JPreto

How can I punish someone that doesn´t play the game since 2010? Wait a minute. You complained about the contents listed when a cache was originally placed at LEAST 4 years ago? Did you even visit the cache or were you just perusing cache listings looking for infractions to complain about? Really?!?!?!?! Is that your question?!?!?!?! The answer in on the cache page!!!! http://coord.info/GLFAT3D2

For me it doesn´t matter if the CO did it himself or not... He could have chosen other places than the spot where the "G" is carved. But he choose that one! If it wasn´t a "G", that is the first letter of both the word Groundspeak and also GeoCaching, but if it was an "H". Maybe the "H" was there for a reason that you don´t even know, like the name of his mother... I would still feel that that cache shouldn´t be there because you are relating a human made marking on a tree with the game that you play. I don´t think that this type of placement references are good examples for the future geocachers that might think that the letter was placed by the CO and not that the CO found the letter there years before the cache was placed. With so many places to put a cache, why choose that one where the tree was marked? Can you understand my point of view?

It is great that you feel like that... Really shows how local geocachers from where I geocache think! And by the way I have more caches like this from the same player... Can´t you think that a n00b will think when he sees this cache, with that hint, and the "G" carved on the tree? I´m sure we will not think about copying the idea at all... right? http://coord.info/GLE22833 Think again...

When I posted NM on moldy logs the community criticize me... actually they criticize me for even placing a DNF, some defend that you just post a DNF after 3 visits!!!! If I remove contents of a geocache that is approved by a reviewers saying: "I removed some contents because I felt that were inappropriate" Don´t you feel that the same community would say: "Here he is again, the reviewers have no problems with the contents, since them approved the geocache, but he is being a smart a** and saying what we can and can´t put in a cache". Now you understand?

My actions would be the same! I was just answering what "dprovan" and "GeoBain" were discussing: I know nothing about reviewers, but I really doubt that. I think the most extreme case would be enforcing a rule that they don't agree with, but they accept that there's probably a good reason for the rule, they just haven't run into that case yet. So I put out an example, a fact... not hypothetical assumptions.

How can I punish someone that doesn´t play the game since 2010?

Something like this: http://coord.info/GC2KRK8 Look at the hint "Between the roots, find a discrete G" and the spoiler picture, the "G" carved on the tree. Cache still active! Defacing?!?!?!

Just to put a timeline into things: July 2008 - First cache ever found as a muggle in Portugal Ago 2013 - Started officially geocaching in Brazil Jan 2014 - Placed my first cache with the goal of placing one per day May 2014 - Placed my last cache So you really feel it is a burnout case? And between May and August this year, when I didn´t place any cache, I burned out? If my attitude was made in a rush and I did this in May, maybe it could be that... but after 3 months? The problem, as I mention before, is that several attitudes from local geocachers really make me feel unwilling to place more caches and maintain them for other geocachers. After the last comments of the Forum Moderator "Rui de Almeida" or in his geocaching name "Kelux" really made me realize that it is not worth it so, I archived all my 141 caches.

I know nothing about reviewers, but I really doubt that. I think the most extreme case would be enforcing a rule that they don't agree with, but they accept that there's probably a good reason for the rule, they just haven't run into that case yet. This are just assumptions... This is a case: http://coord.info/GC1ZXZY This cache, from the day it was placed had: And pictures describing both the geocache and the contents. The guidelines clearly say: So I felt that the "3 sterile (sealed) lancets for blood glucose measurement" were not appropriate as a geocache swag. Post this on my log and even contacted the local reviewers. The answer I got from the reviewers was: "You are right it is not appropriate, did you remove it?" I said: "No I didn´t... After all that is happening here I don´t want any more problems with the local community." The answer that I got back was: "Well, what do you want us to do then?" I told them: "Do whatever you feel is right. I did my part, now it´s in your hands!" I got no answer from that and the cache is still active containing lancets that clearly are not appropriate for a geocache and the CO is absent from the game. The influencers of the local community visit the cache, and even post notes saying it is OK to visit... So clearly the cache is being maintained by the local community (or at least the influencers of the community). The reviewers know about the fact that the cache is not respecting the guidelines and do nothing about it... Make your conclusions... What I put here are facts!

This person really has a double personality problem... It is the same BRAZILIAN FORUM MODERADOR that in another topic was accusing me of lying and being dishonest... Now he comes here, with his geocaching name (not is Forum Moderator name "Rui de Almeida") and be all sensible and understanding and full of... Come on man, you cannot please greeks and trojans, take a stand and stop using different accounts according to your needs!

Thanks for understanding this... If I could change the title, the word "geoleech" and the definition I would... TITLE: "Thinking about leaving my CO boots in the closet" WORD: No word, just mentioning what were my feeling about it. DEFINITION: No definition, just mentioning on the possibility of archiving all my caches. Maybe with these 3 changes the topic would be in the subject I meant it to be... and not about the usage of a word.

Please note that your definition of a "GeoLeech" is much narrower than JPreto's definition: ..... Now I'm just curious what the topic starter thinks of this adjusted "definition" of a GeoLeech! That was not my intention of the usage of that term. As I tried to explain before the term was an adaptation of what happens in the file sharing community. This term is used for people that have more Downloads than they have Uploads.

Okay, interesting stuff. Thanks for reconsidering the harsh words toward those who don't place caches. I understand better the problem with caches that you are having locally. I don't have an answer right now, but maybe you can discuss this at meetings with local cachers. Any luck so far? I was calling myself a leech also... but again I say: "Bad term choice". The answer to your question is yes...I tried to go to some meetings in the beginning. 1st - They said I shouldn´t write my logs in English and that I should at least write in Portuguese and English. I explained that since most geocachers in Brazil are foreigners/tourists (300 Brazilians to around 600 tourists per year) and most cache descriptions were only in Portuguese, this was a way the help them and I didn´t want to write my logs in both languages, like I did in my own geocaches. 2nd - In one of the cases, probably the one that most local geocachers criticize me, was the archival of a TB Hotel in the most famous park of São Paulo. The listing was approved and after approval 2 names were added as a hint. I went to visit the cache and it was inside a cafeteria and the 2 names where from the owners that you should ask them to give you the cache. I explained this to the reviewers and the cache was later archived. Fact is, a couple of months before the listing was approved this subject came out on the table of that cafeteria and I mentioned that if they submitted the listing it would not be approved because it would be against the guidelines. So yes, I tried talking to them in many ways... They don´t like DNFs, they say less geocachers would visit a cache if a DNF is placed and they hate maintenance requests because it forces them to visit the cache. Some have caches 600km-800km from where they live and they can´t do proper maintenance. Me too, definitely, in my opinion, throwdowns are the worse... and again, I say, from the original post, that I am thinking about becoming a leech. So if I meant it to be as bad as I thought you would all interpret I would never had used that term. I used that term based on file sharing services that use .torrent files and people that do more downloads than uploads are called leeches. This was the reason behind the use of the word.

It's not a matter of opinion. The site does not require any sort of ratio for hiding or finding. That's a hard fact. I never said it did... I just mention that I had that as a goal, because this way meant that more people where finding caches, meaning more people were playing the game or at least, more often.

I'm not sure whether I understand what you try to say. When someone hides a lot of caches in the same area within a short time, I'm also not necessarily very happy about that, but not because I care about numbers. So some cachers might ask you this type of question without caring about numbers themselves. I thought that hiding more caches that I would do a good maintenance (checking regularly if they were there) If someone tried to search for my caches it would be less likely for them to be gone. Understand now... I was not about me having more caches but more caches with maintenance were available for whom wanted to play. My usual stats of a geocaching day were 1 DNF in every 3 searches... and most of the cases the caches weren´t really there. For a person who is just starting to geocache this can be very disappointing because you are searching some something that isn´t even there.

Lets see if I can explain it now: Because for me those caches are routes along a path, with a .GPX file you can do that. Actually without looking too much into it, they all seem like Wherigo caches. Maybe I am just old fashioned and see geocaching as a cache-hunting game where a given set of coordinates are your target and not a trail-marking game.

Ok, GeoLeech, bad term choice... but anyway there is a aspect I think you are not considering, and maybe I didn´t refer it strongly enought: While is most European countries and USA geocaching is everywhere, here, where I am, in Brazil, geocaching is nothing so, one of the ways I thought to promote the game was to look at the stats and try to understand them and try to come out with solutions for people to play more. After reading a lot of logs, on both active and archived caches, and talking with local players, I came to the conclusion that there were 2 big issues: 1) Poor or no maintenance on geocaches; 2) Because of point one, after looking for some caches and couldn´t find them, people would give up. This is the actual data from Brazil at this moment: Total unique caches found in Brazil 2012 - 620 2013 - 925 2014 - 1554 Total caches placed in Brazil 2012 - 368 2013 - 476 2014 - 829 Total unique active Brazilian players 2012 - 208 2013 - 322 2014 - 395 Total players that found Brazilian caches 2012 - 673 2013 - 993 2014 - 974 Since I geocache (August 2013) I placed 142 NM requests, out of those almost 100 caches were archived, many of them weren´t visited since 2012. I thought that placing more caches and placing DNFs and NMs on the caches that were gone missing would help the game. Problems: 1) Me placing so many caches, 1 per day from 1st January until 23rd May 2014, local players felt threatened and even asked me in events why I was doing this. Many feel that numbers is important. 2) Me posting DNFs and NMs they had to do maintenance otherwise their caches got archived. 3) Me complaining to reviewers about some geocaches that didn´t follow the guidelines and got archived. With all this the solution they figure out, to keep the numbers I suppose but here I am assuming, is making Power Trails that grew like flies after June 2014. Maybe you can understand a bit more my way of thinking about geocaching.

Sorry if I irritate you, it is not my objective or goal in any forum to irritate anyone. I simple can´t agree that placing a backup geocache can the solution for the problem, which is: "a geocache container gone missing". If I ever go to Austria I will be very please to try and find at least of your geocaches. It´s a promise!!!

First of all, I am in no way promoting the activity of becoming a GeoLeech. I am just expressing my thoughts... Second, and after searching in the forum for this word, I couldn´t find anything that used it. So I am going to define it: GeoLeech Third, I found some topics that relate to this subject, read them and this is probably the most significant: Seek but don´t hide When I started placing geocaches, to share with others the places I found interesting (like some mountain caches), that you could find curious (like some building or architecture) or simply because it might be in a bike route (all of my bike series caches) I never expected to think like I am thinking in the last few months. My question is, why to place geocaches, after all? 1) My caches disappear with no particular reason, some I really suspect stolen by other geocachers; 2) Because of the constant vanishing I must do maintenance on them, meaning replacing them; 3) The personal logs are much less common that the "TFTC" or "Another one" logs; 4) Other players don´t respect the guidelines, they actually try to bend them more then they try to follow them. So the real motivation for placing new caches is gone, and with that the motivation for maintaining the ones I have. But I still pretty much enjoy all the places I visit while geocaching and really gives me the opportunity of making some great trips with my motorbike. So I am thinking about removing and archiving all my caches and just searching for caches. This is the total opposite of what I think a community game is all about. One of the aspects of the game I think is the "Finds in my caches" vs "My Finds" (so called Karma) that I try to be over 1 (1.13 now), meaning more people log in my caches that I log in other people´s caches. I am really in a stand still, regarding this issue. Can you point out more PROs and CONs of being a GeoLeech? I´m sure I am not thinking about all of them, but some opinions would be welcome before making a decision that is now more inclined on becoming a GeoLeech myself.

A listing, a final geocache container, a set of final coordinates... This is how I see the game 1:1:1 relationship. The original game is about finding a container in a set of coordinates. 1:1 relationship, right? For what I understood then listings were implemented so more information could be passed easier, like a yellow pages directory. Things changed when people started to be more creative just pointing out places, no container needed (virtuals on... then off). What I think is that the goal of the game is not only being able to find a container, so no need for backups, if you can´t find it just log a DNF, they are there for that exact purpose. Why do geocachers always have to find a cache? If you, as a owner just place a backup for the sake of them being able to find a container, isn´t that in some point, diminishing the FOUND IT aspect of the game? Maybe, in some point in the future, the DNFs logs will disappear because all geocaches have backups, if not, you can place a throwdown and if none of that works you say you forgot your pen! You will always have a way to log a FOUND IT. Can´t you see that "feeding" this aspect of the game is just ruining it. At least for me it is... so I can´t approve none of these attitudes.

I answered to this directly to Keystone... will not discuss it here!

WOW!!! Thanks so much for the video... never heard the "balanced anarchy" term before, it just felt right for me... WOW!!!!

If you mean that exceptions can be made, then you are correct. Generally they won't be made, but they can be made. But then again, even police officers may give you a warning rather than a ticket if you are caught speeding. Even in the law there is wiggle room. Not really, and I explained this is another topic. If a policeman sees you breaking any law (like speeding) and doesn´t give you a ticket he is actually not respecting 2 other laws: He can lose his policeman license (optional by enforcers of the law enforcers) but if the facts are proven he will be fined (not optional if the law is respected). But maybe if he can prove it was his first time, the conditions of work were rough, he was tired... bla, bla, bla... maybe the judge will just send if off with a warning. So, you are right after all... no mater if it is Law, Rule, Guideline or Recommendation... in the end, anything can happen!!!! So behind this Democratic figure fact is, we all live in a balanced Anarchy!

That's why they call them guidelines rather than the laws of geocaching. Actually the definition of guideline is: Merriam Webster - a rule or instruction that shows or tells how something should be done Cambridge Dictionary - information intended to advise people on how something should be done or what something should be Collins - a principle put forward to set standards or determine a course of action So, it sure seems more like rules instead just recommendations... But if they are not clear, there is little use for them since all are open to discussion. Exactly. Guidelines are rules that show how you SHOULD do something. Whereas a law: Merriam Webster - a (1) : a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority "Law" is clearly different than "guideline" (must vs should) but what about "rule"? Isn´t it basically the same as a guideline ("should" is applied)? I tend to use guidelines as rules, not as laws, but like some say: "rules are meant to be broken". So we are up to the same point... all possibilities!!!!

And even if they are not meet, if you explain it to the reviewer and he/she agrees with you, there is the possibility of the listing being published. So, I should never really opened this to discussion... It is pointless since there is always room for the reviewer to "look to the side" if you know what I mean.