Restricted Caches

[+geognerd]

Just remembered this cache:

 

Kids Cache (GCPHR7)

 

The FTF was restricted to kids under 13. Now we're not going to criticize this little guy's first FTF are we? There's even a pic to show the FTF was legit.

[+Renegade Knight]

Just remembered this cache:

 

Kids Cache (GCPHR7)

 

The FTF was restricted to kids under 13.  Now we're not going to criticize this little guy's first FTF are we?  There's even a pic to show the FTF was legit.

This one doesn't bother me, but then neither did the original. There was a cache with a reserved FTF that got a lot of debate. At the time I came out against the reserved FTF. Then when the owner weighed in and when I had time to think about it I decided they were right and what they did was a good thing for reasons that you would only know if you were a local.

 

You can't have it both ways. Either peole can set up cache rules or not. If not then that should be in the guidelines. "No Cache Rules".

Edited August 21, 2005 by Renegade Knight

[Cammie455]

restrictions and requirements are different.

 

I think that if he had made it a requirement that only someone with less than 10 FTF's could get the FTF... everything would have been ok. Instead he worded it as a restriction against a group of people.

Bad choice on his part.

Maybe it's all about the drama.

[+WascoZooKeeper]

With almost 300 finds, I still remember the fun of being FTF when I had relatively few finds under my belt. Even more experienced cachers still enjoy discovering a brand-new log waiting for them at a new, never-before-found cache.

 

I've hidden a cache before where I requested that anyone with a prior FTF, or more than 100 finds total, not go after my cache until either (1) someone else logged the find, or (2) one week after the hide. It's strictly the honor system -- I'm not going to delete anyone's log, I'd just let it sit there for the world to see that some FTF hound put his own obsession ahead of letting anyone else have the fun of a FTF. In my case, there were no complaints, and my request was honored, and the FTF appreciated having the opportunity to grab the "honor".

 

As far as being "given" the find . . . . well, suppose the local FTF hounds (in our area, there are usually three or four prime suspects) consciously decide on their own to deliberately NOT be FTF on some new caches? That is, the cache owner doesn't ask them to hold back, they just do so on their own. Nobody knows they've done it, it's not published on the cache pages anywhere. So I suppose they're "giving" the FTF to other cachers in that case? I don't think so . . . they're simply being considerate and saying "FTF is fun for me, I'll let someone else have a little fun, too."

 

I will do the same for other new caches occasionally in the future -- not every one, probably not more than perhaps 1 in 10.

[+geognerd]

I've hidden a cache before where I requested that anyone with a prior FTF, or more than 100 finds total, not go after my cache until either (1) someone else logged the find, or (2) one week after the hide.

For the record, I don't know how many WZK hid with this stipulation, but I found a cache he hid with this rule. And I was very happy to get that first FTF plus first dibs on the swag in the cache - I took my second geocoin. Oh, and this cache wasn't an easy find. A few months later (with more experience) I went on to FTF another WZK cache that was open to everyone.

[+Mudfrog]

So I suppose they're "giving" the FTF to other cachers in that case? I don't think so . . . they're simply being considerate and saying "FTF is fun for me, I'll let someone else have a little fun, too."

 

Agree wholeheartedly that this is a nice jesture but they are in fact giving the FTF away. They could have gone for it but chose to let someone else "have" it. If i was on the recieving end of this jesture and knew how the FTF hounds operated, then i would sure wonder if that was what happened and therefore not enjoy experience as much!

 

Just remembered this cache:

 

Kids Cache (GCPHR7)

 

The FTF was restricted to kids under 13. Now we're not going to criticize this little guy's first FTF are we? There's even a pic to show the FTF was legit.

 

Nope, this idea sounds cool and im sure there are others with similar restrictions that are great caches too. The restricitons that this thread covered were aimed towards everyday cachers who just happen to cache harder than other everyday cachers who choose not to put forth as much effort for a FTF!

[+WascoZooKeeper]

I've hidden a cache before where I requested that anyone with a prior FTF, or more than 100 finds total, not go after my cache until either (1) someone else logged the find, or (2) one week after the hide.

For the record, I don't know how many WZK hid with this stipulation, but I found a cache he hid with this rule.

Only one so far. I may do one more soon. And then, since I can't see myself maintaining more than about 20 caches total, that will probably be the last one for a while unless I start archiving some to put new ones out.

 

Another cacher in our area did a similar FTF restriction; they modified theirs slightly after I sent a couple suggestions to them.

 

Hey, geognerd, go sign up for the October breakfast event!

Edited August 22, 2005 by WascoZooKeeper

[+WascoZooKeeper]

So I suppose they're "giving" the FTF to other cachers in that case? I don't think so . . . they're simply being considerate and saying "FTF is fun for me, I'll let someone else have a little fun, too."

 

Agree wholeheartedly that this is a nice jesture but they are in fact giving the FTF away. They could have gone for it but chose to let someone else "have" it. If i was on the recieving end of this jesture and knew how the FTF hounds operated, then i would sure wonder if that was what happened and therefore not enjoy experience as much!

Well, this isn't worth getting all angsty about, but let me just pose an interesting situation to you. I'm planning an event, and there will be somewhere in the area of 20-30 new permanent caches placed, to be published that day. The caches will lie in an area about five miles wide by 15 miles long, running north-to-south; the north end of the area will be not far from the event. Several area FTF hounds will likely be at the event and will thus get the cache location information immediately when it is released.

 

By your logic, if Hound "A" heads straight for the northernmost caches, and Hound "B" heads straight for the southernmost caches, "A" has "let" "B" have the south, "B" has "let" "A" have the north, and both of them have "let" still other cachers have the ones in the middle.

[+Mudfrog]

So I suppose they're "giving" the FTF to other cachers in that case? I don't think so . . . they're simply being considerate and saying "FTF is fun for me, I'll let someone else have a little fun, too."

 

Agree wholeheartedly that this is a nice jesture but they are in fact giving the FTF away. They could have gone for it but chose to let someone else "have" it. If i was on the recieving end of this jesture and knew how the FTF hounds operated, then i would sure wonder if that was what happened and therefore not enjoy experience as much!

Well, this isn't worth getting all angsty about, but let me just pose an interesting situation to you. I'm planning an event, and there will be somewhere in the area of 20-30 new permanent caches placed, to be published that day. The caches will lie in an area about five miles wide by 15 miles long, running north-to-south; the north end of the area will be not far from the event. Several area FTF hounds will likely be at the event and will thus get the cache location information immediately when it is released.

 

By your logic, if Hound "A" heads straight for the northernmost caches, and Hound "B" heads straight for the southernmost caches, "A" has "let" "B" have the south, "B" has "let" "A" have the north, and both of them have "let" still other cachers have the ones in the middle.

Definitely no angst coming out around here. In this thread i've seen several respond in favor of the restriction and as long as all caches arent put out this way, then it's no big deal. Everyone has an opinion and i still stand by mine in that this type of restriction is not needed.

 

Not exactly sure what you are saying in your second paragraph,,, None of the cachers are giving anything away since there are several caches and there's no way they can accomplish the task of getting every FTF. Hound "A" isnt giving hound "B" anything,, he/she had to start somewhere and they decided to head north. Hound "B" wanted a FTF too so he/she headed south. The one obvious point that you do make here is that these cachers want the FTF and are putting forth an effort to get it!

[+501_Gang]

Why should the cache owner care who gets the FTF?

[+WascoZooKeeper]

Why should the cache owner care who gets the FTF?

From my own experience, and from a number of other cachers I've spoken too, getting an FTF while still relatively new to geocaching is a pretty good emotional rush. For someone who's still learning about the sport, it can provide some pretty powerful motivation. Why not help ensure that someone gets this little boost?

 

To describe it another way . . . . imagine finding an envelope with $1000 in it. Who's it going to mean more to . . . . the guy who's never had more than $100 in the bank, or the guy with a $50 million trust fund?

[+Shop99er]

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?

NO

 

NO

 

NONE

 

What knothead approver let that one go through?

[+JohnnyVegas]

Why should the cache owner care who gets the FTF? 

From my own experience, and from a number of other cachers I've spoken too, getting an FTF while still relatively new to geocaching is a pretty good emotional rush. For someone who's still learning about the sport, it can provide some pretty powerful motivation. Why not help ensure that someone gets this little boost?

 

To describe it another way . . . . imagine finding an envelope with $1000 in it. Who's it going to mean more to . . . . the guy who's never had more than $100 in the bank, or the guy with a $50 million trust fund?

And just how much of a little boost can it be when the FTFr knows that the hard core FTF hounds requested not the try for a FTF. For me it would not be much of a find and it is still not a real FTF.

 

Also it has been stated that it is not fair that those the are retired have a chance to get a FTF while everyone else is at work. Well we had a new cache pop here this morning cavalry hill , within about an hour their were 8 people trying for the FTF, we all got there within minutes of each other, about half of the cachers there are not retired.

The worst thing thought is no one could find it, we all got DNFd

 

If someone wants a FTF it takes lots of luck and work, A fair amout if mine have been at night between 10PM and 3AM, if you are not ready to go 24 hours a day, 7 days a week you are only limiting your chances for a FTF. I keep one GPS hooked up to my computer so that I can load any new caches in about a minute or so.

Edited August 23, 2005 by JohnnyVegas

[+1stimestar]

I think it is a great idea. Those of you who are true FTF hounds, why does it bother you so much? You already have several. Sometimes it is not a matter of "if you want it you have to work for it". Around here most FTF are men whose wives stay home with the kids so they can go out at any hour of the day or night with no preplanning or notice. That's fine and dandy though I can certainly see where it can end up contributing to situations like this: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=106320 . I don't plan on ever getting any FTF or at least none for many more years as my children are still small. "Fortunatly" I am not a member of the good ol' boys club and have to schedule my caching around my work schedules and babysitters. I just don't see that big of a deal if someone wants to put a reign on those who get their cache. If it pisses you off, don't do it all.

Edited August 23, 2005 by 1stimestar

[+bilgeratt]

I once went out after work in the morning, introducing a co-worker to geocaching. Since I knew a New Cache had popped up overnight, we went there first.

 

I drove, and he used my GPS. But you know what? He found it all on his own, and so his very first cache was an FTF.

 

I got what I wanted, I beat a certain other local there. That's all I cared about.

 

Come to think of it, that's still all I care about. Beating that other guy. lol.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I think it is a great idea. Those of you who are true FTF hounds, why does it bother you so much? You already have several. Sometimes it is not a matter of "if you want it you have to work for it". Around here most FTF are men whose wives stay home with the kids so they can go out at any hour of the day or night with no preplanning or notice. That's fine and dandy though I can certainly see where it can end up contributing to situations like this: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=106320 . I don't plan on ever getting any FTF or at least none for many more years as my children are still small. "Fortunatly" I am not a member of the good ol' boys club and have to schedule my caching around my work schedules and babysitters. I just don't see that big of a deal if someone wants to put a reign on those who get their cache. If it pisses you off, don't do it all.

Most of the posters in that topic do not seem to have a problem with the Husband/Wives when it comes to time spent geocaching, Besides which, you are going to have a hard time in whch men and women enjoy the same hobby.

 

As far FTFs, as I said before if someone wants one bad enough they will get one, if they do not want to put much time or effort into getting a FTF, that is just to bad, why punish those of us that are willing to put the time and effort into a FTF that may be required.

 

Lets keep politcal correctness out of geocaching, there is no room for it.

[+One of the Texas Vikings]

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.

Or...hmmm..let's see.. How about restricting the cache to only being available to

people who drive Honda's or have English as a second language...

 

Come on....people... I have to work for a living too.. I wish I was retired.

But, to complain or whine about people who are retired having an advantage, so what, maybe they need it. They are older ????

I have only one FTF, couldn't care less. But, to restrict the game or caches

to a certain group smacks of elitism. One of Houston's cachers has put about 10 out on the islands on Lake Houston.. I haven't got out there yet, but I'm working on it. That is different then saying one in a park is not available to me, because I'm the wrong religion, too short, or what ever... it is just wrong.

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

I've responded to this one already at TXGA but I'll throw my opinion out here too.

 

This issue isn't about FTF.

It's about cache owner's rights.

 

I would never put this requirement on one of my caches. But a cache owner puts time, money, effort, and creativity into his cache. He or she should have the right to put little zany rules on their cache of they want. You wouldn't restrict your cache. I wouldn't mine. But that's the point- it's YOUR cache.

Natural selection will take place. Enough dumb rules on your caches, and people will stop looking for them. But you have the right as a cache owner to look at your logless cache page if you want. When cache finders start sending cache hiders money for their efforts, then they can dictate rules to them.

FROM TXGA:

"As it is, FTF has way less to do with skill than work schedule, up to date internet access, timing of posting, and the like. That's why I'm surprised some cachers make such a big deal about FTF, because it doesn't indicate any special achievement, per se."

 

That thread discusses how to give FTF some significance, but that's another issue altogether.

 

It just seems to me this is all about the rights of the FTFer, and we're forgetting about the rights of the cache owner, however stupid their desires may be.

[+Bear Paughs]

It just seems to me this is all about the rights of the FTFer, and we're forgetting about the rights of the cache owner, however stupid their desires may be.

I agree with you, but I think the reason this thread has turned into a finders rights thread is that the cache owner is by choice publicly listing something on a site where (other than PMOs) virtually anyone can get the information and go seek the cache. Geocaching.com doesn't discriminate -- it provides a service to the entire community who choose to use it. Gosh, in my understanding Groundspeak was formed as a way to facilitate bringing the sport to the masses. Listing something on geocaching.com with restrictions of when something can be found by only certain parts of the population is not appropriate.

 

Lets face it, there are other methods for achieving what this cache owner wants to do -- one such option certainly is to not list the cache on geocaching.com. Clearly the owner has an idea who the local cachers are that are newbies or even more experienced but who do not have any (or many) FTFs. He or she could place the cache without listing it and send the information only to those people that meet the requirements he or she has placed. It would be a private or invitation-only cache. After some time has passed, it could later be listed on geocaching.com (assuming it met approval) and be open to all. Maybe not the best solution, but it's a suggestion -- and one in which geocaching.com does not play a part in limiting the play for some.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Or someone could set up a web site for those that do not want to really have to work for a FTF. You could call it something like

 

Don't want to go after dark.com

 

Don't want to get up early .com

 

Don't want to go out in the rain.com

 

Don't want to check my e-mail every day.com

 

I have a job that takes up my time.com

 

[+Joypa]

Enforcement of any rules a cache owner chooses is problematic. The CO does have the option of deleting a log deemed not to meet the rules but the CO can not know for sure if his restrictions are being observed in many cases. For this reason, applying restrictive rules to caches open to the general public would seem to be largely a pointless exercise. Of couse, some of you are very creative and may be able to find ways to make it work.

[+Mudfrog]

Or someone could set up a web site for those that do not want to really have to work for a FTF. You could call it something like

 

Don't want to go after dark.com

 

Don't want to get up early .com

 

Don't want to go out in the rain.com

 

Don't want to check my e-mail every day.com

 

I have a job that takes up my time.com

 

Those are good!

 

I don't plan on ever getting any FTF or at least none for many more years as my children are still small.

 

Another excuse, another website:

 

I cant get a FTF cause i have small children.com

Edited August 26, 2005 by Mudfrog

[+JohnnyVegas]

As far as the issue of retired geocachers getting most of the FTF, this is not true.

 

Were I was living before most of the FTF were going to a geocacher that was also working full time, he even got a FTF that was less than a mile from my house and he had to drive 20 miles to get it.

 

When I was working full time I got a fair amout of FTFs, Were I live now there is a large number of FTF hounds that get a good deal of the FTFs, and they all work full time.

 

Next time you see a new cache pop up that no one has found, just post a note the says you are an your way, someone may decide not to bother to try for the FTF

[+beejay&esskay]

Enforcement of any rules a cache owner chooses is problematic. The CO does have the option of deleting a log deemed not to meet the rules but the CO can not know for sure if his restrictions are being observed in many cases. For this reason, applying restrictive rules to caches open to the general public would seem to be largely a pointless exercise. Of couse, some of you are very creative and may be able to find ways to make it work.

I've just seen a cache where the only find logs that will be accepted is if the cacher is returning the owner's TB to the cache.

 

That seems pretty restrictive, and I'll try to accept this as "owner's rights"...but should something that restricted be listed here?

[+Mudfrog]

Enforcement of any rules a cache owner chooses is problematic. The CO does have the option of deleting a log deemed not to meet the rules but the CO can not know for sure if his restrictions are being observed in many cases. For this reason, applying restrictive rules to caches open to the general public would seem to be largely a pointless exercise. Of couse, some of you are very creative and may be able to find ways to make it work.

I've just seen a cache where the only find logs that will be accepted is if the cacher is returning the owner's TB to the cache.

 

That seems pretty restrictive, and I'll try to accept this as "owner's rights"...but should something that restricted be listed here?

Yes! Everyone has a chance to to sooner or later find that cacher's TB and return it to the cache. No one is being singled out with this stipulation!

[+tozainamboku]

Enforcement of any rules a cache owner chooses is problematic. The CO does have the option of deleting a log deemed not to meet the rules but the CO can not know for sure if his restrictions are being observed in many cases. For this reason, applying restrictive rules to caches open to the general public would seem to be largely a pointless exercise. Of couse, some of you are very creative and may be able to find ways to make it work.

I've just seen a cache where the only find logs that will be accepted is if the cacher is returning the owner's TB to the cache.

 

That seems pretty restrictive, and I'll try to accept this as "owner's rights"...but should something that restricted be listed here?

Yes! Everyone has a chance to to sooner or later find that cacher's TB and return it to the cache. No one is being singled out with this stipulation!

1) Put the cache on your watch list.

2) When the owner's travel bug is logged into the cache, go grab the travel bug and log a note.

3) Return the travel bug to the cache and log a find.

 

Of course if the cache is located right outside the owner's house it may be difficult to beat him to the cache to grab the travel bug.

Edited August 31, 2005 by tozainamboku

[+beejay&esskay]

1) Put the cache on your watch list.

2) When the owner's travel bug is logged into the cache, go grab the travel bug and log a note.

3) Return the travel bug to the cache and log a find.

 

Of course if the cache is located right outside the owner's house it may be difficult to beat him to the cache to grab the travel bug.

The cache is in the owner's front yard.

 

Maybe I need to make this a local log and grab...I find the TB, log him in (hey, easy find) and take him back out again...

 

And then some other local cacher that wants to do the same...

 

[RexBloodman]

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.

Why not just BORROW your Neighbors dog to do that cache. I'd guess that you might get your neighbor involved in Geocaching.

[+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.

Why not just BORROW your Neighbors dog to do that cache. I'd guess that you might get your neighbor involved in Geocaching.

That's kinda the point. Many ways to fool cache restrictions.

[+JohnnyVegas]

That is a cache that I would just put on my ignore list, for some reasons dogs always bite me