ClayJar

Better hiders Boy, somehow I missed the part of the attribute page that made me swear on my mothers grave that all the attributes I selected were bonified and certified. I pondered over what word to use there to indicate a distinction between the hiders who, upon finding that the "scuba gear required" attribute is actually watched and meaningful, decide that they will be gracious enough to not pollute that one attribute. It would be wrong to say "smarter", "nicer", "more intelligent", or anything like that. There are plenty of very smart, very nice, and very intelligent cache hiders who also don't care a bit about the fact that they are hurting the ability of scubacachers to use the attribute to find the very few scubacaches there really are out there. "Better" isn't the right word, either. I suppose, now that I've been continuing to think about it, "more considerate" would have been a more appropriate fit. My apologies for not having come up with that earlier. So, the more considerate hiders have been willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches (including a guy who asked if it would help us if he merely switched to an equally humorous incorrect attribute instead of the scuba one -- I said that sounded like a fine idea). Then there are people with 13 parched dry land caches (including one on a mountaintop) that abuse the attribute apparently out of spite. I'm certainly tempted to think of them as "bad cachers", although perhaps they're just misguided.

Hmm... either you're a scubacacher and you're actually grateful for the crap I willingly put up with to help you (and you're being sarcastic about the other half), or you're one of the poor, misguided souls who gets upset at the guy who points out that the emporer not only has no clothes but also that he's tone deaf and rather less funny than he thinks he is. I suppose I should take it as the former. You're quite welcome.

Okay, let's see here... is this thing on?... Anyway... Due to the rampant abuse of the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute, I maintain a public bookmark list which alerts my fellow scubacachers when they are viewing a cache which appears to be among the abusers. Not all the abuse is intentional, of course, and the better hiders have been quite willing to remove the attribute from their non-scuba caches. In order to be sure I do not have a cache tagged as abusing the attribute after the hider has removed it (or relocated the cache to an appropriate wet location ), I have to look at each and every cache on the bookmark list every update (which I attempt to do weekly). There ought to be an easier way! A bookmark list PQ doesn't include any reference to attributes, so I can't use that to tell which ones to remove. Obviously, a "normal" PQ with the "Requires Scuba Gear" attribute selected won't tell me which caches are on the abuse list. There's also no way to add attribute-based filters onto a bookmark list PQ. (If there were, I could just have a PQ for "caches on the bookmark list, excluding those with the attribute", which would tell me directly which caches have been most graciously corrected by their hiders.) Is there any PQ-fu that I don't know that could help me? (Or is there any plan in the works to add references to the attributes to the GPX files? Surely, attributes have been around long enough to figure that out, eh?) I really didn't want to have to write an entire system and consume even more PQs just to handle this, but is that what I'm going to have to do? (Incidentally, if anyone wonders why I say "rampant abuse", given that over 71% of the caches listed as "Requires Scuba Gear" don't even get your feet wet, it should be obvious. )

Monday, January 21, 2002, at 8:30pm Central Standard Time, the greeting was spoken and the very first weekly official geocaching chat. Tonight, Monday, January 22, 2007, beginning at 8:30pm Central Standard Time (Tuesday morning at 02:30 UTC), we convene the 262nd consecutive weekly official geocaching chat and celebrate five uninterrupted years. Join us by going to http://gcchat.clayjar.com/ or by connecting to irc.slashnet.org with your favorite IRC client and joining #Geocache. Who knows, but someone might even give something away. (At least, such has happened before...) -ClayJar

I keep a list of scubacaches (and landlubbin' caches abusing the attribute) out on the net for anyone to reference: ClayJar's Scuba Cache List It's quite fun to be deep below the surface of a lake and find a cache... and the shallow ones are fun, too, I suppose.

Well, since J. and I just celebrated the New Year at her apartment here in Fukuoka, Japan, I figured I ought to share the joy with all the rest of you (especially since my cats back in Baton Rouge won't be celebrating for another 15 hours or so). So, from the two of us to all of you... HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! ...and remember, have fun, don't drink and drive, have your pets spa... wait, that one was Bob Barker's line...

This is pretty fair. If there are less than 5 ratings it shows up. If 5 ratings or more the usefulness needs to be above 50% to be shown on the page. Thanks! How about cleaning up the "scuba gear required" attribute, then, Jeremy? I am still maintaining the list, but the bookmark list I was instructed to make in lieu of the attribute being cleaned up will be useless under this plan. More than 50% of the attribute is abuse, and it seems they don't like being called on it. (Unintended consequences of a nice idea.)

Hehe. By the way, I found the best way to handle vindictive feedback... I went diving again. (Incidentally, the "scuba" cache list and map has been updated again.)

Feel free to do what you wish. I just updated the lists again. One cache had the attribute removed... and several new dry land caches showed up with it. The fact that the bookmark list is currently rated useful by 1 of 12 users just goes to show how very little non-diving cachers care. I suppose it's easier to be a jerk than to give even a millihoot who you're hurting by abusing the system. (Really builds your faith in the fine, upstanding qualities of geocachers. The last time I felt this disappointed was when I tried to get a CITO organized and got a general "we don't give a hoot about that", which is precisely what is being said about CITOing the attribute abuse now.)

The list has been updated. Several cachers have removed the "scuba gear required" attribute from their caches, and to them, I say thank you. Of note is that there are several new *real* scuba caches in addition to the usual crop of dry logs.

Figured I'd mention that, as of Friday, I have upgraded my provisional membership in the scubacaching club to full member status. The Deep Dam Cache was quite the enjoyable dive (although as my log notes, it did get rather chilly by the third level, 85' down).

There are, at my last update, 177 caches using or abusing the "scuba gear required" attribute. That's a miniscule fraction of the total number of caches, is it not? There are also people, myself included, who have looked at each and every cache in the list, and who continuously monitor the list for updates. Doesn't that pretty much make the official reviewing workload a relatively small burden? The attribute *means* *something* to scubacachers. Obviously, to non-scubacachers, it means a pittance. Still, wouldn't it at least be an interesting feasibility study for attribute review? The number of caches affected is fairly small, and the work required to monitor the attribute is minimized as much as possible, and the attribute provokes strong feelings. Why not try out attribute review with the scuba attribute, and see how it ends up? True scubacaches are intrinsically a special case of geocaching, so it's hardly the end of the world to let the attribute be a special case for a trial, if nothing else.

You're not talking about something like: Caches apparently misusing the Scuba Gear REQUIRED attribute. If bookmarks were shown on the main results page, or if there were a way of saying "I wish to temporarily ignore this bookmark list", it might help online searches, but tell me again how this helps when you're doing a Pocket Query on the scuba attribute? As far as I can tell, PDA caching programs don't have a magical psychic link that can tell you whether the hider is BSing, and to the obvious reply of "Well, why not just do a bookmark list PQ, instead?" If that's the official solution, then why don't we get rid of the pathetic excuse for an attribute, since it apparently only exists to satisfy attribute lust. Just give me one simply official answer: Does the "scuba gear required" attribute exist to help scubacachers find scubacaches? If the answer is yes, let's actually have a discussion about what it would take to clean it up. If the answer is no, it's time to put it out of our misery.

You've apparently not understood where I'm coming from. I'm not asking for any redesign at all. All *I* would like is an official policy (*specifically* on the "Scuba Gear REQUIRED" attribute, as it is quite distinct) that says that the we as scuba diving cachers can politely ask attribute abusers if they would remove the attribute, and if they don't, the reviewers will remove the attribute (and if the abuse is repeated on the cache, archive the cache). If each review would be a quarter "gratuity", collected and donated quarterly to the reviewers as thanks for the extra work, that would be fine and would likely reduce the noise floor (or at least make it a slightly rewarding noise floor). If we had to get together to "sponsor" an attribute-specific reviewer (since that would be just compensation for the additional work), that could gladly be worked out, too. Without any policy regarding abuse of the "Scuba Gear REQUIRED" attribute, it is all but worthless. I have put in my time and effort to work toward cleaning it up, but with those cachers who misuse the attribute intentionally and maliciously, the lack of any policy for dealing with the abuse makes all my work (and that of others) nothing better than a fool's errand. (For the record, I have been slowly working through the caches, starting with the cachers I've met, to try to make some grassroots progress, but it is quite uncomfortable to have no official policy on which to base my humbly-phrased polite requests. As for filtering them out, if it were possible to filter out based on a public bookmark list, then as long as I keep the list updated, and we tell every scuba diving cacher to ignore it, and none of them want to look for any of the non-scuba "scuba" caches... It's just not a workable option, and it shouldn't be necessary to work around very obvious abuse.)

L.A.? Because there are a lot of people there. Dallas? Because PRanger is there. Have you ever tried to talk to PRanger, for example?

Incidentally, thanks to a friendly European cacher, a few more caches have been categorized. There have also been a few new caches (including one or more *real* ones) added to the list. http://www.clayjar.com/gc/scuba/

RWW: Wouldn't it be rude to submit such a log? If the cache requires trivial maintenance, the cacher who discovers the problem should lend a hand. I'll just have to whip up a bunch of inexpensive cache-sized dive slates and some cut down pencils, and then when I see a "scuba" cache that has inexplicably dried out, I can fill it with water and leave a clean slate.

I can see it now. All scuba attributes must be approved by NAUI... I mean SSI... I mean GUE (it's tech, after all)... No, wait! PADI can offer a new specialty! "C-cards! Get your C-cards! Hot off the printer, collect all eight!" Seriously, though, unlike all the subjective attributes, "requires scuba gear" has a rather trivial first-order test: "Is it anywhere the h-e-double-hockey-sticks near water?" If not, it's an abuse of the attribute and a flat-out lie, and prank cache pages are a valid reason to use the "should be archived" log, eh? On a slightly related note, might I ask whether it would be discouraged for a group of us to start a concerted effort, as cachers who are certified divers and therefore have a direct interest, to form a small confederation to collectively approach the people abusing *our* attribute? I know it's a flame fest waiting to happen, but since nothing is going to be done by those who have powers from above, a grassroots movement appears to be all we can have.

Dredging the forums for old threads again, but... While I agree that an additional cache type isn't warranted for exceptionally difficult caches, I would disagree that difficult caches are "easily" searchable. Do a PQ for caches with the SCUBA attribute. See how many of them actually require SCUBA. I happen to have illustrated the appalling state of our scuba attribute on my "scuba" cache page. The part that irks me the most, however, is that it keeps getting worse. Might I be so bold as to make a humble request of the cache reviewing powers that be? ***PLEASE***, DO NOT PUBLISH ANY MORE "SCUBA" CACHES THAT *OBVIOUSLY* AREN'T! I don't want to sound ungrateful for the work you guys do. I know what fun a nearly thankless (and all too often, somewhat adversarial) job can be. (I've been a sound guy... the main difference is that instead of being flamed, I've been yelled at in person and almost punched.) As a diver and a long-time cacher, however, it seems to me as if at least the blatant misuses of the scuba attribute could be, and should be, curbed as a matter of policy. Otherwise, why in God's blue oceans do we even *have* a worthless attribute? Divers have a long history of self-policing (and the occasional flame war... but DIR really *is* brilliant/stupid/irrelevant, I tell you!). If there were at least a contact reviewer and a stated policy of "crap is something up with which we will not put, at least regarding the scuba attribute", it would go a long way. We can handle the "Is <10 meters scuba or free-diving?" debate, but the drylanders with their "OOOOOh, perty!" junk is something that needs to go if there can be any real usefulness at all.

Hey, Wreck Diver! I love your bookmark list. If I can get the time, transportation, and requisite buddies to do geocaching-on-scuba, they will be at the top of the list (or they may even *be* the list). I'm currently collecting dive time in my log book and trying to talk some buddies into diving to place my own true SCUBA cache to get a spot in your bookmark list. I hope my being an information junkie and making a comprehensive overview doesn't make me come across as a paper diver. I just like learning and analyzing things, and hydrocaches are the latest relevant topic on which I can play with data.

Okay, I *was* going to wait to post this until some of the vast number of misuses of the "requires scuba gear" attribute were cleared up (some people seem to be in "Oooooh, pretty..." mode when it comes to attributes). Since there has been no apparent progress on the abuse situation, I've done some more updates so that it can be at least a bit useful, even in spite of the pollution (can we CITO attributes yet?). In no way am I upset about the wheels of cleanup moving slowly, by the way, but there seems to be no legitimate reason not to share this in the meantime, so, without further ado... ClayJar's "Scuba" Cache List

Does anyone speak Estonian or German? There are just a few caches with the scuba required attribute that I cannot comprehend to know whether to mark them in the yes or no column: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCHRWD http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCTCMZ http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCPCH7 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCV2G6 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GCVYDY Not counting those five, the current tallies are: 129 Scuba *NOT* required. 28 Scuba required/advised. 3 Not enough information. (For a total of 165 caches with the attribute. As you can see, there are a lot of misinforming hiders out there.)

Might I suggest learning German while you're saving up for your openwater cert and gear?

This is my personally filtered list of scuba required caches (as of this morning). Any not on the list either don't have the attribute, or I couldn't tell that they were actually scuba-required. I really must start planning some scubacaching trips (now that I have my card).

Are you getting any message or something, Welch? I've never had a problem (except on one school's wireless, but that's a firewall).