outros geocachers! Pena que alguns geocachers no brasil estejam mais preocupados com a reputação, numero de caches, etc... do que em fazer o jogo crescer e respeitar os guidelines!

Não sou eu a falar mas podia bem ser... Parabéns "slhugu", finalmente alguém que quer ver regras a serem impostas e não que o Brasil seja o faroeste do geocaching como alguns "gringos" disseram no forum internacional. Rui, há quantos anos estás no Brasil???? Ainda não sabes as leis brasileiras??? Ou queres tu ser o primeiro revisor no Brasil???? É isto uma campanha???

Penso que este tópico se baseia em pressupostos não corretos. A Groundspeak limita-se a respeitar toda e qualquer legislação local, regional e nacional pré-existentes, podendo ou não, fazer eco delas nas suas páginas. Não cria, nem pede que a comunidade crie qualquer regras aplicáveis descricionariamente a cada território onde se pratique o jogo. Por último, convêm recordar que o facto de alguma política local, regional ou nacional não se encontrarem listadas nas páginas da Groundspeak e do geocaching, não significa que não sejam respeitadas, pelos revisores... e que por acréscimo, não devam ser respeitadas pelos geocachers. Politicas de Portugal - https://wiki.Groundspeak.com/display/GEO/Portugal Guidelines da Geocaching - https://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx Volto a dizer, seria importante que, pelo menos, os guidelines da geocaching fossem respeitados pelos Revisores: Guideline, simples... o dono do cache deve visitar o local, após o pedido de manutenção, num período geralmente de 4 semanas... no Brasil alguns caches já vão em mais de 2 anos!

Bom dia a todos! Sempre apoiei a criação de regras e normas para o geocaching, principalmente no que é a adaptação à realidade Brasileira. Lamento ver, como referi mais do que uma vez neste forum, que são os próprios Revisores que não cumprem com essas regras. Vejam o caso de alguns caches: http://coord.info/GC1FPM3 http://coord.info/GC1FPGD http://coord.info/GC1GPPD http://coord.info/GC22NKY Estes são apenas alguns dos vários caches que pedi manutenção em 2014... e até hoje ainda não foi feita a manutenção, nem foram arquivados!!!! Por isso digo, acho muito bem que sejam implementadas regras e normas que DEVEM SER CUMPRIDAS e não ignoradas como acontece habitualmente. Este foi o principal motivo por ter deixado o Geocaching, se os próprios revisores não cumprem essas regras então fica muito difícil. JP

Hi all!!! After a period of absence due to my work life I am back and just to find out my fears have come true... Brazil is more and more.... well, see for yourself and take your own conclusions: Praça Universidade Mackenzie - GC55RQ8 Specially this log: Found it Laferre found Traditional Cache Praça Universidade Mackenzie And the text of the log, because he might change it: Free translating it to english it says: So... maybe I will find now some very old caches, that where never found just by placing a Throwdown and saying FTF, even if they are archived with the excuse of not updating my cellphone... REALLY?!?!?!? Welcome to the Wild Wild West of Geocaching!!!!! PS: As you can see the cache had a Maintenance Request and was Disable by a Reviewer more than 20 days before the actual post... Even tho the post has the date of June 27th, it was actually written in the cache yesterday, July 9th!!!!

JPreto, Não entendi... Por que cuidado? As redes sociais são justamente para encontrarmos pessoas que tem os mesmos interesses que nós... Só que nem todos os geocachers estão no FB, por isso sugeri ao Cláudio que coloque aqui seus objetivos... Abraços!!!! OFF-TOPIC Porque se estava a falar de objectivos para 2015, mas como o próprio dono do tópico faz a pergunta eu irei responder. Simples, o Grupo do Facebook (Geocaching Brasil) não é aberto a todos, é um grupo controlado por 5 pessoas e sem aprovação delas ninguém entra no grupo, mais ainda, se os comentários não vão de acordo com a opinião dos adminsitradores a pessoa é expulsa do grupo. Por isso volto a dizer: cuidado, com um grupo cujas opiniões são controladas... OFF-TOPIC

Cláudio, fico contente em ver que como novato está se interessando em participar do Fórum, um canal muito importante. Como novato você tem muito o que palpitar. Pelo seus posts no grupo do FB percebo que você pretende esconder diversos caches na sua região. Esse é justamente o propósito deste post. Gostaria de ver seus planos para 2015 descritos aqui também. Forte abraço!!! Toninho Cuidado com esse grupo do FB... muito cuidado!!!!!

Esperemos apenas que os locais e os caches não sejam os reais senão "MAJOR SPOILER!" Aliás existiram jogadores que foram suspensos pela Groundspeak por situações como esta: "fazer reportagens na televisão em nome do geocaching, onde se mostram os locais onde os caches estão escondidos".

Bom 2015 a tod@s!!!! Olha, pessoalmente algo que gostaria que acontecesse era a suspensão de todos os usuários que não tentam respeitar as regras do jogo e que tentam arranjar formas para aumentarem os números ilicitamente, com contas "sockpuppets" e outras formas. Um já foi "Team Ribeiro" assim que o objectivo parece cumprir-se... a Groundspeak HQ deveria tomar mais acções com estas! Outra seria arquivar todos os listings que não tivessem geocaches no local, ou que os donos dos caches não efectuassem a sua manutenção. Também se está a cumprir, e ainda estamos no início do ano!!!! Muitas descobertas e boas aventuras!!!!

Bom!!!! Pena que pareça mais uma publicidade pessoal, 4 fotos da mesma pessoa numa única página?!?!?!

So you prefer to have listings that have no caches there, or that the owners don't maintain rather then having the listings archived! Great then... I rather have the listings accurate with the reality! Do you actally visit these caches and confirm them? Yes, all of them!!!!

So you prefer to have listings that have no caches there, or that the owners don't maintain rather then having the listings archived! Great then... I rather have the listings accurate with the reality!

Your local reviewers will most likely look at these caches the next time they sweep the country looking for, well, caches disabled for more than X weeks. Maintenance requests are originated towards the cache owners. Some geocachers don't consider them critical. Some geocachers ignore them. Some geocachers filter all the automated messages coming from Geocaching.com. Have you tried contacting each and every owner of these caches? Offer a hand? No, the local reviewers only know about the caches for which you post SBA logs. All the other caches, unless specifically pointed out, do not raise any kind of "alarm". The reviewers have been really busy...NOT!!!!! They said they were taking care of it but nothing done in 2 months... Just great!!!! Funny enough, just a few days after this post all those caches were archived!!!! Maybe, just maybe this is the only way to get things done here in Brazil: Post the problems in the International Forum so everybody can see the problem that is happening in Geocaching in Brazil. Ohh, yes... I am soooooo lame, but at least I am trying to do something, others just watch and keep quiet...

Complaining on here will get you nowhere. If you think the caches need archiving then post the appropriate log to bring them to the reviewer's attention - that's a Needs Archived log. Complained directly to all them by email... Complained to the Brazilian Forum... Complained to GS... This is my last resourse... What else?!?!?!?

Just doing an update on these caches - in front of each cache, in bold... Your local reviewers will most likely look at these caches the next time they sweep the country looking for, well, caches disabled for more than X weeks. Maintenance requests are originated towards the cache owners. Some geocachers don't consider them critical. Some geocachers ignore them. Some geocachers filter all the automated messages coming from Geocaching.com. Have you tried contacting each and every owner of these caches? Offer a hand? No, the local reviewers only know about the caches for which you post SBA logs. All the other caches, unless specifically pointed out, do not raise any kind of "alarm". The reviewers have been really busy...NOT!!!!! They said they were taking care of it but nothing done in 2 months... Just great!!!!

If people react negatively for a geocacher posting a DNF, and rather hash for posting a NM... imagine a NA!!! The first NA that I posted was immediately deleted by the CO, and then undeleted by a Lackey. People feel that they can do whatever they want and that they are above everybody else... We are all equal!!!!

Are there any guidelines regarding this? Aren't there concerns that, since they aren't reviewed, these event-only pseudo-caches might contravene other guidelines? In the example cited for this thread, it seems weird to me that you'd be allowed a real Found It on what sounds like not a real cache, within the context of the permanence and saturation guidelines. Even if there were some guidelines that would probably use the words "should" or "might" so, anything is possible!!!!

I have all the caches that I picked up... total 140 caches! I am going to Portugal and Spain next month, and I will take all my caches with me! Feel free to contact me to sign the logbooks. Once in a lifetime opportunity to log FOUND IT in 140 Brazilian caches. Really Toz?!?!? Why would you, GS or any other geocacher worry about this! PS: And by the way, if you can´t find me just place a TD and everything will be fine...

I thought we were in a information era, and that making a code that just sent a warning to Lakeys or Reviewers saying: "The cache X was logged FOUND IT, and it is archived for over 6 months" Is it that complicated? Are there so many caches in this situation? Will... Just power of will...

Yeahh... small ajustments... New code! <div class='stat' style='position:relative; top:-226px; left:453px; height:0px;'> | <img style="vertical-align:sub" src='/images/icons/32/dnf.png' alt='' height="15" width="15" /> 376 DNF Logs </div>

I would think that "archiving a cache" (better said archiving a cache listing, the cache could be there in the original place) had the goal of excluding the cache from being further searched by people that used the geocaching.com listing service because for some reason it shouldn´t be part of the game. Maybe it´s just me being picky... But, by the way, if you keep searching for archived caches, and you keep logging FOUND IT on them, what is the goal of archiving a cache?

Ok. Let me try a different approach: If there is nothing wrong with logging a FOUND IT, 3 years after the cache has been archived why was it locked then? or, If indeed there is a problem with logging a FOUND IT, 3 years after the cache has been archived why not delete the bogus logs? Capiche? I like the incoherence, just that... "Covering the sun with a sieve" is not an option for me!

Why bother? Even when we look at this worst case -- not anything that happens very often -- it's not a big deal. I'm not even sure I'd bother to lock this one, although I don't question Groundspeak's decision to do so as a matter or routine. So even if the archived caches serve no purpose beyond people logging 6 months after finding it, I still can't see any good reason to bother having an automatic super-archive state. But, in fact, logs of long archived caches can actually be quite useful in rare cases such as if the container is found years after the cache had been archived. It makes no sense to prevent that just because someone might possibly use an archived cache's log for playing around in a way that's not authorized. The bottom line is that archived caches demand no respect, so none is enforced. I´m not saying we shouldn´t be able to see what are the cache´s logs but to "enforce" people to follow the GS guidelines maybe they could disable the FOUND IT logs after some time... That´s all I´m saying! Fact is, even tho cache listing is archived, people were still logging FOUND IT, against the guidelines, no? Or wait, sorry, my mistake, as a matter of fact there isn´t any guideline that says: "you cannot log a FOUND IT after the cache has been archived". So you are right, the cache listing shouldn´t even be locked because, actually, it is not breaking any GS guideline and people should just start logging in APEs, Virtuals, Locationless and other types, just because they can! But above all, have fun and don´t care about what others do...

Regarding your second point, Geocaching HQ does not and cannot actively monitor millions of caches (including archived caches) for instances of abuse. When a situation is brought to the attention of Geocaching HQ or the relevant Volunteer Cache Reviewer, action can be taken on the individual listing. In this instance the cache listing in question is now locked to any future logs. That action was taken within two days of when this thread was started. I'd call that "swift" given that the topic was started on a weekend. Why not automatic lock all archived caches after, lets say 6 months, just to put out a date... this would enforce users to respect the archival. But again I say: "Some geocachers don´t respect GS guidelines and nothing is done... Or shouldn´t those find logs all be removed by GS, if GS tryed to enforce the guidelines?" Just saying...

I love these type of stories!!!! 1) Shows that people don´t respect the Groundspeak guidelines. 2) Shows that GS doens´t enforce people to respect their guidelines. Great, just great...