Find Count = Status?

[+Bandit & Magna]

For me it's about finding new places I've never seen before. I have no desire to find every micro under every lightpole base in town. I look for caches I can ride my motorcycle to(dirt or street). I love a good hike in the woods as well. I'm not gonna run out in the middle of the night for a FTF but I will climb whatever it takes to get to one. Numbers mean nothing to me. I do this to relax. If I want to stress out I can go to work. My favorites are multis(the harder the better) so I don't find too many in a days time. I also log my DNFs but most times I will return to the cache and find it without help.

[+beejay&esskay]

I use find count along with other information to form some opinion about a cacher.

 

I know there are some experienced cachers who do not log any finds. I know there are some longtime cachers who log finds for caches not found.

 

All of this, as well as the actual opinion expressed, go into evaluating what I think of an opinion.

[+clearpath]

Then I learned that maybe the 50 cache finder only found caches terrain 5 caches.

Or they do not use a GPS, or they cache in the nude, or they dress-up like batman ... Or they have three wives, a kid, a dog, three fish and a mortgage and can only find time to cache once or twice a year.

Um clearpath-I think the OP asked about what give 'higher status', not alternative status.

not that there's anything wrong with that...

 

Ok so maybe it isn't about attitude, it is about the numbers? I'm getting confused now. It does seem to answer the OP's questions, that if you do have fun geocaching, the more time you spend doing it, the more fun you can have, and the greater the likelihood that your numbers of some kind will be greater than the average joe's.

Okay wimseyguy, hehehe, I see you switched a couple of words around in my post ... you know three wives could be absolutely a great thing ie. imagine how clean the house would be or if they looked like the cast of Desperate Housewives. Or it could be a very very very bad thing ie. the honey-do list would be endless and they could all have the sex appeal of Hillary Clinton ...

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

I am surprised to read that so many people feel that experience confers no status in geocaching, and that high numbers do not indicate accomplishment, or seniority.

 

Experience confers:

Status- No

Accomplishment- Yes

Seniority- Big No!

 

Seniority? What does this mean? Do experienced cachers get extra vacation time? Do they get to go to the front of the line at the buffet at the monthly Geo-eat & greet? How does this "seniority" get observed in real-life terms?

 

Find count is one component of a geocacher's resume that I take into consideration when forming an opinion about his or her standing in the game.

 

Why would one HAVE a "geocacher's resume" and why do we need to form an opinion about their standing?

My points are this: If this were Fantasy Caching (think Fantasy Football), and I was assembling some sort of virtual caching team, I'd have a need to study other player's find counts. If I was hiring for my new company, Cachers-R-Us, I'd have a need for you to submit your geocaching resume. For both of these functions, it would be necessary for me to make some sort of comparison between multiple candidates regarding their skill level.

 

But I'm not.

There is no need for me to create any standings. There's no need for me to evaluate between cachers. Again, why should I "form an opinion about their standing?" if there's nothing to be done with these rankings once I'm finished? It's a useless endeavour.

I personally think it's none of my business to form any opinion about someone based on a geocaching stats page. I'll reserve my opinions for people I actually MEET.

[+Snoogans]

 

Q: Well then, how do you measure yourself against other cachers?

 

A: By height....

 

BTW I'm six feet tall. If you are taller than me I'll look up to you.

Edited December 3, 2005 by Snoogans

[+Airmapper]

I'm 6'4", so there fore I look down on most people.

[+Bandit & Magna]

Hmm, I'm 6'4" as well. I guess we see eye to eye then.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Numbers aren't everything.

 

If a low number cacher couldn't find a cache I placed I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. They might not have seen enough hides like that to know where to look.

 

If a high number cacher couldn't find a cache I placed I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. It's easy to "over think" a hide because you have experience. I've done it many times (unable to find caches lots of others - even n00bs - have found.

[+AuntieWeasel]

There is no need for me to create any standings. There's no need for me to evaluate between cachers. Again, why should I "form an opinion about their standing?" if there's nothing to be done with these rankings once I'm finished? It's a useless endeavour.

Okay, now wave your pincers and say, "does not compute, Will Robinson."

 

People who participate in an activity are curious about other people who also enjoy that activity. Human beings constantly compare themselves to each another in all sorts of ways for all sorts of reasons, many of which are values-neutral, benign or even downright healthy. People who assert that they never evaluate the accomplishments a fellow creature unless they are sizing him up for a job opening are...ahhh...I will forbear to stretch the forum guidelines any further. Let me just say I don't believe you.

[+badlands]

Numbers aren't everything.

 

If a low number cacher couldn't find a cache I placed I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. They might not have seen enough hides like that to know where to look.

 

If a high number cacher couldn't find a cache I placed I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. It's easy to "over think" a hide because you have experience. I've done it many times (unable to find caches lots of others - even n00bs - have found.

 

Funny but oh so true

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

People who assert that they never evaluate the accomplishments a fellow creature unless they are sizing him up for a job opening are...ahhh...I will forbear to stretch the forum guidelines any further.

 

I never said that I wouldn't or couldn't recognize an accomplishment. I even think a previous post of mind said that experience does confer accomplishment, just not a standing or seniority. I was referring to "standings" and the need for a "geocaching resume", hence my analogy to a hiring situation.

 

Let me just say I don't believe you.

 

See this is one of those situations where I would reserve judgement on someone until I met them. See, if someone looked me in the eye and said they don't believe something I said, I might assume they were calling me a liar, and be offended.

 

Here, I just look at like colorful dialogue.

[+Yamahammer]

Let me just say I don't believe you.

 

See, if someone looked me in the eye and said they don't believe something I said, I might assume they were calling me a liar, and be offended.

GHH, Is someone (else) questioning your character again???

 

To Aunt Weasel, GHH is a honorable guy. (YM doesn't trust him - ) ... I do think the questioning of a man/ladies character on an observation they made is a little out of line. Maybe it's just me. Maybe not. But unless they have done something to you or about you, why question what his opinions and observations are? Why not give them the benefit of a doubt? But if you have those impressions of GHH and you don't think he has creditability, so be it.

 

Back On Topic: I honestly don't look at the numbers of another or base their opinions on the numbers. I do like being competitive with some locals here. I use them as my next goal. I want to see who's just ahead of me and then go get them. My game - my way. But I don't look down on anyone when they are below my numbers. I don't make fun of them or ignore them. Circumstances may prevent some from caching as much as they want to. Things like family, work, church activities get in the way. ... Here in East Texas, we don't have a target rich environment nor are there that many cachers in comparison to a metro area. Does that make us less a cacher v. the rest of the GC world? I don't think so.

[+AuntieWeasel]

To Aunt Weasel, GHH is a honorable guy. (YM doesn't trust him -  ) ... I do think the questioning of a man/ladies character on an observation they made is a little out of line. Maybe it's just me. Maybe not. But unless they have done something to you or about you, why question what his opinions and observations are? Why not give them the benefit of a doubt?

If someone makes an assertion that is not credible, questioning the person's credibility is the kindest explanation. All other probabilities are even less flattering. Seriously, where did this "you have to know somebody to judge if what he says is crap" thing come from? Are they sprinkling it on cornflakes?

 

This is why I like working with engineers. If they're wrong, the bridge falls down and people die. So they tend to cling to substantive truths. They don't say things like "Phil is a really good guy and he's been a friend of mine for years. If he thinks pi=3.2, who are you to judge?"

[Tahosa and Sons]

THE PARADIGM PARODY

 

Some Cachers make things happen

 

Some Cachers think they make things happen

 

Some Cachers watch things happen

 

Some Cachers wonder what happened

 

Some Cachers don't know anything happened at all

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

If someone makes an assertion that is not credible, questioning the person's credibility is the kindest explanation. All other probabilities are even less flattering. Seriously, where did this "you have to know somebody to judge if what he says is crap" thing come from? Are they sprinkling it on cornflakes?

 

Judging by many of the posts here, they find my OPINION (regarding the ACTUAL thread topic of finds=status) pretty credible indeed.

 

So they tend to cling to substantive truths.

 

We're not talking physics here. This is ALL opinion, not substantive truths.

I don't recognize cacher seniority, or confer rank upon cachers, or convey any other judgment on cachers according to their numbers. I recognize a person who has found 1,000+ caches as having quite an achievement. Call my opinion crap. Say you don't believe me.

 

Have a coke and a smile.

 

I'll leave the rest up to the mods.

[+Yamahammer]

So are you saying, "In God we trust. In all else, show me data? (Demming)" - This applies to work and stats, not a game or to apply to a personality or character. To say that nothing else matters except the bridge stands or falls??? It was just an opinion. Nothing else. You work WITH engineers. You aren't one. ... I don't know you. Based on your comments, do you want me or anyone else to make a judgement and maybe label you? ... You didn't agree with GHH. So what? You "don't believe" him, so you bring to bare his character, become confrontational??? On Line? Nice.

 

On Topic: If I lived in say, Dallas. I could amass 300 finds in a month or less. I live in a rural area and it's taken me 7 months to reach that number. So, my opinions, expertise or creditability doesn't mean a thing unless I get 3x that much in the same amount of time? That makes me less than a cacher who has been caching the same amount of time with more finds cuz they live in target rich environment and I don't? - based on the numbers.

[+AuntieWeasel]

Judging by many of the posts here, they find my OPINION (regarding the ACTUAL thread topic of finds=status) pretty credible indeed.

Consensus is not the same as truth. Millions of people often agree on things that are wholly incorrect.

[+Snoogans]

So are you saying, "In God we trust. In all else, show me data? (Demming)" -

Lighten up. It's an Auntie thing....

 

[+AuntieWeasel]

Based on your comments, do you want me or anyone else to make a judgement and maybe label you?   

Uh...well, yeah. My comments say a great deal about me. A great deal and that more accurate than, say, what my face or my figure, over which I have some but limited control, says about me.

 

Why wouldn't you judge me based on what I say? How else are you going to judge me?

 

Seriously, if you don't judge people based on the stuff that comes out of their mouths, how do you navigate the world? Would you buy a used car from a traffic cone?

[+Yamahammer]

Snoog, Sorry about that. I'm not about 'enabling' someone just 'cuz' they do it all of the time.

 

Besides, I've looked at her 'numba's' and GHH and myself both have more finds. Her opinion doesn't matta! She doesn't have the data to support an authoritive theory in this matter.

[+Snoogans]

Would you buy a used car from a traffic cone?

OK. Ya gotta admit that you'd be less suspicious of a traffic cone than a used car salesman.

 

What was this thread about again....

[+Yamahammer]

Okay, now we're flaming used car salesmen. Next it'll be lawyers, politicians and district managers of food chain resturants. Wait. We just flamed food chain district managers. ... Flame thrower off.

[+AuntieWeasel]

Snoog, Sorry about that. I'm not about 'enabling' someone just 'cuz' they do it all of the time.

Enabling? Dear lord. Somebody went to the Kellog's School of Pop Psychology this morning.

 

Besides, I've looked at her 'numba's' and GHH and myself both have more finds. Her opinion doesn't matta! She doesn't have the data to support an authoritive theory in this matter. 

If we were standing at a crossroad debating which trail was correct, I would certainly find that datum significant. Wouldn't you?

[+Yamahammer]

Did you say something???

 

Numbers really don't have a lot to do with me going one way or another. I have a GPS'r and I know how to use it!

[+Logscaler and Red]

When you  talk to  a cacher, does thier find/hide count factor in to conversations about caching and how much weight you give thier opinion?

 

Yes, of course it will, no matter what you think or say.

 

You will always compare caches that both parties have found and your related experince at those caches. How fast you found it, how many times you looked for it, etc. Maybe you will not voice it but you will think about it

 

When we are talking head to head or e-mail chatting about caching I could care less about how many they have found but how long they have been caching, where they have been cacheing and WHICH caches they have found.

 

Another major item I look for in a cacher is the experience that people have AFTER said cacher has been to an area. I keep hearing complaints about a cacher with a high find count who is getting a lot of FTF's but in the process is literally destroying the area in doing so. This person also hides only micro caches to try and keep some sort of hide/find ratio. No respect from me.

 

But when I talk about a cacher, their caching experience always comes into play. What is the fastest way for you to rate cachers? Finds. You want to talk Jeremy into putting an average D/T box into their stats? Have at it.

 

If your heading into a new area to cache, you will read logs for caches in that area. How will you base your cache hunt? Experience of the cacher who have DNF'ed the caches. The log's will read something like "found it" by a flock of people but the last log was a DNF by someone with 4 digit finds. Skip it or figure they don't know what they are doing? You will skip it is my bet.

 

Now, let's flip the coin a little.

 

I have a high find count. I do not exploit it. I even try to shy away from it and not let it be known. I have logged several DNF's and the cache owner disables the cache with a statement like " if logscaler can't find it, it is not there." Do you know how much pressure that puts on us? Lot's. Yes, on several of the caches, the caches where still there and I just did not find it.

 

It seems like a lot of people "assign" a high status to cacher with a high count. At a lot of events, our cache count is announced like we are Royalty or something. If the count matters so little, why do so many people track other people's finds??? End of small rant.

 

Logscaler.

[+flask]

Snoog, Sorry about that. I'm not about 'enabling' someone just 'cuz' they do it all of the time.

Enabling? Dear lord. Somebody went to the Kellog's School of Pop Psychology this morning.

 

Besides, I've looked at her 'numba's' and GHH and myself both have more finds. Her opinion doesn't matta! She doesn't have the data to support an authoritive theory in this matter. 

If we were standing at a crossroad debating which trail was correct, I would certainly find that datum significant. Wouldn't you?

...and they think i'm too dismissive.

 

oh, babycackes, i LOVE you when you're on a roll.

 

can you turn that up just a little? please?

 

i did not go off on a rant today. not even one.

 

can i live vicariously off of yours? pleeeeze? pleeeeze?

 

what are you doing thursday? lunch maybe?

[+Renegade Knight]

It depends. If a 1500 finds person can't find one of my harder caches I'll likely check on it. If a newbie can't I'll chalk it up to inexperience.

 

On the other hand, like SepticTank says. Bull is bull and if the person at 1500 finds is a windbag and full of their own self importance, I'll go hang out with the noobs and drink beer.

 

Edit:

 

On second thought, the things that will give a cacher status in my eyes, are their hides, their willingness to help noobs, and their logs. 20,000 THX's are not as good as 3 very nice logs.

 

A few get some status by posting in these forums.

 

Second Edit:

 

The first two cachers that had any kind of status to me were the person who hid the first cache I found (now moved on from geocaching), and LogScaler & Red. I had driven a nasty switchback road in the middle of nowhere and gotten skunked. That was a 3 hour drive to nowhere and 3 back in a place that I would never need to go again.

 

LogScaler reads my DNF, happens to be in the area from Oregon, checks on the cache, confirmed my DNF and replaces it for the Absentee owners who had placed it while on vacation (before there was such a thing as a vacation cache). They drove farther than we did to check someone elses cache. That was a deed well done in my eyes. I can't tell you how many caches Logscaler has but if they never did another one beyond that, I'd still make time to say hello at a crowded event.

Edited December 4, 2005 by Renegade Knight

[+AuntieWeasel]

can you turn that up just a little? please?

Shhhhh. Not here. There are eyes everywhere! If you get too exuberant, they throw a net over your head and you get a short, refreshing vacation from the forums.

[+reveritt]

...

 

can i live vicariously off of yours? pleeeeze? pleeeeze?...

Ditto for me. I was actually in this debate at one point. Now it's tough to get a word in edgewise.

 

The great thing about having Auntie cut loose is that I can say whatever knuckleheaded thing that comes to mind, and likely as not, nobody will pay any attention.

 

But seriously now--I don't think any of us seriously think that a high find count by itself is sufficient to confer any elevated status. There are many other things to look at. Nonetheless, your find count (assuming it is legitimate) is indicative of your experience, and is not likely to be completely ignored by any intelligent person.

 

There is no field of human endeavor (with the possible exception of flying kamikaze missions) where extensive experience does not contriibute to elevated status among colleagues.

[+dougsmiley]

This topic took off..

 

I'm a total newbie, still waiting for that dadgum GPS to arrive. For me, it's less about the numbers and more about getting outdoors and doing something. Sure, I recognize the accomplishment of a lot of finds, but I would tend to respect someone with 30 awesome, well maintained hides and only 200 finds more than someone with 2000 finds and none or very little hides.

 

A good hider can't find as many to begin with. He (or she) has to go and check up on all their caches during time that could be spent finding others. I respect that kind of dedication to the sport.

 

Do I base my opinon of anyone on numbers, no. I see someone with 0 the same as someone with 1000. Sure, I recognixe their acheivment, but it doesn't mean they're a great person.

[+altosaxplayer]

I agree. Very touchy topic. Around here, we have a few local guys that have reached the 1k mark and are on their way to 2. I would value what they would have to say about a particular cache or a method than I would someone with 20-100 finds.

[+Logscaler and Red]

Very touchy topic.

Not touchy at all.

 

Just agree with anyone with more then 900 postings and you will get along just fine!

 

Logscaler

[+flask]

Very touchy topic.

Not touchy at all.

 

Just agree with anyone with more then 900 postings and you will get along just fine!

 

Logscaler

*snort*

 

giggle

[+clearpath]

A high number of cache finds has EARNED the cacher respect (status) in this game, how could it not??? Unless you live on a commune someplace in Oregon, just about everything you do in the good ol USA is governed by some sort of hierarchy (thats a hard word to spell). Tenure, years of service, years of schooling, number of bullet holes, etc. Everything has a yardstick for measuring status. Take these forums for example, everyone knows that Briansnat is next to Godliness, plays a mean shortstop and can pound microbrews while listening to punk rock better than any human ...

[+GRANPA ALEX]

Personally, my count attainment is a measure of success I have acheived in meeting MY targets and they have nothing to do with anyone else.

 

THAT is exactly the way I feel about everyone else's count - it is a measure of the time they have to play, the priorities they set in their lives and goals they set - nothing to do with me.

 

I once thought that experience even equated to greater ease in finding a cache BUT I became dismayed . . . newbies finding caches with ease on which experienced cachers had DNF logs AND going out with high-number guys who struggle the same as I do with finds.

 

It is simply, for the most part, one cache a time for everyone and we are all equal, except for time in the game and time to spend in the game. That is my view & I am sticking to it!

[+TeamVilla5]

Well, without checking your numbers or anything, I can't be 100% positive, but I am at least 99% sure that if I live life right I hope to be reincarnated as flask or Auntie Weasel... numbers, hell... give me a good articulate opinion anyday!

 

On a side note, I'm not sure I'd like to BE criminal, but I sure enjoy his vim and vigorous banter, not to mention those unGAWDly gorgeous eyes! OH! I almost forgot his appealing lack of respect for "authority."

 

Happy Cachin'!

Lori V.

TeamVilla5

[+TeamVilla5]

Sorry for above hijack... back to your argument... I'm going caching!!!

 

Spread the love!

Lori V.

TeamVilla5

[+clearpath]

On a side note, I'm not sure I'd like to BE criminal, but I sure enjoy his vim and vigorous banter, not to mention those unGAWDly gorgeous eyes!

Aye, yie, yie ...

[+flask]

Well, without checking your numbers or anything, I can't be 100% positive, but I am at least 99% sure that if I live life right I hope to be reincarnated as flask or Auntie Weasel... numbers, hell... give me a good articulate opinion anyday!

 

On a side note, I'm not sure I'd like to BE criminal, but I sure enjoy his vim and vigorous banter, not to mention those unGAWDly gorgeous eyes! OH! I almost forgot his appealing lack of respect for "authority."

 

Happy Cachin'!

Lori V.

TeamVilla5

that's sweet of you to say.

 

opinions i have aplenty.

 

unfortunately (for me), clean living dose not earn you a ride as me or anything like me.

 

if i believed in a harsh retributive deity or a stict law of karma, i'd have to wonder what i did to deserve this.

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

Careful grandpa, opinions like that might get you branded a liar around here!

 

You've explained more clearly the point I was trying to make earlier.

 

I don't have my head in the sand. I can recognize elevated status in many areas of society. Peyton Manning clearly has a higher status than other pro Quarterbacks. Tony Stewart has a high status amonst race car drivers. Warren Buffet= high status amongst investors.

 

I just don't see geocaching the same way.

 

Some of the best caches I've ever found were hidden by cachers with 5 or less hides. Some of the worst I've found (or DNF because of poor maintenance) were hidden by very experienced cachers. I've seen rookies find caches that vets DNF'd many times. My own example is a particular cache that I attempted 3 times and could not find. Was sure it was gone. Then a cacher with 11 finds under his belt logged a "Thanks for the simple cache! TNLNSL" (Went back and found it on the 4th try! )

 

It is simply, for the most part, one cache a time for everyone and we are all equal, except for time in the game and time to spend in the game.

 

Like you say, for the most part. Of course some experience is gonna help you recognize a UPS a little quicker. You'll have a little better feel for how a hider thinks. As a hider, you'll learn film cannisters and Gladware always leak, and you need a more water-proof container. But you learn all this pretty quickly, and once you know these basics, I believe everyone is about on the same "status" level.

 

Like Grandpa Alex said, when I see big numbers, the first thing I think of is the amount of time spent on the game. That's not taking anything away from the accomplishment! It represents a lot of fun playing this game we all love, which is something I'm pretty envious of. When I hit 1,000 finds, it will mean I've had fun 728 more times than I already have! I'll STILL have a hard time finding magnetic key holders on metal bridges!

[+reveritt]

A high number of cache finds has EARNED the cacher respect (status) in this game, how could it not??? ...

Thank God...a sane voice rises above the din.

[+reveritt]

... I am at least 99% sure that if I live life right I hope to be reincarnated as flask or Auntie Weasel...

Not me--I want to be reincarnated as myself--I want a "do-over"!

[+flask]

A high number of cache finds has EARNED the cacher respect (status) in this game, how could it not???  ...

if my find count (and currently i am celebrating my 52d find in my grand tradition of celebrating all those divisible by 3) is what gives me respect in your eyes, i am not interested in having your respect.

 

if the quality of my play with regard to those 52 finds is what garners your respect, i will be honored to accept it.

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

if the quality of my play with regard to those 52 finds is what garners your respect, i will be honored to accept it.

 

well said!

[+clearpath]

if my find count (and currently i am celebrating my 52d find in my grand tradition of celebrating all those divisible by 3) is what gives me respect in your eyes, i am not interested in having your respect.

 

if the quality of my play with regard to those 52 finds is what garners your respect, i will be honored to accept it.

flask, I'm one of your biggest fans ... that being said, fair or unfair, our society has always placed a premium on excessive results (remember Michael Milken ... okay, bad example). I'm not saying your 52 finds is without merit. I am, however, saying that someone with 5,000 finds is going to be placed higher on the pedestal than someone with 283 finds (my total to date) ... it may not be right, but how many things are in this world?

 

The cachers with 5,000 finds, right or wrong, has decided to invest their time and energy to finding a lot of caches. They have earned the respect that they deserve if for no other reason than the time they have decided to invest.

 

Hell, I applaud them for having that much time to do anything let alone go caching ... However, I equally applaud your 52 quality caches, I really do (and thats not just because I'm sweet on you )

[+flask]

However, I equally applaud your 52 quality caches, I really do (and thats not just because I'm sweet on you )

awww, that's sweet.

 

but what if 20 of 'em are guradrail micros?

 

perhaps the merit of my play with regard to them is that i was gracious and thankful that someone provided me with a pleasant outing whether to a parking lot or a park?

 

but never mind. i have now moved on and i am accepting congratulations for having found (in the divisible by three celebrations) cache number 188.

 

does my opinion carry more weight now? am i more respectable? will i be more respectable next week when i celebrate 502?

[CoyoteRed]

A high number of cache finds has EARNED the cacher respect (status) in this game

Only by a sub-set of cachers--those who put a simple number above many other attributes.

 

how could it not???

Easy. When folks recognize some cachers live in areas where you can easily get well into the two digits of caches everyday for days on end. It would take weeks, if not months, to put a dent in their Nearest Page.

 

While others live in very cache poor areas and the same effort as the above cacher might net them a tenth of the number.

 

Does that mean the cache poor cacher has less status than the cache rich one? Apparently is does in some folks eyes. Not mine.

 

A very good reason why numbers can't equate to status is the amount of effort of find the same number of cache can vary widely from region to region. That's not to mention life styles, disposable income, and more.

[+flask]

yesterday i did this cache.

 

if you have found it whether it is you first find or your thousandth find, you have my respect and what's more, my full attention.

[Sadie]

Even the President of the USA has status with respect to achievement. Many do not like, lack respect for, and acuse him of wrong doing. But, he has status. More status that the Mayor of a small town. Respect or otherwise liking the prson is an entirely different issue.

[+Snoogans]

Even the President of the USA has status with respect to achievement. Many do not like, lack respect for, and acuse him of wrong doing. But, he has status. More status that the Mayor of a small town. Respect or otherwise liking the prson is an entirely different issue.

Many of the previous true observations about geocaching status make that an Apples & Oranges argument.