Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
4leafclover

I Have A Question Regarding The "found Logs"

Recommended Posts

JZ3494

and

 

JZ0826

 

A little background:

 

early this year, I posted the story of how JZ0826 came into my possession. And since then, the Hamilton County surveyor's office has called me with several more benchmarks that get destroyed, and they allow me to come take them.

 

Now, two of these were loggable on GC.com, and I and a friend of mine find it amusing to allow people to claim them as finds when we go to events. I mean, seriously, how often does one get to see an actual benchmark out of its setting? We refer to them as travellers.

 

It has come to our attention that this practice not only baffles some users, but truly seems to bother them. My question is...WHY?

This is simply an aspect of a "game". The marks have been recorded as destroyed, and I and the owner of the other mark just like to show them off, and give people something to do. Why is that so offensive?

 

I ask this after reading Artman's post in another thread, and his notes on JZ3494. Bill93 registered his opinions on JZ0826.

 

Is benchmarking SO SERIOUS that players of the game can't have a little fun with them, just like people do with caches and travel bugs?

 

Just to clarify my post —

 

Being fascinated with topo (or any other kind of) maps I understand.

Wanting to search for non-NGS marks I understand.

Photographing or otherwise documenting those marks I understand.

Wanting to report them to the monumenting agency I understand.

Its the urge to log them on Geocaching.com that I find a bit baffling.

 

Unlike caches, benchmarks on Geocaching were, are, and IMO will always be an afterthought. They are a finite universe. They will almost certainly not be expanded to include newer NGS marks or those of other federal, state or local agencies.

 

If you have your heart set on logging a benchmark on Geocaching.com, then search for the marks that are eligible for logging, i.e. the NGS marks in the Geocaching.com database.

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

4leafclover,

 

Some folks have a hard time seperating "the game" from the "NGS".

 

As to why do people want to log a Traveling Benchmark? They log your benchmark because they can! Most don't understand the thrill of finding an old benchmark as the regulars here in the forums do, but will take the opportunity to add another icon to their stats page and have FUN doing it.

 

Your benchmark introduces others to this hobby and some may even go on to get as much excitement from hunting benchmarks as WE (the collective) do. The more who see your disk the more who might get as involved as the rest of us.

 

Remember, if you're not having fun, then why do it.....

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

You say it's only a "game". This is true. But games have rules: you don't get a "base hit" if the shortstop throws the ball into the stands, you don't collect $200 unless you pass GO, and you're "It" (or, "He" in the U.K.) until you tag someone else. Now, you can SAY you got a base hit when the shortstop threw the ball into the stands, you can collect $200 anytime you want if no one else is looking, and you can SAY someone else is "It" without taking a single step. But you would be judged unfavorably by your friends (ex-friends, actually) if you did these things.

 

Logging a mark as "Found" after it has been removed from its described setting is a pointless waste of keystrokes and data storage space. It is pointless activity that does not rise to the level of playing a "game".

 

Will

Share this post


Link to post

From the FAQ Page -

 

What do the choices "Found it!", "Couldn't find it!", "Destroyed", and "Post a Note" mean?

You can log "Found it!" if you see the marker and know that it is the correct marker. If the marker is a survey disk, you must read the disk. The designation (its name) stamped on it must match the Designation in the description. Reading the disk is necessary because another disk could have been set within a few feet of the one you're looking for. If the station has reference marker disks, they don't count as the find; you must find the station disk itself.

 

 

It appears that they read the stamping on the disk and it matched the description!

 

Found it --- In poor condition, except for the polish job done on it! ---- would be an acceptable log according to forum discussions!

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

I could have, but that would have been changing the point. The issue here (read the initial post) is how to justify a "FOUND" on a disk that has been removed from its described setting.

 

I assert that the practice is not justifiable. Do you really think it is?

 

"Destroyed", "Note" or "Not Found" may be OK. But "Found"? C'mon.

 

BTW, what does "game" vs. NGS have anything to do with this?

 

W

Share this post


Link to post

This is a “”GAME”” a very nice one but its still a game

 

I found JZ0826 ( have not logged it yet ) at an event in Chicago a few weeks back and thought it was cool, was introduced to someone that hunted benchmarks and that in itself was outstanding, normally I am the only one there hunting these. Noticed a lot of folks asking what it that ( the pipe cap ) and the game was explained to them, most of the time they had heard of it but yet to find one.

 

My best explanation is to tell them that , yes its cool to find a box in the woods that has been hidden for a year but its way Tooooooo Cool to find something that no one has found in 125 years, now that’s an adventure.

 

When someone starts writing me a check for each benchmark found or missing then its not a game anymore, but until them this is just a “GAME” and will treat it as such.

 

If its fun keep on doing it the way its best for you. There is no pointless activity if its legal and fun

 

“”What is a benchmark? “” a way to have fun on this site and geocache at the same time, if it were not for this game site listing benchmarks where would all the purest go play, is there another site that offers as much as this one for everybody, I don’t think so

 

…. JOE

Share this post


Link to post

The leisure game player finds a disk that is listed on GC.com and goes to the FAQ page and reads the description for found and determines he has found the mark described on the datasheet. He doesn't look any farther and is satisfied he has found the correct disk, he logs it as found. GC.com doesn't really care one way or the other how you log a disk (or cache for that matter).

 

The NGS requires you to fill out an online form and meet their definitions of found and not-found along with other criteria. They do not take kindly to those who might screw-up their database and so they scrutinize all reports before they enter them into the database.

 

The OP asked "It has come to our attention that this practice not only baffles some users, but truly seems to bother them. My question is...WHY?"

 

Most of those who are regulars to the forums would most likely log it "Destroyed" or just post a "note". But the question remains as to WHY it bothers some that others just have fun and don't follow the strict rules of the NGS.

 

Personally we would log it "We concur that the mark is destroyed". If others want to claim a find that is fine by us. We don't work for either GC.com or the NGS and do this for OUR enjoyment. Live and let live is how we see this hobby.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

I have access to a large number of "destroyed" benchmarks at my workplace. I will not record that I have found them. When I see that a benchmark is destroyed, I come to a conclusion that it no longer exists and I have no need to look for it. I do agree that having a benchmark disk is nice, they make great paperweights. I have an unrecorded (uncirculated) disk on my desk right now at work.

Share this post


Link to post

Since it's a game, and there's no risk of having anyone mistakenly using the disk for survey control, it's harmless fun, a kind of insider's joke actually.

 

My own feeling is that hunting benchmarks is a little like wildlife photography. A "living" benchmark is one that is serving its purpose by marking a well-known position as it was intended to do. After all, the purpose of the benchmark is to identify the position, not to identify a chunk of bronze. A "found' to me would mean I found the mark serving its purpose, and therefore found the position that is in its proper relation with the national spatial network.

 

Just as I would think that a supposed wildlife photographer that spends his time shooting pictures in a zoo or museum is "cheating" in some sense of the word, so do I think that claiming a find for a bronze disk that has been removed from its position and carried around to events is "cheating".

 

However, I recognize that there are quite a few other marks that are frequently logged in error. Usually the ones near popular caches or landmarks are the most likely to be logged in error by cachers who stumble on them, and there's no point in getting overheated about it. If someone has fun by saying they found a travelling benchmark, who am I to complain about it? It doesn't spoil the enjoyment that I get from my kind of hunting.

 

The biggest risk I see is that someone starts thinking that having a benchmark in their pocket is really cool, and goes out and pries one out of its setting so that he has one too. Starting a fad of benchmark collecting would be a very bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that people should log the "travelling" disk with a Note or a Destroyed log, not with a Found log. I agree that it's cheap to log a mark like this; I don't buy the "What's the harm in logging it as a Found?" argument. I agree (without having seen an example) with the sentiment that this might encourage people to destroy marks to get their own souvenir. I don't consider benchmarking a game; I consider it a hobby. The fact that it's listed on Geocaching is a nice fact; benchmarking is not geocaching.

 

However, I won't harass you, nor others, for doing this. What I care about (and am continually refining my technique) is getting reports right to the NGS. I've screwed up in reporting to the NGS, and have tried to fix the issue when I've found out. I worry that destroyed marks that are taken won't be reported to the NGS, and that people who take them will rely on a state agency to report to the NGS, if the person reports at all.

 

I would probe one of your statements. You said that "the marks have been recorded as destroyed". When I look at the NGS PIDs for your two marks, I see that JZ0826 is listed correctly as Destroyed. When I look at JZ3494, I see a NOT FOUND log:

JZ3494                          STATION RECOVERY (2005)

JZ3494

JZ3494'RECOVERY NOTE BY LOCAL SURVEYOR (INDIVIDUAL OR FIRM) 2005 (RDH)

JZ3494'DISC HAS BEEN UNEARTHED AND REMOVED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION.  HAMILTON

JZ3494'COUNTY SURVEYOR'S

JZ3494'OFFICE HAS REPORTEDLY GIVEN THE STATION DISC AWAY TO A COLLECTOR.  THE

JZ3494'STATION IS LOST.

 

You really should log this with the NGS as Destroyed, as a surveyor might possibly go after this mark in the future. I'm not sure we should talk about taking marks in the FAQ, but IF we do, we should emphasize that the taker needs to personally handle NGS logging. Playing a game doesn't cost people money, but as mentioned, for a professional going after a mark that isn't there IS money.

Edited by BuckBrooke

Share this post


Link to post

I still think that the "NGS Benchmarks" count should be taken off the User Stats page. People then would not have to worry about increasing this number.

 

.....or instead change it to the number of "First to find" then if 20 people find it after you, you are the only 1 to get credit in your "stats".

Share this post


Link to post

1st of all...I don't think I CAN record it as destroyed, as it is my understanding that it is the surveyor's office's "job" to do so. And according to them, it has been done. (As far as I know...)

 

I think holograph captured it the best, in referring to it as "an inside joke". As far as logging it as found on gc.com...I still see nothing wrong with it. IF they were making the report to the NGS, then, yeah...that's a problem.

 

It's just something "silly" to do, I suppose because it can be done. I've logged 2 archived caches as found, because, by god, I found them, physically, after they had been archived. (I mention this, because according to some people, by the "rules", I should not be allowed, as they are no longer "in play".)

 

I am an avid benchmark hunter. Not as much for the past few months, because my digital camera is broken, and I hate logging them without pictures. I too, find enjoyment in logging those that no one else has yet to find. I love the stories about finding the 100 year old marks. I wish those existed where I live. But lo and behold...the only one like that in this area is likely destroyed, or on the roof of a building where I can not access it.

 

JZ3140

 

Anyway, my point is...I too am an avid benchmark hunter. I just see the humour in logging these the way they are. My question is more "why is it so WRONG"...and I see the opinions. That's what I am looking for, is the opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
I still think that the "NGS Benchmarks" count should be taken off the User Stats page. People then would not have to worry about increasing this number.

 

.....or instead change it to the number of "First to find" then if 20 people find it after you, you are the only 1 to get credit in your "stats".

it doesn't count toward total found...only as one more benchmark. To me, that much is neither here nor there.

 

Perhaps...if this is such an issue...after a mark has been destroyed, the capability to log it as found should be locked. Then only notes could be posted....IF it were an issue with TPTB at gc.com...

Share this post


Link to post

A station not in its original position is either not found or destroyed. You want to take it to events, attach a TB dogtag to it. I agree with 7things. It's not a loggable benchmark.

Share this post


Link to post

OK, let's have an interim summary:

 

John 2oldfarts has changed from "Fount it" to "We concur that the mark is destroyed".

 

4leafclover has changed from it's a "game" (which implies either competition against an opponent or an established standard of performance, or structured activity with some desired outcome) to "something 'silly'", ("silly", from Middle English meaning "foolish" or "pitiable").

 

I think we've pretty much settled it.

 

W

Share this post


Link to post

Now that was truely mean-spirited.

 

I presumed that 4leafclover meant "lacking seriousness; given to frivolity" when she used the term 'silly' ---

 

And last time I checked, "game" still meant "an amusement or pastime" in addition to the more competitive aspects you assign it.

Edited by Team Neos

Share this post


Link to post
OK, let's have an interim summary:

 

John 2oldfarts has changed from "Fount it" to "We concur that the mark is destroyed".

 

4leafclover has changed from it's a "game" (which implies either competition against an opponent or an established standard of performance, or structured activity with some desired outcome) to "something 'silly'", ("silly", from Middle English meaning "foolish" or "pitiable").

 

I think we've pretty much settled it.

 

W

 

Thanks for understanding what was written.

 

I said "Found It" would be an acceptable log and later I said "Personally we would log it "We concur that the mark is destroyed"."

 

Found it is still acceptable and we would still log it Destroyed.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

I guess we all look for marks and do so for 'FUN' in our own way.

 

2oldfarts think nothing of driving 1 or 200 miles looking for marks in their beautiful desert area.

 

ArtMan can pick up 30 in a day (Congrats by the way!) and 25 of them will be FTF.

 

I spend an entire day climbing a mountain in hopes of finding one long lost mark.

 

We all had fun in our own way. If someone wants to log a dis-mounted mark as FUN......so be it. It isn't my cup of Tea. I know who has earned their numbers when I look at holographs site and spot check the logs.

Share this post


Link to post

My comment on the subject, referred to by the original post, was recorded in a note logged for one of these "traveling" benchmarks. It says something to the effect of "if someone brings a geocache box to a meeting, does everybody claim a find?" It seems to pretty much take the game out of it.

 

Regarding responsibility to log a destroyed: yes, it should be the job of the engineers who see the mark being destroyed by construction. They don't have any time/$$ budgeted for that and have deadlines to meet, so sometimes they don't do it. Next in line with the responsibility is anyone else who gets possession of the disk. I don't consider it acceptable to have a disk that has been removed from its mounting and not report it to the NGS. You are getting something you want, so give a few minutes in return. The information you log might save somebody a lot more time in the future.

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, I'll bite.

 

Every game has a set of rules, and a set of assumptions of how the game will be played. Rules cannot be written to cover every situation. Therefore, every game requires "good faith" by the players.

 

To play the game in good faith requires the player, in this instance, to follow the description and/or coordinates and to attempt to find the disk, rivet, drill hole, intersected point, etc, that was described and entered into the NGS Database, in its setting.

 

Mistakes are one thing, and they do happen. Lack of diligence is another thing. It can be annoying, but understood. But logging a mark "Found" for a disk that has been removed from the setting described and is, instead, lying on a table, or logging an intersection station "Found"when it is known not to be the same point that was described and entered in the database shows a lack of good faith.

 

Unlike geocaching, there is no one to approve or disapprove your logs, so you can set your own limits. But in my book it is cheating. If you have fun cheating, have at it. You have earned the scorn you receive.

Share this post


Link to post

On another note, some folks are concerned that the NGS recoveries submitted under the "GEOCAC" agency code be taken seriously.

 

Our reputation certainly cannot be helped when it gets around that those geocaching folks report "Found It" when they see a Bench Mark disk laying on the tablebecause they just see the humour in logging these the way they are.

Share this post


Link to post

Found logs that keep getting added to the listing could cause someone to attempt to hunt it, in vain, much like found it logs on a missing cache would. Not many would think doing this sort of thing on a cache is right, so I would ask- what makes it so right on a benchmark?

 

A TB tag could be put on them, but don't release it. Keep it in hand for cachers to log as they would any other TB and explain that they can log the BM also, but as destroyed. Doing it that way still allows people to get credit in some way for it and also educates them a bit about benchmarking.

Share this post


Link to post
4leafclover Posted: Oct 19 2005, 12:50 PM

It has come to our attention that this practice not only baffles some users, but truly seems to bother them. My question is...WHY?

This is simply an aspect of a "game".

 

One word comes to mind, and the word is: cheating.

 

Both in work, and in games, cheating is the same concept.

 

It degrades not only the cheater, but the whole of the work or game that is cheated.

 

That is WHY.

Share this post


Link to post
no tb tag will ever get attached to it...I'd never see it again.

Unless I missed the point.....

 

The idea was NOT to release the BM/TB, rather make it an "event travel bug" so to speak.

 

A good example: Travel Bug # TBG6F1 - "BIND"

http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.as...4d-f55214be498b

 

This TB is not to get placed in caches, but gets passed from cacher-cacher at events.

 

Just my "hay-penny" worth....

Share this post


Link to post

Just to let everyone know -- "Shirley is now going to show her feelings".

 

I do not like all of the name calling and snide or cruel remarks made in this thread aimed at 4leafclover. I thought all of you that made such remarks were grown men - with thoughtful, deductive, fairly advanced minds. If you were talking directly to this lady in person, would you be saying the same things?

 

This is such a shameful display of 'set in stone' ideas - do not mess with my toys way of thinking - I am truly disappointed by a lot of the people who I had come to think highly of.....

 

Most of your posts are so negative, you do not even think about what good might come from doing this at all. List all of the pros and cons....do not just keep beating up on the OP. I think some of you guys owe 4leafclover a big apology!

 

So - with that said - here is my list of pros & cons...

 

PRO -

 

1) I can see where this could be a fantastic teaching tool to the caching side of GC.

2) Showing these marks at event caches is a way to tell people about the history of surveying and explain the reason that we are addicted.

3) Everyone has a great time...this IS what event caches are meant to be.

4) One person might get the bug and become an avid hunter.

 

CON -

 

1) If it is not one of the things stated at the event....someone might think it would be cool to have one of these things enough to go hammer one out....(this already happens in the world we live in, we have seen what appears to be this happening).

2) More people in your area might start benchmarking and be the FTR (first to recover) thereby taking some of the fun out of your hunting.

3) A lot of people might have fun?

 

Come on - get real - just who is this hurting? (other than your self-imposed sense of importance, that is...)

 

This has been totally my thoughts and feelings on this subject...do not blame or flame John because my post. If I hit to close to home and you become irritated, flame away at me all you want.

 

Shirley~

 

Edit for tongue-tied fingers...

Edited by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)

Share this post


Link to post

Shirley -

 

I found your post to be interesting but incomplete; not even slightly irritating. Well, maybe slightly, but not sufficiently irritating to tempt a "flame".

 

Here's why I think your thoughts on the subject are incomplete: you left out one "CON", and it is this: The notion of posting "Found it" for a "traveling benchmark" ("traveling benchmark" is, of course, a contradiction in terms - a "moving fixed object") trivializes what little integrity there is in the activity of hunting and documenting benchmarks (and such integrity is completely unrelated to any NGS-aspect of the activity).

 

I do not do anything with caches or any of the many related phenomena and activities. They don't interest me. But I could, were I to give a hoot, learn enough about caching to do something that would be, simultaneously, legal, immense fun, and completely at odds with, dismissive of and enormously irritiating to the entire geocaching community. I could, for example, find a cache, remove it to another location and leave behind a posterboard "ha ha" sign. Wicked fun and totally legal, but would it be OK? But I don't do that, and I hope I don't need to explain why I don't.

 

(Admittedly, I don't know if the activity I described above is within or outside the bounds - such is my lack of knowledge about caching. If it is not a sufficiently incorrect thing to do, use your imagination for a better example.)

 

Now, regarding the notion of apologizing to 4leafclover. Certainly, if I have gone over the top and given offense, I am sorry. But, I commented on her use of the words "game" and "silly", and not on any personal aspect. Be that as it may, if I gave offense, I apologize. She is still [insert accurate but inoffensive term for doing something inconsistent with generally accepted practices and standards], but I certainly don't want her or anyone else to feel bad about it. Just stop it.

 

Will

Share this post


Link to post
I do not like all of the name calling and snide or cruel remarks made in this thread aimed at 4leafclover. I thought all of you that made such remarks were grown men - with thoughtful, deductive, fairly advanced minds. If you were talking directly to this lady in person, would you be saying the same things?

 

She asked for opinions, I gave my opinion, in a measured, logical and, a heartfelt way. She asked why any of us thought it was wrong, I explained my point of view. I see nothing in the previous posts that I would characterize as snide or name calling. If you wish to take offense, that is up to you, not me.

 

A few more words on good faith: If you are playing cards with someone, there is probably no written rule against peeking into the other person's hand to see what cards are there. But I think everyone would agree that was not playing the game in good faith. Instead, it would be cheating. Similarly, logging a bench mark as "Found" because someone placed the disk in front of you is an example of not participating in the activity in good faith. It is cheating. In this age of "plausible deniability" and debate over what the definition of "is" is, have we gotten beyond the point where good faith and integrity are passe even in our hobbies? That is a sad thing for me to contemplate.

 

I think your list of pros and cons misses the point a bit. Speaking only for myself, I was addressing the question of what is wrong with logging the bench mark as found when you have only seen it out of its setting lying on a table at a meeting. While it may be a great teaching aid to show what a bench mark disk looks like, it is a poor teaching practice to encourage people to log it as "Found" when it is completely out of the context in which it would be "Found" as a useful bench mark. Perhaps it is a better teaching aid to stress that the bench mark is "Destroyed," and there is the evidence before you on the table.

 

In addition, there are many disks with the same stamping, i.e.:A 71 in Missouri and A 71 in Nebraska. Both are both reported to be stamped "A 71 1935." If I see the disk on the table stamped "A 71 1935" I have no personal knowledge as to which disk it is. So, if I log it, it is a second hand log, not my own work, and inherently prone to error.

 

2) More people in your area might start benchmarking and be the FTR (first to recover) thereby taking some of the fun out of your hunting.

 

You do not know my motives, so please do not presume to ascribe motives to me. If more people want to hunt bench marks around here, that would be great. I just hope they maintain the integrity of the activity.

Share this post


Link to post

I like the idea of a TB Benchmark (note Devil's Advocate's comment). If you search under the Travel Bugs for Benchmark, you'll see several that are going around. You'll see there both a few "never-been used" discs and one or two destroyed-reclaimed discs, all of which have proper documentation as to where they came from, what their purpose is and what you should do with them. However, most of these are of the "take a picture of me with a benchmark you go and find and pass me on" TB style.

Edited by BuckBrooke

Share this post


Link to post

I don't take any of this as snide comments aimed at me. I asked opinions, and that is what people are posting. We just seem to disagree. so be it.

 

geocaching is a game open to interpretation of sorts. The "rules" are not hard and fast, and I believe there is some latitude on the benchmarking side, also.

 

As for the ideas of logging it as a TB (with a tag)...yeah, I see the merits of that, too. But forgive me for seeing the humour, the silliness, of logging a once fixed object, AT the co-ordinates where you see it.

 

As for the "cheating" notes... wow. I guess I would say "lighten up"...it is a game we play, and nothing that I know of is at stake. No one is going to win any money, for instance.

Share this post


Link to post

As a matter of semantics, you didn't "find" anything if some one shows your their travelling benchmark. The term "Found" should only apply if you went out purposfully looking for the thing.

 

$0.02,

R_C

Share this post


Link to post

On 10/30/05 there is a geomeet in Massachusetts. If I go there and see a hundred travel bugs, write down the serial numbers on the bugs and log them in as as found, would that be considered cheating? Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/30/05 there is a geomeet in Massachusetts. If I go there and see a hundred travel bugs, write down the serial numbers on the bugs and log them in as as found, would that be considered cheating? Just a thought.

it's not my cup of tea...but A LOT of people do that. It's just the way they want to play.

 

no skin off my nose.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

 

My first post. Have been reading the forums for a few months, and hope to actually start benchmark hunting soon. This discussion has been interesting for me to follow, because I would be very disappointed to find that “anything goes” in this game….of course, I also don’t yet understand many of the ins and outs of hunting & recording marks, so may be off base here.

 

Once upon a time, I was a tournament bridge player. Fairly successful, too—my partner and I even won our state championships one year. (My husband and I spent our honeymoon at a bridge tournament in Canada nearly 30 years ago, which may be one reason why we’re no longer married!)

 

Bridge and benchmark hunting seem to have some similarities.

 

The majority of bridge players are those for whom the game is just a way to pass time, with no thought to being serious about the rules. At the opposite end of the spectrum are those very few for whom the game is a real business (and worth huge sums of money in partnerships and fees, which of course doesn’t happen with benchmarking). In the middle are those who are serious about the competition and improving their skills & scores, and who take the ethics and code of conduct of tournament play very seriously.

 

Those who like to just mess around rarely attend tournaments. They aren’t serious enough about the game, and they tend to be rather loose with the rules. (Don’t argue with me; it’s true.) The tournament players don’t give a darn about whether or not the social players meet their standards, as long as the social players don’t attend a tournament and act as though they were playing bridge in their own living room. When at the tournament, one is expected to follow the rules.

 

From what I’ve seen, most of the people who post on this site believe in a code of conduct for benchmark hunting. As a newbie, I want to see rules and parameters. Not only does this increase the challenge and professionalism of the game and the results, but it sets standards of behavior for those involved. And that can’t be a bad thing.

 

So if someone wants to list a “traveling benchmark” as “found” for their own fun, then go ahead. Just don’t try to record it as any kind of official find. It dilutes the results for everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post

gto girl -

 

Welcome aboard and thanks for your first post. Interesting analogy, bridge. I have never played the game but I have known people who did; I was often surprised by their passion for the game.

 

Your are not "off base" in your observations. The benchmark hunters who frequent this forum fall within a broad range of [for lack of a better term] "seriousness". At one extreme, there are participants for whom anything does, indeed, go. At the other end are old-school, rule-loving, ritualistic deviant, by-the-book fuddy-duddies. The middle ground is inhabited by all sorts of eccentrics.

 

I hope you start hunting marks soon, and I hope you have great success. Use caution, though: this "hobby" can be wickedly addictive.

 

I'm also glad that you appreciate the need for rules. There aren't that many, and the black-helicopter crowd at the NGS won't come to take you away if you bend them (the rules, that is) occasionally.

 

Again, welcome aboard and good hunting.

 

One of the fuddiest,

Will

 

Edited in futile attempt to conform to Standard English.

Edited by seventhings

Share this post


Link to post

I don't have a dog in this fight but I have an observation.

 

There are 2 ways to recover these survey markers.

 

One, is the Geocaching.com game of benchmark hunting. The games rules are loosely defined enough so as to leave many people boggled as to what the rules could and do mean, and many decide to interpret them very widely as they see fit, both conservatively and liberally enough so as to cause disagreements as to what's what in regards to the rules. They are also confusing to some who need to learn why there are 2 different sets of rules that hunters follow depending on the way they choose to play.

 

Unfortunately, as the sanctioning body of the game and it's rules, GC.com has decided not to further define the rules as the game has evolved to help mitigate the confusion and animosity these loosely defined rules cause.

 

This causes a lot of discord and heartburn within this community of game players. I know, I have received a lot of the discourteousness and meanness full on from more than a few players here. Others in this thread are getting a taste of how this goes right now. It is not fun, but until GC.com comes down as the TPTB and tightens up the looseness in the definitions which define the rules, this will continue to drive a wedge between us.

 

Two, is the Rules that the National Geodetic Survey, a US Government agency and Controller of the survey markers and survey data. The Geocaching Benchmark game is loosely based on these markers and their data, but with different rules. The NGS is a disinterested third party as far as the Game of hunting is concerned, and their rules are based on the premise of insuring a pure recovery that allows for reporting the latest news about a survey marker without allowing too much hard to correct, vandalism to the data to occur.

 

The nice thing about NGS rule, (in my opinion) are that they belong to a disinterested third party, and are immutable. While not totally clear at first, they are a lot more succinct than those used at GC.com and can make sense once someone understands the NGS reasoning for why they follow the methodology they do. Those who like them simply have to play by a clearly defined set of rules and the grey ares to this are happily defined by the NGS employees, who are disinterested in GC.com game play. In other words, these are the rules and they are not open to interpretation by anyone other than the NGS itself. We simply have to follow them. This does bring clarity and fairness to the NGS recovery method if taken as a game.

 

Until GC.com comes forward and works with us collectively over which rules are too loosely defined and are taken too much interpretive license with, these spats will likely continue. Those who like to say this is just a game while capitalizing the word game do seem, in my observation, quite happy with the loose definitions and will likely be the most upset if the rules are more clearly officially defined. Those who wish the rules were more clear and have been advocating for this for a long time will have to continue to watch the loose definers have their fun until such a time comes to pass, if it ever does.

 

The only real solution would be for GC.com to step up and help us define these rules a bit better than they are. Some will welcome this and some will flatly hate it, but it is the only real solution.

 

Monopoly is a game, just a game, but it has rules., a more clearly defined set than benchmark hunting does to be sure. Chess would be another fine example. Try loosening the rules at a chess match and watch the fur fly!

 

Again, This is not a flame nor a complaint, just my observations. It is not necessary for anyone to like or dislike, agree or disagree. More importantly, I do not wish to be flamed by those who disagree. If you have your own opinions please feel free to post them and own them as yours without referencing mine. I am hoping to avoid further flame spankings today.

 

Thank you,

 

Rob

Edited by evenfall

Share this post


Link to post
Those who wish the rules were more clear and have been advocating for this for a long time will have to continue to watch the loose definers have their fun until such a time comes to pass, if it ever does. 

 

 

Thank you,

 

Rob

 

I wonder why TPTB set up the NGS forum? :mad:

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Those who wish the rules were more clear and have been advocating for this for a long time will have to continue to watch the loose definers have their fun until such a time comes to pass, if it ever does. 

 

 

Thank you,

 

Rob

 

I wonder why TPTB set up the NGS forum? :mad:

 

John

Again, This is not a flame nor a complaint, just my observations.  It is not necessary for anyone to like or dislike, agree or disagree.  More importantly, I do not wish to be flamed by those who disagree. If you have your own opinions please feel free to post them and own them as yours without referencing mine. I am hoping to avoid further flame spankings today.

 

Thank you,

 

Rob

 

Sorry John,

 

Not taking the Bait. But I hope the forum moderator does. This matter has their attention and I hope they can help resolve it.

 

Best Regards,

 

Rob

Share this post


Link to post

gto girl -

 

I enjoyed reading your post. :lol:

 

I hope you don't let this topic dismay you about us benchmark hunters. The regular posters in the Benchmark Hunting and NGS forums are doing our benchmark searching and reporting the best we can. There are varying perspectives on exactly why we're doing it, but I think if you watched each person on a search you'd see that they were being very careful about what they're doing and making sure to produce logs that make good sense. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
The only real solution would be for GC.com to step up and help us define these rules a bit better than they are. Some will welcome this and some will flatly hate it, but it is the only real solution.

It certainly would be good to have a clearly defined set of rules. I try to work by the 'general consensus'.

But, however, it surprises me how many geocacers do cheat. An example is my webcam. "Photo of you taken by the webcam is required to log this." A full thirty percent of the logs did not have said photo.

As to someone's analogy of the table of bugs at an event. Yes, it is done. If a bug is logged into an event, it can be found and logged from that event. Often by more than one person. Unfortunately, a log of bugs disappear at events. I had one grabbed from me. I had to grab it back. If I had put it in a cache, I would not have been able to log it properly.

 

Rules is good, but they only work if people follow them.

Share this post


Link to post

I have followed the discussions about benchmarking rules and, while I definitely lean towards the side that favors them, I also realize there is nothing we can do to enforce rules on the GC.com site, or even on the NGS site, when it comes down to it.

 

I hunt benchmarks as if it was my job (and I liked that job). It is that simple to me. In order to do a good job I need to take it seriously. I cannot claim a mark that I haven't seen or confirmed as the correct mark, and I won't. I hunt to report to NGS, but enjoy posting here on GC because the atmosphere is less strict and the recoveries can be more personal. I will sometimes leave a note about a mark instead of a recovery, something I cannot do with NGS, nor would I want to. This provides a place marker for a future recovery, or some information for anyone else who may want to research a mark.

 

As for NGS having strict rules, yes, they do, and I try my best to follow them. But I think anyone who has hunted a while realizes that there is no enforcement of the rules, and many of us have seen recoveries of marks that definitely no longer exist, or not found recoveries of marks that we are sure were never hunted for. This applies not only to a certain group of hunters who have been discussed at length here but to more "official" agencies.

 

So like all things in life, there are those who take tasks seriously and do their best, those who do sloppy work and those who cheat. What are the repurcussions? Pretty much nothing except that the next person will hopefully do the right thing.

 

One thing is for sure. I don't let what others do get on my nerves. My hobby is not policing benchmark hunters, it is hunting benchmarks. If I can help someone do a better job, that is great, if not, I just keep hunting!

Share this post


Link to post

I concur with Mloser's comment, (although it is off topic from the opening post).

 

I believe that as benchmarkers, we should constantly strive to achieve NGS standards in our recoveries. Some folks here aren't interested in attaining that level of accountability/accuracy and they may even rebel at the thought of doing so. That's ok with me, to each his own.

 

However, we are slowly evolving towards that goal.

 

- Mitch -

Share this post


Link to post

4lc-

 

I would never log one of those as "found". I didn't even look for the benchmark that a local cacher placed in his lawn for that reason.

 

It's just wrong. There are thousands of benchmarks in the area, most of which have never been reported found here. If you want a benchmark find, go after one of those. (Not speaking to you directly...but to those who log a find on your destroyed benchmarks.)

 

Now everybody plays their own game, and nobody is likely to be confused after reading the logs on these traveling benchmarks...but I'd have the same feeling if people logged "finds" on caches just because they found the description on the Internet.

 

A found benchmark is a very specific thing...and it's not what you have in your backpack.

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting comments on both sides.

 

I find that I have no problems with people logging the "traveling" benchmark because the host came by it legally and immediately logged it as destroyed.

 

But... if people were to log benchmarks that they didn't actually visit, or in the case of structures used as benchmarks that they didn't physically see sometime in their life, then I would be annoyed.

Share this post


Link to post

First, welcome to 4LC! We don't have many women on the Benchmark forums. (Shirley, Zhanna, me--am I missing any?) I saw your name in the logs for one of your benchmarks, but since you haven't used it here yet, I won't mention it.

 

Anyway, my $0.02 worth...when you show folks Cincinnati BM #74, that's exactly what they are seeing, *not* JZ0826. The PID JZ0826 refers to a station that consists of two things: a disk with certain markings on it, in a certain location. If a different disk is put in at the same location (a reset mark), or if the existing disk is moved to a different location, JZ0826 no longer exists, so it can't be logged as found.

 

However, I strongly encourage you to keep taking your benchmarks around to geocaching events. It's a great opportunity to get people excited about benchmark hunting and to educate them about PIDs and what they mean.

 

I hope we'll see you around these forums more!

 

Patty

Edited by Wintertime

Share this post


Link to post

not that this has much to do with the discussion at hand... but.

 

The man that I gave JZ3494 to, passed away this weekend. I have a feeling that we will be doing soemthing special with his benchmark, and it might involve find logs of the sort not approved of.

 

just a minor word of warning.

 

: Do we have a crying smilie?:

Edited by 4leafclover

Share this post


Link to post
First, welcome to 4LC! We don't have many women on the Benchmark forums. (Shirley, Zhanna, me--am I missing any?) I saw your name in the logs for one of your benchmarks, but since you haven't used it here yet, I won't mention it.

 

Anyway, my $0.02 worth...when you show folks Cincinnati BM #74, that's exactly what they are seeing, *not* JZ0826. The PID JZ0826 refers to a station that consists of two things: a disk with certain markings on it, in a certain location. If a different disk is put in at the same location (a reset mark), or if the existing disk is moved to a different location, JZ0826 no longer exists, so it can't be logged as found.

 

However, I strongly encourage you to keep taking your benchmarks around to geocaching events. It's a great opportunity to get people excited about benchmark hunting and to educate them about PIDs and what they mean.

 

I hope we'll see you around these forums more!

 

Patty

which benchmark were you referring to? and that's ok...you can call me Katie.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...