Restricted Caches

[+Langly]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

Edited August 18, 2005 by Langly

[+JohnnyVegas]

HOw would they know how many FTF anyone has, The hider would have to look up every cache someone has found and look to see how many FTF they have. Unless they know every cacher in the area this would not be easy to enforce.

 

I think it is also a stupid idea, so someone who has never had a FTF gets one becasue the local FTFs are not allowed to search or log the find for 24 hours. In my opinoin this would be a bogus FTF. It like extending the baseball season and not permiting the better players to be part of the game so that the lesser player can improve their stats for the year in the record books. This all sound like geocacing PC nonsense.

 

If they want a FTF let them earn a real one like anyone else.

Edited August 18, 2005 by JohnnyVegas

[ZoopD|ngle]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

The owner can't stop you from signing the physical logbook so any restrictions she puts on when you may log is a moot point. I find that by not logging my finds on the site that I'm able to avoid any potential conflict.

 

I don't agree that any subset of cachers should be excluded.

[+Langner91]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

I suppose a person can exclude any number of cachers. Here are a few tricks the person could have used to accomplish the same thing.

 

1. Make it a Member Only cache. This will exclude those who don't spend money to find these things. But, the FTF problem won't be solved.

 

2. Don't list the cache here. This one makes it easy to exclude 90% of the geocachers in the world.

 

3. Make the cache "invitation only". Nothing says a Geocache has to be listed here. Go hide the tupperware, email the person or people who they want to get the FTF, and after they find it, invite more people or list it here.

 

That's the way I see it. I always assumed the purpose of this site was to "advertise" your geocache to the masses.

 

I don't think the way they did it would work very well, either.

 

edited to make it not sound like I was being disrespectful to the OP.

Edited August 18, 2005 by Langner91

[CoyoteRed]

The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

Okay, so go be FTF and then wait your 24 hours to log it. What's the problem?

 

</sarcasm>

 

No, the logging requirement is not right. Why folks want to place restrictions on who can log a cache they've found is beyond me.

[+AtoZ]

No he can not restirct it, as there is no way unless he is really gunning for a specifice person(s) he know. I would find it sign the log then wait 24 hours and still have the FTF even if I did not log it intinally. UGH some people

cheers

[+Renegade Knight]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

Looks like they have a few people who always get the FTF leaving others in the cold. I don't have a problem with this. It's already been pointed out that you can still go be FTF and then log after 24 hours.

 

Cache rules can only be enforced by policing the online logs. The actual cache and it's log can be found and signed (or not signed) by anyone at all.

 

The only way to truly enforce a rule on a cache is to set it up so the rule has to be complied with BEFORE you even get the coordinates.

[+tozainamboku]

Someone hid a cache here in So. Calif. with a similar restriction. One of the FTF junkies went and found it, then logged it with a sock-puppet account.

[+tabulator32]

In the essence of treating geocaching as a sport, as it is claimed to be, wouldn't that be tantamount to telling the top runners in a race they had to wait ten seconds after the starter's gun so the others would have a better chance?

 

I wouldn't impose such a rule on a cache. I probably wouldn't follow it on someone else's cache, either.

[+BilboB]

It's their cache, they can do with it as they want. Doesnt mean cachers have to comply. There are ways around everything. Not a good idea though, who cares who is FTF?

[+Kit Fox]

This is nothing more than FTF affirmative action.

 

Telling the regular FTF loggers to wait a day, so other cachers have a chance at FTF is a silly idea.

 

It's like giving "Johnny" and A grade, to make hime "feel better". He didn't deserve the A, but we don't want to hurt his feelings either.

I would not be proud of being FTF on a cache that others skipped, so I had a chance.

 

I like being FTF (I have 75 FTFs), but I don't lose any sleep if i'm not FTF. I no longer drive 20 miles out of my way, just for FTF. I go after caches, when they are located en route to my destination. Gas prices have tempered my enthusiasm for caching right now.

 

What is next, hiding private caches so only your friends can retrieve the Jeep TB?

 

Bad idea in my personal opinion.

[+Renegade Knight]

In the essence of treating geocaching as a sport, as it is claimed to be, wouldn't that be tantamount to telling the top runners in a race they had to wait ten seconds after the starter's gun so the others would have a better chance?..

Doesn't golf use handicaping?

[+sbell111]

Not in tournament play.

[+sbell111]

I think the FTFers would try that much harder to find it first. This would leave the first on-line logger with logging something like 'I'm posting online first, but Quikacher and Earlybirder were there before me.

 

Also, should the actual FTFer be expected not to trade out any FTF prizes?

[+Joypa]

This question is actually more interesting than it initially appears. Once the cache is posted, anybody can look for it and sign the log so the restriction does not look like it can be enforced. Ah, but then the owner can delete a log, claiming it does not comply with his requirements...and the find goes away. Hmmm....Good way to make enemies. Wonder what the motive is?

[+Smukke]

Well, obviously the motive is to give 'beginners' a chance for an FTF before the more rabid FTF-hounds jumped in. Consider it like a 'novice class' in autocross racing, or rally, designed to encourage beginners to compete for some small 'trophy.'

 

I guess I don't know why it would be bad to encourage new folks to try a FTF if they have a shot at it. If you are a cynical old geocacher, feel free to call it a 'fake FTF' but I can assure you that when you are a beginner, every little 'trophy' counts.

 

The way I see it, it's sort of like the TB hotels that 'restrict' people from taking more TBs than they drop. If you don't like the restriction, either ignore it & move a TB on its way anyway (thus possibly doing the TB owner a nice favor), or just dont give your business to those particular hotels.

 

<shrug> Seems to me like life's too short to get all bent out of shape over stuff like this.

[+KKTH3]

If you really want to exclude certain people from a FTF - just buy them all airline tickets for a weekend to Vegas.

 

And if that doesn't even the field enough, cancel all the return tickets once they land there.

[+Ed_S]

"If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

I think excluding people with more than 10 FTFs is childish and dripping with PC. It's also an example of the wrong-headedness of the PC crowd. Part of being the FTF is being the First to get out there! We have cachers around here who get out in the wee hours of the morning so they can be first. Doesn't bother me a bit, and it makes it all the better when I do beat them to a FTF! <G>

 

But other exclusionary caches have been better-received, because they're not really excluding anyone, but they may require you to get or borrow something. Here's an example (and note who the FTF is! <G>):

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...42-b21e37789680

 

There was no big outcry when this guy put this cache out - if you don't have a dog, do you know anyone who does? Borrow the dog for an afternoon!! It's not rocket science! Take the dog owner, too, and maybe turn someone else on to caching!

[Keystone]

As my friend Ed knows, I was the volunteer who reviewed the "dog required" cache. I published it, because it didn't violate any guidelines, any more so than a cache on a remote island discriminates against people who don't own boats or helicopters.

 

I did write an e-mail to the cache owner, warning him that he might receive some negative feedback from folks who might view his cache as "exclusionary." I am so glad to see that his local community views the cache in the spirit in which it was created.

 

Perhaps not all intentions are as good as that example, though. But it isn't really the cache reviewer's job to pass judgment. Let the community decide.

[+Ed_S]

This is nothing more than FTF affirmative action.

 

(I have 75 FTFs)

I like your affirmative action simile! <G>

 

On your FTFs, YOU DA MAN!! I only have 65!

[+Ed_S]

Hi Keystone! Good to see you here! On that Dogs Only cache, I did meet one cacher who brought the cremated ashes of his dog along, and tried to get credit for it. Didn't work. But he was the only cacher I've ever met who had a beef with that cache.

 

I'm sure he had an exchange of email with the owner. <G>

 

Bottom line - follow the rules! Don't like 'em? Put the cache, or the owner, even, on your "ignore" list.

[+Joypa]

Well, obviously the motive is to give 'beginners' a chance for an FTF before the more rabid FTF-hounds jumped in. Consider it like a 'novice class' in autocross racing, or rally, designed to encourage beginners to compete for some small 'trophy.'

 

I guess I don't know why it would be bad to encourage new folks to try a FTF if they have a shot at it. If you are a cynical old geocacher, feel free to call it a 'fake FTF' but I can assure you that when you are a beginner, every little 'trophy' counts.

 

The way I see it, it's sort of like the TB hotels that 'restrict' people from taking more TBs than they drop. If you don't like the restriction, either ignore it & move a TB on its way anyway (thus possibly doing the TB owner a nice favor), or just dont give your business to those particular hotels.

 

<shrug> Seems to me like life's too short to get all bent out of shape over stuff like this.

I don't know why it's "obvious" what the cache owner's motive is. It could be what you say but there might be some other reason.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Hi Keystone! Good to see you here! On that Dogs Only cache, I did meet one cacher who brought the cremated ashes of his dog along, and tried to get credit for it. Didn't work. But he was the only cacher I've ever met who had a beef with that cache.

 

I'm sure he had an exchange of email with the owner. <G>

 

Bottom line - follow the rules! Don't like 'em? Put the cache, or the owner, even, on your "ignore" list.

Wow, now thats a tough 'gray area' call! I'm shocked that the cache owner didn't allow it, as it seems like a creative solution to me, and I'm sure that it was a touchy subject for the guy who cared enough about that dog to keep the ashes.

[+Thrak]

I'm a total n00b (12 finds and 1 dnf) and here is my take on this. I think it's a crock. I want my first FTF but not if it is done in this manner. I agree that it smacks of AA and I don't like it at all.

 

I'll get a FTF one of these days - or perhaps not. If I ever do get a FTF I want it to be due to MY efforts and not because someone else wasn't "allowed" to beat me to it.

 

(For those who may feel I'm being snotty about AA: My son broke his neck in the army 10 years ago at age 20. He feels the same way I do about AA - he isn't in favor of it at all.)

[+VegasCacheHounds]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

Eh, it must be someone who has gotten tired of rushing out to a cache and seeing that the log was already signed by either you, 9key or the Padre

[+Ed_S]

Wow, now thats a tough 'gray area' call! I'm shocked that the cache owner didn't allow it, as it seems like a creative solution to me, and I'm sure that it was a touchy subject for the guy who cared enough about that dog to keep the ashes.

That's what I thought, too, but it's posted on the page that you must have a living, breathing dog with you. The intent was more to keep people from bringing stuffed toy dogs, I guess, but the owner chose to go by the letter of his rules.

[+Joypa]

Re: The dog cache. This is nuts. What is to prevent the ethically challenged from claiming they had a dog with them? You can always get a photo of the neighbor's dog. My point is- the rule is unenforceable.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Re: The dog cache. This is nuts. What is to prevent the ethically challenged from claiming they had a dog with them? You can always get a photo of the neighbor's dog. My point is- the rule is unenforceable.

Well heck, most 'rules' of caching are hard to enforce. I think that most things like this are meant to be self-policing. If you're gonna cheat, you're gonna cheat (but who are you really cheating anyways?)

 

Its just like the people who log a find on a cache that they never visited. Without checking the paper log, is there anyway of enforcing that rule?

[+Thrak]

Re: The dog cache. This is nuts. What is to prevent the ethically challenged from claiming they had a dog with them? You can always get a photo of the neighbor's dog. My point is- the rule is unenforceable.

The photo was to be of the dog WITH the cache container. Pretty hard to do unless you were actually there. (Well, I guess you could Photoshop it but.......)

[+Prime Suspect]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

This doesn't exclude anybody. Anyone who finds it, can log it. The owner is simply asking that the FTF hounds give someone else a shot.

 

Feel free to look for more molehills to make mountains of.

[+Langly]

Hmm that is not what the cache owner said:

 

* They're my caches and I can make rules as I see fit, can I not? Maybe my next cache's FTF will be reserved for people of Scottish ancestry that have twin daughters.

 

Sounds exclusive to me.

[+Mastifflover]

Sounds pretty lame to me. The FTF race is pretty heated around here. I've gone out at 3:00 AM to claim some. If someone is not willing to make that kind of effort while others do, do they really deserve a FTF.

[+Joypa]

Re: The dog cache. This is nuts. What is to prevent the ethically challenged from claiming they had a dog with them? You can always get a photo of the neighbor's dog. My point is- the rule is unenforceable.

The photo was to be of the dog WITH the cache container. Pretty hard to do unless you were actually there. (Well, I guess you could Photoshop it but.......)

Yeah, doesn't take much to edit a photo.

[+Joypa]

Re: The dog cache. This is nuts. What is to prevent the ethically challenged from claiming they had a dog with them? You can always get a photo of the neighbor's dog. My point is- the rule is unenforceable.

Well heck, most 'rules' of caching are hard to enforce. I think that most things like this are meant to be self-policing. If you're gonna cheat, you're gonna cheat (but who are you really cheating anyways?)

 

Its just like the people who log a find on a cache that they never visited. Without checking the paper log, is there anyway of enforcing that rule?

Well, that's exactly my point. No sense getting worked up about some cacher making rules for his cache. He can't enforce them.

[+sbell111]

You could just grab a matching container and take a pic in your back yard. Hmmm, I don't think our cat uses that brand.

[+JohnnyVegas]

There were recently caches posted in the North Texas area. The restrictions stated "If you have more that 10 FTF's you may not log this cache for 24 hours".

 

Is it generally accepted to exclude a subset of cachers? Or is it hey it's ok it is the hiders cache? What subset of cachers will be excluded next?

This doesn't exclude anybody. Anyone who finds it, can log it. The owner is simply asking that the FTF hounds give someone else a shot.

 

Feel free to look for more molehills to make mountains of.

I sure does. it excludes anyone that has 10 FTF from get a FTF from this cache.

 

If some one else whats a FTF let them earn one like anyone else.

Lets face it would not be a real first to find, this idae of not allowing anyone with 10FTFs is just a pile of PCBull

Edited August 19, 2005 by JohnnyVegas

[+geognerd]

I'm going to get stones thrown at me for saying this: I am all in favor of caches restricting FTFs to someone who doesn't have one, or has less than 100 finds. There are geocachers who are retired and apparently do nothing but cache all day long. They are able to go out and get FTFs on weekday mornings while the rest of us are getting ready for work. Sure, us working folk can get up at 4AM to go after an FTF, but that doesn't always work. One cache I know of was found at 1AM by someone on the way home from the late shift (or was it the bar?). Give the people who actually work for a living the chance to get their first FTF. I got my first FTF at a cache that was restricted to newbies for the first week, and I have gone on to log 4 more FTFs "the hard way." One cacher I know of got ticked off that one of these retired guys kept getting the FTF on their caches, so they restricted the FTF on one of their recent hides. It was found the evening after it was posted, so it wasn't like the hardcore cachers had to wait 2 weeks to be allowed to find it.

[+geognerd]

Oh, and to those who think an FTF from a restricted cache is cheapened, it's not. Did you stop to think that the people who qualified to find the cache first were still competing with others who were qualified to find the cache? I was still pleased to see that I had beaten some other newbies by only a few hours at the restricted cache where I got my first FTF.

[+southdeltan]

I still can't imagine why people care so much about FTF's. Big deal. Hell, you don't even know if you ARE the FTF because some people don't log in logbooks, much less online.

 

I personally MUCH prefer a cache that's been around the block, if you know what I mean.

 

On a seperate, but related note - logging requirements (not FINDING requirements, those are the things you do to make the cache hard to find... like hiding it well or making sure the puzzle is hard enough) are assanine.

 

sd

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I couldn't care less about being FTF (I've have one FTF in the last year, and that cache had been posted for a week before I happened to be in the area!) but yes, logging requirements that don't allow someone that found the cache to log it, even if only for a day, should not be allowed. If it's a cache and listed on geocaching.com, any geocacher should be able to log it if they find it. you want to make it tough? Fine, make a hard puzzle or require rock-climbing or SCUBA.

[+Kealia]

Bad idea. Sounds like it speaks more about the local community if you ask me.

 

Around here, there's a local cacher and myself who get a lot of the FTFs. We've both grabbed a few lately so we've made a decision to back off of the new caches placed recently to give others a chance for the FTF.

 

Now, do I care that much about the FTF - no. I've probably gotten 25 or so but I don't keep track (my best guess). If I was told I COULDN'T because I have too many, I'd be a bit ticked off.

 

As for some of the other comments. yes some people work (as do I). Should those that don't be punished because we do? Nope. If I want a FTF bad enough I'll go get it at some ridiculous hour....

[+pdxmarathonman]

16 logs in 7 months on the dog cache. 1.5 star terrain, only 14 of the logs are finds.

 

Doesn't sound like it needs any restrictions to me.

 

I was at a geo-dog's birthday party at a local pub last night that allows dogs on the patio. There probably would've been 14 finds with the dogs if it was an event cache

Edited August 19, 2005 by pdxmarathonman

[+Mastifflover]

I'm going to get stones thrown at me for saying this:  I am all in favor of caches restricting FTFs to someone who doesn't have one, or has less than 100 finds.  There are geocachers who are retired and apparently do nothing but cache all day long.  They are able to go out and get FTFs on weekday mornings while the rest of us are getting ready for work.  Sure, us working folk can get up at 4AM to go after an FTF, but that doesn't always work.  One cache I know of was found at 1AM by someone on the way home from the late shift (or was it the bar?).  Give the people who actually work for a living the chance to get their first FTF.  I got my first FTF at a cache that was restricted to newbies for the first week, and I have gone on to log 4 more FTFs "the hard way."  One cacher I know of got ticked off that one of these retired guys kept getting the FTF on their caches, so they restricted the FTF on one of their recent hides.  It was found the evening after it was posted, so it wasn't like the hardcore cachers had to wait 2 weeks to be allowed to find it.

Let me be the first one to throw stones. Your making some broad generalizations about people that like to get FTF's. There are 4 people in my general area that like to try to get FTF including myself. I know the other 3 personally and we all have full time jobs and 2 of us go to college part time. Many of my finds are at night and they have never been because I was coming home from a bar. I have 48 FTF's, I must be falling down drunk all the time!

[+JohnnyVegas]

Oh, and to those who think an FTF from a restricted cache is cheapened, it's not. Did you stop to think that the people who qualified to find the cache first were still competing with others who were qualified to find the cache? I was still pleased to see that I had beaten some other newbies by only a few hours at the restricted cache where I got my first FTF.

To bad it wasn't a real First TO Find. Rather that restrict who can find a cache first which is very infintile, You can tell yourself all day that a FTF on a restricted cache is not cheapened, is most certainly is cheapened.

If I ever see a restricted cache in my area you can bet I will set up a shell account and go for it anyway.

It would be better to request that the cache be activated on a saturday or a sunday (which can be done) then anyone that is not working that day can go try and find the cache at the same time and get a real FTF

[+pdxmarathonman]

What's the prize for most FTF's?

[+Colorado Cacher]

Well, well, well welcome to Texas. They all think they own Colorado also. The key word here is THINK.

 

Sorry I have a great hate for anybody that buys entire mountains, fences them off, and refuses to let people enjoy what they have been for a lifetime.

[+Mastifflover]

What's the prize for most FTF's?

No prize, just a little friendly competition.

[4wheelin_fool]

I dont understand the FTF issue. I have several FTFs, but it wasnt because I wanted to be the first. It was because I just wanted to find the cache! I was curious, so I happened to be the first. GEEEZ. Who cares who is FTF? And people who are restricting FTFs from others are just petty and silly. I would create a sock puppet account just for that one cache's FTF and even title it after that cache, then log it normally as the "second" finder.

 

It was also mentioned that someone wasted a trip to a cache because it could not be logged as a find if you did not have a dog.

Well, I guess I can call this my "waste of time cache of the day," since I am not a dog owner... and I don't always have printouts of caches ahead of time.

I dont understand this either. Are some people using these high-tech GPS units just for a smilie? I dont go geocaching for the smilie. I do it for the journey, the hunt, the trip. If I dont log it online as a find, so what? When I started geocaching in '01 I didnt even have an account. I did it for the fun! Later (in '02)I started logging a few that I found the previous year and determined that it was a waste of time. Who are these smilies supposed to impress? If you want to impress your fellow geocachers - hide a dadgum good cache!

 

Heres a smilie for ya -

Edited August 19, 2005 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Patudles]

What's the prize for most FTF's?

No prize, just a little friendly competition.

That is I think, the answer. Just a little friendly competition. I used to love going for FTF. It was the challenge of going out at all hours to find a new cache before the other competitors found it. I have no idea how many FTF I have, a lot you can count on that. Sometimes that was the most fun part of the cache. Specially if it is an urban cache. If you don't have any competition it's not nearly so fun.

[+pdxmarathonman]

I dont understand the FTF issue.  I have several FTFs,  but it wasnt because I wanted to be the first. It was because I just wanted to find the cache!  I was curious, so I happened to be the first. GEEEZ. Who cares who is FTF?

As a cache owner I enjoy the online logs. So I guess the smilies are for the cache owner (unless you're part of the huge majority that loves the numbers )

Edited August 19, 2005 by pdxmarathonman