Jump to content

Confucius' Cat

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    2744
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Confucius' Cat

  1. I'm going to change the focus here for a bit: What are we giving to those who are seeking a new experience by downloading and using the intro app- what KIND of experience? Noob_01 downloads the app, sees 100 caches within 5 miles and the closest one is just 600 feet away. WOW! So, Noob_01 clicks "navigate" and proceeds to the center of the walmart lot, where there is nothing but a light pole and several parked cars. Having no experience and not knowing that he needs to "upskirt" the lamppost nor what a "micro" might be, he either walks away with a dumbfounded look or perhaps gets hassled by WM security about why he is prowling around the parked cars. At best, he figures out to lift the skirt and finds a film can and a piece of wet paper, "that's what geocaching is all about???," he says to himself as he tosses the film can on the ground. In short, Noob_01 has a pretty poor "intro" experience. With the state of geocaching as it is today, that is the noob's most likely experience. -sadly! Is this the experience we want newcomers to have? Is the first impression of the app users on their first hunt perhaps "killing the game" as much as the trashed game-pieces? The intro app needs to be limited -seriously limited- to caches that will both paint the game in a good light AND be an acceptable risk to the cache owners. NO other caches should be listed. Suggestion 1: have an "opt in" system where cache owners can specifically request their cache (on an individual basis) be listed on the app. And this checkbox ONLY appears on small or larger conventional caches- NO MICROS, and no high difficulty. It would of course have to be up to the cache owner, but a really cool thing they could do is put some "handouts" in the cache, explaining the game. Suggestion 2: let the local reviewers or local club members place a few caches in their respective areas (voluntary) specifically to be listed on the intro app. The reviewers and club members, hopefully, would place caches that give the game a good name. Seriously, letting someone "self introduce" to this game is a prescription for trouble. Mentoring is in order. It can be done in an automated manner or it can be handled by volunteer members. Nothing short of some kind of mentoring of newbies is going to solve the problems of geocaching today. -with or without a free app.
  2. Yeah, because everyone always reads and heeds the warnings in the fine print... LIKE Yep, people always read everything! Now barricade the door, get back in bed, and make sure your air purifier is working.
  3. Excellent post in its entirety. I would like to respond only to the last paragraph. I think you have correctly categorised the issue: "misunderstanding the game." I seriously doubt there is any malicious intent in this issue. The problem in education in any sense is how to make it happen. My "blanket statement" that "no one reads anything" is of course, hyperbole. (You knew that, LOL) But the poinbt is entirely accurate as you acknowledge- "People are lazy, so design interfaces so that the path of least resistance..." That "path" has to be mandatory entered upon loading the app for the first time. But still, you can't make anyone read or even look at a video. Without some kind of test, it will be treated by most exactly like the privacy statement- click the box and move on. At least if the tutorial ran automatically, SOME people who might not understand, would. Pretty simple fix for a lot of it.
  4. Pretty close. My point is that these things need to be REQUIRED in order to establish an account, log on and use the app. YOUR point, that it will STILL be FREE, is also a good point to appease thos who whine, "but..but..but..geocaching is supposed to be FREE." "Free" means "no money changes hands directly for the service," not "you can be anonymous." I am not looking to fight with them, if i have issues I email a reviewer ..but in general i sometimes email to keep them from posting spoilers and.or posting a log that is more than a TFTC .. An excellent "fix" for this issue, from the GC programming side, would be to implement a system similar to that which FaceBook uses for timeline posts, namely, alerting the cache owner and requiring "permission" (by checkbox) to add the log entry. Until that permission is given, the cache page would just show "found," "not found," or other appropriate "canned" log. It puts a little more work on the cache owner, but it also stops the possibility of rude comments being seen on the cache page for an indefinite period of time (forever in the case of an absentee cache owner). All in all, this would be a simple common sense improvement. I have been the victim of rude comments, posted by others on my caches, pissing off other cachers. I deleted and reported. But in the mean time, damage was done. There are similar issue with Flickr. They solve it with essentially a "whitelist" option. But that really wouldn't work here. RE: "TFTC" IMO, that is a perfectly fine log entry- especially for caches where the owner basically threw it down and posted the coordinates. Actually, I seldom log those at all... but that has gotten me in trouble for saying that in the past. TS though, I will log/not log what I wish. "TFTC" should be a checkbox. Shoot me. Not everyone has kissed the Blarney stone. Just accept a basic log as a gift, same as your cache was a gift.
  5. The whole idea of a "caching license" was also beat to death in the olden days. "Study" need not be a requirement. The game is simple. "Seek, find, sign, log, replace, repeat." It's not rocket science. A splash screen detailing the basics on first load would be sufficient "training." That is as much as any newcomer gets, any way they come in to the game. It is offered to read. One can read it or not. If they make it too long, it will be just like the "privacy statement-" only the lawyers and lawyer wannabees will read it. I admin several groups on Flickr and I can tell you unequivocally from my experience there, NO ONE READS ANYTHING. So. It is what it is. Short of a mandatory personal training session with an old timer, there is NO WAY to ensure that a newbie will get any information about the game. ANd even if you made newbies "get a license," some would likely still mess up. Hmm... speeding, drunk driving, texting... all done by people who had to take a test first. it is what it is. (I HATE that cliche'!) Welcome back, Confucius' Cat!! I remember you! Not to be arrogant or anything, but I'm fellow old timer who has basically never stepped away from the game for any significant time. I've never gone more than 21 days without finding a cache, and before 2013, I could have said that was only 14 days. Have placed 51 caches over the years. Let me tell you, this intro app is pure freaking evil!!! The number of Geocaching.com accounts has more than tripled since 2010, from 3,000,000 to well over 10,000,000. That's obviously mostly due to the "app crowd" (smartphone apps came out in 2009). The free intro app is only about a year or two old. It has, in my and many other people's opinions, brought with it an unprecedented level of "newbie cluelessness". How clueless? In some cases it's been speculated some of these people don't even know a player like themselves placed that cache for them to find, and they think there's some kind of cache fairy. They're just playing another game on their phone. We ain't talking about this being 2004, and some guy who went out and spent $200 for a Garmin doesn't know how to log a travel bug. Well. Glad to be back. Doubt I will be anywhere near as active as I was back in the day, though. I don't recognise your name, but alas, I think I might be getting "old." Did you have a name change? Anyways, I DO see the problem. I guess we all do. The bigger problem is how to fix it. First and foremost, the site needs basic security in setting up new accounts. As ridiculously unsupervised as account creation is, I wonder how many of those 10M accounts are even real? And no doubt, many of them were "one time use," "One time use." That is perhaps the salvation in this issue. People who do not have a clue will burn out quickly. Damage minimised, but not eliminated or repaired. Until GC fixes or at least puts a bandaid on the problem to stop the bleeding, what do WE do? Suggestions: 1. I don't think higher difficulty ratings will make much difference. I see high rated caches on my copy of the windows phone app whilst logged in to a totally bogus usernams- just looked at a 4* 10 mi south. Besides, over rating will "kill the game" as well. 2. Obviously, PMO will work to some extent- but all one has to do is click the "pay" link and they can be a PREMIUM MEMBER without a clue! But going PMO diminishes your cache's exposure. Ultimately, if the USERS go this route, GC benefits from additional income from real cachers who don't have anything to hunt unless they pay up. Might not be a bad thing overall. Might end up splitting the community more so than it is already split. 3. Concentrate on better hides- longer walks, more difficult locations... the rogues will still have access but I would bet they won't stay on the trail long enough to actually find (and destroy) the cache. GC needs to immediately institute new account security, verifying information the same way everybody else on the internet does. Then they need to send emails to every user asking to verify their email (same way everybody else on the internet does) and block all accounts whose verification fails- with provision to "reset your account" if the person tries to log in. I know this part is difficult but others do it successfully. This would actually be a very simple (LOL) thing to implement in the login process... if the email has not been verified (all accounts at first setup) the site sends an automatic email with a link. If the link is not clicked, user is not logged in., but offered alternatives to restart the account. This actually should be a periodic function to ensure that all members MAINTAIN usable email addresses. This would be a hassle for my own accounts at this time (except for my main account) because my old email address got hacked and I closed it about a year ago. (So I reckon I better change the other accounts before GC takes my advice, LOL)
  6. Kind of an interesting revelation... I have several accounts for different reasons, but I had never considered using any fake credentials before... I'm just not that kind of guy. Plus it has been at least 4 years since I set up an account and honestly didn't remember what was needed. So, I did an experiment... I just installed the WINDOWS intro app on a new smartphone, created a bogus account with an email consisting of random letters and lo and behold, all the caches in the world open up before me! (well all but PMOs I guess) Indeed there ARE SERIOUS PROBLEMS HERE. But the real problem is not an intro app problem, it is a general GC problem... you see, I just did the same thing on my desktop computer... random username, simple password, bogus email... in like flynn! The desktop website DOES have a tutorial video- very basic, nothing about trading, no "put it back like you found it." Cute and trendy, though. Indeed the entire site is open to the dishonest. Hard to believe a 21st century, post 9-11 website could be TOTALLY DEVOID of security! This deserves its own topic if it does not already exist. While admittedly, this is a silly game with no real monetary risk (come on, is that film can with the soaking wet piece of paper in it that you dumped under the lamppost skirt in the Wally World parking lot really THAT important?), i mean its not like someone can steal your life savings with a bogus GC account, but still- NO SECURITY?? WTH, the local pizza joint verifies my email address before I can make an order! But, that said, adding security to account establishment will NOT stop caches from disappearing. The bottom line is, when you place a cache it is vulnerable to attack by 7 billion people. If GC would fix these GLARING security flaws, it would be only vulnerable to about, oh, seven billion people. But at least the ones that are actually legitimately LOOKING for the cache would be, if not accountable or identifiable, at least contactable.
  7. The whole idea of a "caching license" was also beat to death in the olden days. "Study" need not be a requirement. The game is simple. "Seek, find, sign, log, replace, repeat." It's not rocket science. A splash screen detailing the basics on first load would be sufficient "training." That is as much as any newcomer gets, any way they come in to the game. It is offered to read. One can read it or not. If they make it too long, it will be just like the "privacy statement-" only the lawyers and lawyer wannabees will read it. I admin several groups on Flickr and I can tell you unequivocally from my experience there, NO ONE READS ANYTHING. So. It is what it is. Short of a mandatory personal training session with an old timer, there is NO WAY to ensure that a newbie will get any information about the game. ANd even if you made newbies "get a license," some would likely still mess up. Hmm... speeding, drunk driving, texting... all done by people who had to take a test first. it is what it is. (I HATE that cliche'!)
  8. I’m still making my caches PMO on GC.COM for the lack of validated contact for those users. That’s been a problem – lack of contact. Sometimes, you have that with regular site users too, but very rarely. As for the trees and ladders… well, climbing also isn’t my strength, but that’s mostly obvious from the Terrain rating. I can always come, look and DNF with no problem. (Not finding a D1/T1 is embarassing, but also happens. Not finding a D3/T4½ is something to not even look twice at.) And recently, together with cachers I met during caching or on events, I’ve climbed some trees, even. So, one learns. App revisions haven't stopped unverified n00bs from stealing caches and trackables. I will never place another traditional. Do a quick search of the forums and you will find out that nothing will stop people from stealing caches and trackables. That is not a noob problem. That is a geocaching problem. Indeed. It's much, much worse when you have the misfortune of having one of your caches listed on the intro app. I don't understand "listed on the intro app" The intro app I have seems to list all the caches in the area except puzzles. I compared the two side-by-side last night and the only difference I saw was the "?" icons missing on the intro. Of course I AM a premium member. Perhaps that makes a difference. I think I'll log in with one of my sockpuppet accounts and see what it looks like- and possibly make a new account. It just seems like this is much ado about nothing. Of course, from the perspective of an old timer in the game, it is ALL much ado about nothing- especially in the forums (well maybe SOME of it is Macbeth). We have been discussing this same ol same ol since 2003. Was the intro app to blame for all the stolen caches and uneven trades in 2003? As others have duly noted- NOT A NEW PROBLEM. The REAL reason caches are disappearing is global warming... and windmills... and smoking in public. the REAL reason dinosaurs became extinct by Dave's Domain, on Flickr Now can we please get back to talking about those horrible lamppost caches, LOL?
  9. and, oh, yeah, FWIW, the current version of the intro app does have a help button which reveals a couple of nice introductory tutorials. Methinks the most of this thread is quite obsolete due to app revisions.
  10. LOL I have ALWAYS carried a three-fly 30' heavy-duty aluminum extension ladder (rated for firefighting service) in my backpack! Can't believe you would leave the house without one... such a n00b!
  11. Pretty close. My point is that these things need to be REQUIRED in order to establish an account, log on and use the app. YOUR point, that it will STILL be FREE, is also a good point to appease thos who whine, "but..but..but..geocaching is supposed to be FREE." "Free" means "no money changes hands directly for the service," not "you can be anonymous."
  12. So, admittedly I read half of page 1 and half of page 20, but it seems this issue (if it still exists or indeed if it ever really did), could be easily solved on the developer level by simply requiring a standard geocaching account to be established before it can be used. Most other specialised apps refer to this with text such as: "you must log in or create an account in order to use this app." Now, that being established, if the standard account creation protocol does not include email and phone verification, GC needs to enter the 21st century. "Internet anonymity" has been and always will be problematic. Means are easily available to at least make rudimentary verification of a user's identity and the only thing gained by NOT following such procedures is an increase in riff-raff in general. Send a text message or voice message to the new user's PHONE with a number that must be entered in the sign up process and then do the same thing with the new user's email. If either fails, there is simply one less new member... heshe can try again when heshe has useable resources. (I joined in 2003, so I have no idea how the sign-up process is done now) The iphone app is a wonderful tool. The INTRO kinda sucks, but it is cool to use it to see just how well the iphone will work as a gpsr (not real well IMO) before one plops down the WHOPPING $10 or whatever it is (which is nearly impossible to get refunded from the Apple store) The iPAD app, works wonderfully, BTW. :-) It is free and it requires LOG IN. Geocaching is and always has been available for FREE. To deny someone use of the system if they have an account is WRONG by any measure unless and until GC changes this free use philosophy entirely. Simply require the free app users to establish a normal account and let the pieces fall where they may- same as for any other newbie.
  13. I typically go out walking and exploring and when i see a feature that i suspect might have a cache, I look for one. If I find it, I sign and if I can remember where it was, i look it up on GC and log it. Sometimes I print out a page and seriously go caching, but not really often.
  14. All-in-all, it would be better for you if you took a beginner shop class at your local vocational school. That way you would be introduced to a wide variety of tools, what they do, and more importantly, how to use them properly and safely.
  15. And this is precisely why the "adequate permission" debate will never end. Actual "adequate" verification of the person granting permission's authority to grant said permission is itself very subjective and therefore certain verification by GC would be virtually impossible. Furthermore i would think that GC's acceptance of the alleged authority figure COULD lead to more liability on their part. As it is now, GC can deflect the verification responsibility back to the cache owner by saying "the cache owner gave us hisher written assurance (by checking the box) that heshe had adequate permission." With any kind of GC verified permission scheme, if GC made a mistake as to whether the permission granter had the authority to grant, I would think they would be in a less advantageous position. (This opinion is not intended as legal advice. For a valid legal opinion please seek the services of a qualified attorney or your state attorney general.)
  16. If YOU do, that would be a conflict of interest. Now, to facilitate the above cause, i shall do my best thread hijacking: Yesterday i stood in line at a convenience store behind a lady buying lottery tickets (see- linked to "gambling" to appear on-topic). She pointed and said, "2 number 9, 5 # 27, 4 #33, 2 #6, no! not number 6, I'll have 2 #7 instead..." On and on and ON it went whilst the line formed out the door and down the block. i says to the guy in front of me, I says, "gee lady, why dontcha do us all a favour and just write an extra thousand dollar check to the state next April 15th and let us pay for our pop and get outa here!" THE NOIVE OF SOME PEOPLE
  17. I would certainly expect you to CARE, but you have jumped to a conclusion that does not seem to be well supported by the facts presented. Many times cachers snag finds right under the proverbial noses of muggles without giving away the cache and to assume that the cacher in question did NOT take traditional "stealth" precautions is a fact not indicated in the log. As quoted, the log seems to indicate that the cache was above the muggles' sight-line and therefore unlikely to have been noticed. The log does not indicate that the muggles saw the cacher at all, nor precisely that they were even present when the cache was retrieved. I have personally stood 30 feet from a trail, cache in hand, dressed in hunter orange, as a dozen people passed by on the trail and NONE of them seemed to notice me. In fact, I don't recall seeing any of them even LOOK at me. The muggles in question could have been so involved in their water fun (or trying not to drown or get arrested) that BIGFOOT could have been snorting and snarling and throwing the cache against the rocks and they would not have even noticed. The log says there were muggles and it looked like fun. No more. Did the cacher wait till they were gone before snagging the cache? Did the muggles look up at the cacher? The log does not say. Did the cited muggles take the cache? No evidence to support that either. Did someone else come along and accidentally find it? Possible. Muggling is a part of the game and happens with or without cachers "helping" the muggles. If i was the cacher in question I would be VERY offended by the wording of the title of the thread. Giving fellow cachers benefit of a doubt is a really good policy.
  18. That would be "tolerance." We'll have none of THAT here!
  19. That actually sounds like a very interesting game.
  20. Checking on a cache for every DNF that is posted is not necessary. Many people DNF simply because they DO NOT FIND the cache, even though it is still right where the last finder left it and (hopefully) where the owner left it. If a cache owner has the TIME to check on every DNF, that is no doubt a good thing, but MOST cachers have other things that they must do (called 'life') and will only check on a DNF under certain conditions. What you describe is a good example of such conditions- a cacher DNFs and contacts the owner to verify they were looking in the right spot. Another example might be if an easy cache is DNF'd by a very experienced cacher or multiple DNF's are posted. I assume from your post that there were no DNFs on the cache page prior to your search, therefore you were the FIRST to advise the owner the cache might be missing and you are taking the owner to task for not making sure the cache is still there. I don't quite understand how far you think a cache owner's responsibility goes. Do you expect the owner to verify the cache daily? Hourly? Do you expect them to go out and verify it BEFORE each cacher goes looking for it? Until someone REPORTS the cache missing (DNF) it is unreasonable to expect the owner to verify the cache. As for logging a find, common sense! You did not find it. WHY you did not find it is irrelevant. You did not find. How does that equate to "I found it?" DNFs are part of the game. Caches go missing. That too, is part of the game.
  21. I reckon that "problem" (if you consider it a problem) is pretty much about to be cured.
  22. Ya know, I think I agree with your guess. Browsing the caches around here that display that icon reveals an inordinate percentage of commercial property caches, (Walmart, Burger King, Lowes, etc), that I assure you were not placed with the permission of the property owner. What better reason for stealth than to avoid arrest. "It ain't illegal unless you get caught." And I had always thought the stealth thing was about not compromising the hide!
  23. Judging from the text in post #3, if accurately quoted and current in revision, based upon a layperson's common-sense rendering of plain American English words contained therein (not lawyer's interpretation), I do not see any application whatsoever of this law to geocaching unless a cache was made using a glass bottle. The gist of the law is "you can't place something on the roadway that might cause injury to a user of the road and if you accidentally do so (such as by wrecking your car) you gotta get it offa there right away." Unless it could be shown that a cache was in some way inherently hazourdous and was placed there for that purpose, how it would fall under this law is beyond me.
  24. Hmmm, that's kinda strange. I would think that most people would think it's cool that a father's taking his son out into the woods. People we meet on the trail always tell us it's so good that we're taking our son outside rather than letting him sit in front of a TV playing video games all day. Sadly, in our society everyone is a child abuser in some peoples' minds. A man taking a boy into a private place is just certainly up to no good! I think you would be right if "most people" recognised the man as the boy's father, but unfortunately unless the "incident" occurred where the two were well known, the neighbourhood busy bodies would have no way of knowing the difference between father and pervert- so they automatically assume 'pervert'. That's our society- people are trained and conditioned to always assume the worst, especially after 911. That people are more aware is a good thing ultimately, but a downside is that innocent acts get questioned more often than is really necessary. Sucks to be the one that is falsely accused and cannot easily and quickly refute the allegation. A stealth failure could cost plenty in time, hassle, reputation, and attorney's fees. Stealth is a fun game sometimes, but pretty risky all-in-all IMO.
×
×
  • Create New...