What's Fair

[+jimmyreno]

There's a local cacher who has over 1000 finds, but he has only placed 3 caches.

To me that looks like take take take, and contribute little.

 

Once a person has 100 or 200 finds should they be placing a reasonable number of new caches for others?

What would be a reasonable percentage?

[+Gecko1]

Mabye place 10-20% of finds.

[CoyoteRed]

What would be a reasonable percentage?

As many or as few as he wants.

 

I only want to hunt inspired caches, not one someone had to put out.

[+Kealia]

What would be a reasonable percentage?

As many or as few as he wants.

 

I only want to hunt inspired caches, not one someone had to put out.

Agreed.

 

Do you really want to find crappy caches (whatever form they may take) just because somebody HAD to place one.

 

Besides, assuming that he/she is trading at each cache they are giving back.

 

I do understnad your point, though. It would seem that they would WANT to give back by placing a few....

[+Yamahammer]

To place or not to place, that is the question.

 

[+jimmyreno]

Do you really want to find crappy caches (whatever form they may take) just because somebody HAD to place one.

 

Besides, assuming that he/she is trading at each cache they are giving back.

 

I do understnad your point, though. It would seem that they would WANT to give back by placing a few....

I agree with that point also, and given that this particular person is inept at finding the difficult placements, the quality of his hides probably wouldn't be the best.

But I took his numbers because they are so extreem, over 1000 to 3.

[+The Leprechauns]

So you're suggesting that the retired couples who live out of their deluxe motor coach, and find caches all over the country while calling no place "home", cannot find any geocaches unless they hide one that they cannot maintain? That's not very nice.

 

Boy, am I jealous of cachers like that, by the way! Perhaps I'll be doing the same thing in 25 years...

[+Miragee]

There's a local cacher who has over 1000 finds, but he has only placed 3 caches.

To me that looks like take take take, and contribute little.

 

Once a person has 100 or 200 finds should they be placing a reasonable number of new caches for others?

What would be a reasonable percentage?

If they don't want to place a cache, that's fine with me.

 

How are you going to get someone to do something they are not inspired to do on their own -- yet?

[+jimmyreno]

So you're suggesting that the retired couples who live out of their deluxe motor coach, and find caches all over the country while calling no place "home", cannot find any geocaches unless they hide one that they cannot maintain? That's not very nice.

 

Boy, am I jealous of cachers like that, by the way! Perhaps I'll be doing the same thing in 25 years...

No, I'm not suggesting that, and probably only 1 in a thousand there live that lifestyle. That isn't the case with the person I'm refering too.

[+hydee]

I think requiring people to take on the responsibility of hiding caches is a bad idea. Its sort of like requiring people to have children so that we have more geocachers in the world...ok, well maybe sort of not, at least with the cache you don't have to find a baby sitter to go out to dinner.

[+StarBrand]

I've seen this come up every now and then.... but I haven't changed my mind much.

 

I think all cachers with over 100 finds ought to have at least 1 hide. Just my opinion. I don't care if they have 3000 finds and just the 1 hide. I just want that one hide to be well thought out and well maintained and stocked with nice items. Can't really call yourself a cacher until you see first hand the problems/rewards of owning a cache.

 

Lots of other ways to give back to the community. Leave nice swag, Pull maintenance on caches that need it. Write interesting logs. Attended and participate in local events. Make comments in the forums. Send out dozens of Travel bugs. Cito everywhere you go. etc.....

[+The Leprechauns]

So you're suggesting that the retired couples who live out of their deluxe motor coach, and find caches all over the country while calling no place "home", cannot find any geocaches unless they hide one that they cannot maintain? That's not very nice.

 

Boy, am I jealous of cachers like that, by the way! Perhaps I'll be doing the same thing in 25 years... 

 

No, I'm not suggesting that, and probably only 1 in a thousand there live that lifestyle. That isn't the case with the person I'm refering too.

But you're asking for a guideline. Be careful what you ask for, because there's always exceptions to the rule. I've encountered many geocachers who are not in a position to maintain a cache themselves.

 

I think we've got enough guidelines as it is. I would much rather find BrianSnat's 142nd hidden cache than the fourth cache hidden by someone who does so under duress of having their account suspended for an insufficient hide/find ratio.

Edited July 29, 2005 by The Leprechauns

[+jimmyreno]

If they don't want to place a cache, that's fine with me.

 

How are you going to get someone to do something they are not inspired to do on their own -- yet?

There has been much talk about trading even or up with swag.

I'm trying to bring that idea to this subject.

 

No one can be forced to place a good cache, and some people are incapable of it.

But maybe this idea should be on their mind rather than ignored.

[+jimmyreno]

Lots of other ways to give back to the community. Leave nice swag, Pull maintenance on caches that need it. Write interesting logs. Attended and participate in local events. Make comments in the forums. Send out dozens of Travel bugs. Cito everywhere you go. etc.....

Good points, another thing I noticed about this person:

he'll go to a cache with 2 one dollar coins, take both and leave a one dollar bill!!!

 

So he's not contributing in any way I can see.

[+budd-rdc]

I wouldn't worry about it unless the person in question is trading unfairly.

 

I doubt I'll be hiding more than two dozen caches in my lifetime. I've scouted a lot of great locations, but I take time to see if others will hide it if it's a bit far from where I live. I take maintenance of my own caches seriously enough to make visits, to restock, to place or take TBs, etc. I would be incapable of maintaining 160 of them (10% of my finds) to the way that I'd like

 

Just because there are people dedicated enough to maintain tens and hundreds of caches doesn't mean you have to follow their suit to create the perception of "contribution."

 

There are people who TN, Leave Lots as contributors, even if they don't hide anything. Don't forget about them.

[+WascoZooKeeper]

Lots of other ways to give back to the community. Leave nice swag, Pull maintenance on caches that need it. Write interesting logs. Attended and participate in local events. Make comments in the forums. Send out dozens of Travel bugs. Cito everywhere you go. etc.....

Good points, another thing I noticed about this person:

he'll go to a cache with 2 one dollar coins, take both and leave a one dollar bill!!!

 

So he's not contributing in any way I can see.

I think you're spending too much energy worrying about this other cacher.

 

If you know them personally, or have the chance to meet them at an event, you might want to very tactfully say something like, "Hey, Joe, I can't believe how many caches you've found!! I bet you've seen all sorts of clever hides! I'd love to see you put a few out there for the rest of us, I bet they'd be fun to hunt down!" -- and then leave it at that.

 

Beyond that, focus on what you can do to make caching more fun for yourself and others.

 

I agree with budd-rdc -- maintaining a cache right takes a lot of time, and I will limit the number of caches I place to what I can reasonably maintain and still allow plenty of time for finding caches. I can't see myself ever having more than a couple dozen caches that I'm responsible for maintaining. Yet there are people in our area who have placed, and maintain, 100-200 caches or more -- more power to them, I'm glad they're around!

Edited July 29, 2005 by WascoZooKeeper

[+deimos444]

Why are so many people trying to run everyone elses' life.

Get a grip folks.

And, uh, could someone edit this for me.

I'm so confused.

[+1stimestar]

Gosh the thought has never even crossed my mind that people think large volume finders should up the local cache count. Now that it has, I don't think it should be any type of requirement even if it is an unwritten, "understood" guideline.

[sporkboy]

There are many aspects to geocaching and hiding a cache, maintaining it and reading all of the logs is one that I enjoy. It is however not for everyone. I don't like hunting virtuals and it's my choice to not hunt them. Some people don't like micros and they are not forced to find them.

 

Geocaching is diverse enough so that you can play it based on your strengths and preferences and I think that's one of the great things about it. I think that more restrictions could take some of the childhood joy that some of us get when going on a hunt and finding a new place.

 

Doesn't the "real world" have enough rules already? Have fun with it and keep in mind that your idea of fun is not the same idea as the next guys. That doesn't mean they are wrong, just different.

[+sbell111]

This issue comes up with some regularity. I guess when the hobby was young, it kinda made sense. Sorta. Maybe a little bit. However, that was then.

 

Often, the idea of 'taking but not giving back' is attached to this suggestion. I really don't get that argument, either. Your average finder is not 'taking' (unless they are a pirate, but that's a different thread, as is unfair traders). The existing caches are available to be logged whether a cacher hides more caches or not.

 

In my opinion, there are so many ways to give back in this hobby. Why would any of us want to be required to do any specific one?

[+sbell111]

I think, in general, if you include 'should it be a guideline?' in your post the answers will mostly be 'No!'. Some will be 'No, gosh darnit!'.

[+webscouter.]

If you had found all the caches in your area I could understand why you might worry about wether caches are being placed or not.

 

You don't know the persons circumstances and even if you did know them there might be something you don't know about. Maybe you are providing this man or womans only enjoyment in life. Then youare a hero to them. Making them hide caches might only result in causing them to leave the sport or a film canister thrown in the bushes next to a town dump.

 

I wouldn't worry about it.

[+welch]

Its better they only place the caches they want and maintain, then putting out ones they don't like and won't keep up.

[+TotemLake]

There's a local cacher who has over 1000 finds, but he has only placed 3 caches.

To me that looks like take take take, and contribute little.

 

Once a person has 100 or 200 finds should they be placing a reasonable number of new caches for others?

What would be a reasonable percentage?

0%

 

There should be no requirements whatsoever to hide in consideration to your find count. Why would you want to restrict the game that way? There are plenty of folks out there that love to hide versus finding. In the end, it all balances out.

 

Stop and think... What are they taking from you that you are not enjoying?

[+Wacka]

I'm in the same area as bud-rdc and have about the same # of finds as him. I only have 2 hides. He and I are about #20-25 in finds the area. If everyone above us hid 10% of their find #, there would be THOUSANDS more caches in the area. There already is 7K within 100 miles. I have 3 containers sitting at home. When I find a good spot, I'll put them out. Do you want thousands more light pole caches?

[+Team Beer]

I have 100 plus finds and 0 hides, but my gps is as old as they get. Quite frankly, I'm not confident in it enough to place any. Besides that I come from a small state, Connecticut, and its diffiicult to not be redundant in placing one here. Perhaps those are both convienant excuses, but none the less true.

You're right that there is a certain amount of "take take take " going on. But I do as much maintanance as I can on the caches I find, and leave them better hid then I found. And I trash out literally every time I cache. One can contribute to the game without hiding caches if one is a responcible cacher

[+Happy Bubbles]

I agree with most of the rest of these folks that everyone should just place how ever many they feel like placing. I just wanted to point out that looking at a percentage of finds as a guideline for hides is an especially skewed way to do it. A find is one time event, while a hide is an ongoing commitment. Everyone has varying amounts of time/money/interest for caching, and so each individual can only maintain as many caches as those constraints allow. Some people might max out at a few cache hides, some at a few hundred, but everyone would have their own personal ceiling on what they can maintain. But there is no such ceiling on finds, so as time goes on everyone's find count will get bigger and bigger while they won't necessarily gain any more ability to hide caches. If you were to set, say, 10% as your ideal ratio, then a person who can't maintain more than ten finds wouldn't be able to find more than 100, and a person who could maintain 100 would have to stop caching after 1000. That's no fun.

 

This person with one thousand finds and only a few hides isn't doing anything wrong. This is a game, done for fun. If they think it's fun to find but not so much to hide, no problem! They're not hurting anything or limiting anyone else's enjoyment of the game. In fact, they're contributing to it by leaving happy little logs for the people who like hiding. Yay!

[4wheelin_fool]

If there were no hiders there would be no geocaching going on. But to require or expect a hide from someone(even with 1000 finds)is a bad idea. It would not be creative if it was forced. But on the other hand most people with 1000 finds could probably put together some really good hides with some gentle prodding.

 

There is a web page that lists geocachers according to the amount of finds that they have. Perhaps if someone put together a page which listed cachers by the amount of HIDES and ranked cachers by that amount - there would be some good hiding of caches inspired. The amount of finds someone has does not impress me that much - the amount of hides, DOES. I have 13 hides right now, but I'm aiming for 50. Anything more than that would probably not be worth the maintenance. On the other hand, really good hides in really good spots would require little maintenance. So lets see, 100? 200? :laughs evil laugh:

 

Just noticed JimmyReno you have EXACTLY the same # of finds that I do, but HALF of the amount of hides - lets get moving buddy !

Edited July 30, 2005 by 4wheelin_fool

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

There is a web page that lists geocachers according to the amount of finds that they have.

 

Aside from the many many other reasons players should not be ranked is that the data is innaccurate and outdated.

 

The ranking site you refer to shows me in 316th place with 1472 finds, when in reality I have 1514 (and that will change as soon as the sun comes up!) for a 296th place ranking. Beyond that these numbes are innacurate because over the years, and especially earlier this summer, I skipped logging all but the most interesting, and so have several hundred finds unaccounted for in this stat.

 

Measuring players by such numbers, even if they were accurate, is a very bad idea.

Edited July 30, 2005 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+briansnat]

There is a web page that lists geocachers according to the amount of finds that they have. Perhaps if someone put together a page which listed cachers by the amount of HIDES and ranked cachers by that amount - there would be some good hiding of caches inspired.

 

Ask and you shall receive. Leading hiders

 

I'm with most of the people here. The last thing we need are more caches hidden by people who are unwilling to take care of them, or hidden simply for the sake of hiding one with no other redeeming qualities. Force people to hide caches and that's what you'll get from most of them.

Edited July 30, 2005 by briansnat

[+Isonzo Karst]

...retired cachers living out of their motor home...

 

Actually I'm aware of quite a large group of retired and traveling cachers. And more and more all the time. RVers tend to buy GPSrs for travel, then learn about geocaching. Many many many of them here in Florida in the winter. There's even an RVer's geocaching club. And they have high numbers of finds, and they don't place hides. But they mostly trade great and write nice logs and come to local events in the winter.

[+wimseyguy]

No No and No.

No more rules/guidellines.

No forcing someone to do something they really do not want to.

No it is not a good idea.

 

A regional prolific finder was 'encouraged' by me and others that he/she/it should put a few out there to 'give back'. I wish I had never opened my mouth/keyboard.

Some were in such bad locations that I actually apologized to them for the encouragement, and in my log to anyone who came there behind me.

I might have even hit the SBA button on one that was a really bad location.

This individual just wants to find caches, and obviously didn't want to put any thought or energy into hiding them.

 

They are fun to do on the days when you don't want to work to hard and just be a numbers ho though.

[+deimos444]

I will hide a cache someday, I promise.

Just don't make me feel like a taker anymore.

please please please.

booohooohooo.

[CoyoteRed]

I will hide a cache someday, I promise.

Just don't make me feel like a taker anymore.

please please please.

booohooohooo.

Only if you want.

 

If you feel you are obligated to place one, don't.

 

If you feel you are being pressured, don't.

 

If you feel you should, don't.

 

If you feel you have found a spot you would like to hide a cache because you think others will enjoy being taken there, then you place the cache.

[+Kai Team]

Personally, I like to maintain a positive balance between the number of finds I have and the number of people who've logged (Found or DNF) my caches (currently I have 305 finds and 538 logs on the 13 caches I own). To me, the balance lies in the experience of caching - am I offering an enjoyable experience to others that's on balance with the experiences others offer me?

 

But that's my personal sense of balance, because I enjoy both hiding and finding caches. And it has it's limits - as my finds continue to climb, I'll reach a point where I won't be able to maintain enough caches to maintain my desired balance. And at that point, I'll forgo my sense of balance rather than than hide caches that I can't maintain.

 

I agree that we should NOT require people to hide caches. We should NOT "encourage" people to hide caches. If anything, we should DISCOURAGE people from hiding caches unless they're willing to put the time and effort into finding good locations and maintaining them.

 

I'd rather have fewer caches and enjoy the experience of finding them than lots of caches where the experience of finding them makes me want to quit caching!

[+DocDiTTo]

Once a person has 100 or 200 finds should they be placing a reasonable number of new caches for others?

What would be a reasonable percentage?

No such guideline does or should exist for a multitude of reasons. Yes, it's *nice* for a cacher to hide caches, but to require it? Heck no.

[4wheelin_fool]

Ask and you shall receive. Leading hiders

 

 

Just what I was looking for !

Thanks Briansnat.

Edited August 1, 2005 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Snoogans]

I'm sorry jimmyreno, but what's the point of looking over the fence at others? This seems to be a running theme. Last I recall it was about someone having too much fun with earthcaches.

 

How about letting everyone else play their game and you play your own as YOU see fit.

[twjolson & Kay]

In regards to the original topic, what about people that just can't afford to place caches? Sure, poorer people may be able to afford a few caches, but at 10% of a 1000 finds that's a 100 hides, and say at 10-20 bucks in decent swag a cache; that's 1,000 to 2,000 bucks total, unless my math fails me. If you don't have the money, you just don't have the money.

 

Plus for every cacher that has too few finds, there are many cachers that have too many. I for one, now that I've gotten into the hiding aspect, have thought on more then one occasion of ditching the finding and sticking purely to hiding!

Edited August 1, 2005 by twjolson & Kay

[+KeithTS]

I am sure most us have cachers in our areas that create really great caches. These people definitely have a knack for hiding caches. Some of us do not have the same knack. I only have a couple of caches, I do enjoy having a couple of hides, but frankly, it is not easy coming up with a theme, name, swag, hiding spot, etc. If/when I come across a spot that ispires me, I'll hide a cache. I'm lucky that I live in an area that is very "cache rich" and there are many great hiders. Because of this, it is getting harder to find great hiding spots. If we were to create a guidline of a hide-per-find ratio, I am afraid it will either lead to poorly hidden caches just to meet the guidline, or people will stop logging on line so that they won't be chastized for not hiding their "fair share". Let's leave the hides to the inspired.

[+SixDogTeam]

WE don't need more rules or guidelines. We're all OK.

[+RetiredDNR&R2]

I am one of those that are retired and live in a motor home and travel the USA. Idid hide 9 in my "home" area. However I have made contact with a couple of GCers to watch my caches to help maintain them if needed.

I most likely will not hide any more as I feel that 9 was enough and I did not want to have my watchers be overwhelmed. I enjoyed hiding caches and wish I could have done more.

I do not want to see a requirement that you have to place a cache. Do it if you can and want to.

[+vulture19]

Time to pile on.

 

I would love to place a couple of caches, but the area that I'm in is saturated. There is not a single spot that I could place a cache that would bring someone to a place that is even remotely devoid of caches. OK, one spot, but it is in a high traffic, downtown, homeless person hangout. I tried for a virtual, knowing that even a micro would wind up missing, but that was shot down and I just decided to forget it. It seems that I was placing a cache just to place one.

 

IAC, I guess my only "cpntributuion" to the game is placing TB's, moving TB's, and bringing new cachers into the fold.

[+Teamhawaii1981 & blueicyrose]

I personally don't agree with the people who would require placement. I am, and I know others, who are college kids who move around every 2-4 years, and just don't have the means to settle. If I was to start a cache I would either have to disable it when I moved again, which is no fun for anyone or good for the sport. OR I would have to find someone to adopt it, which could be a pain.

 

Plus, I know a Cacher who has thousands of finds and one hide. He maintains that hide INCREDIBLY well, and it is worth it to go even if you have many other times just to see how well maintained it is.

 

I say let them cache!

[+Yamahammer]

What about people who only read the forums but never add a reply??? Or read hundreds of replies and topics but don't contribute to the subject? Come on people! Put your two cents in whether you want to or not!!!

 

[Yankees Win!]

I personally don't agree with the people who would require placement.

I agree. There should be no rule or guideline requiring people to place caches against their will.

 

... If I was to start a cache I would either have to disable it when I moved again, which is no fun for anyone or good for the sport.

 

I've seen several statements similar to that one recently, and I must ask: Why is 'cache attrition' not "good for the sport?"

 

I would think it to be a very good thing for the sport. Many areas are becoming saturated with old, often depleted, dilapadated or abandoned caches. Who needs 'em? Sure, they were probably very nice caches when originally placed, but all of the locals ran out and logged them within a couple of weeks. They then sit largely unnoticed, forgotten or ignored until the next wave of new cachers. Not surprisingly, these new log entries usually read something like "the lid is cracked" or "the logbook is full" or "the contents are saturated." I repeat, who needs 'em?

 

I believe leaving caches in place indefinitely is "not good for the sport." Long-time geocachers lose interest as the number of quality new cache placements dwindles. And newer geocachers have little choice but to place dump-and-run caches, because all of the worthwhile locations are saturated. From reading these forums, I get the impression that many areas would be well served by a huge reduction in the number of caches.

Edited August 1, 2005 by Yankees Win!

[+Teamhawaii1981 & blueicyrose]

I totally agree with you that old caches that in poor condition should be disabled and honestly there is nothing worse then an unmaintained cache. However, the reason I think it would be 'bad for the sport' is because I think it would encourage people to place caches irresponsibly and simply for the sake of placing if they know they can disable when they have to move or for any reason at all. Furthermore, I think it is kind of sad when cache gets disabled for any reason because no one else can enjoy it (like my first find ), and this shouldn't become more commplace.

 

Oh, by the way YW, Go Red Sox!

[+treasure_hunter]

There's a local cacher who has over 1000 finds, but he has only placed 3 caches.

To me that looks like take take take, and contribute little.

 

Once a person has 100 or 200 finds should they be placing a reasonable number of new caches for others?

What would be a reasonable percentage?

NO MORE STUPID RULES!

[+deimos444]

I have an insidious question Treasure Hunter.

How does one differentiate betwixt stupid rules and not stupid rules?

[+Joypa]

Everybody needs to relax. There is about as much chance of a new rule or guideline being developed as there is of the earth plunging into the sun. It is not going to happen. There seems to be some misguided conception that there is a body of people charged with making rules for geocaching. This is a listing service. But suppose there was some committee. Who is going to enforce the rules? There are no geocaching police, just listing agents. About all you have to make someone do something is peer pressure. That will have to be enough.