Photos (mainly Of The Spoiler Type)

March 13, 2006

I received an email from a fellow geocacher, one who placed a number of caches, some of which I found recently. It basically stated I should be careful about what I post for photos, since some could be considered (and I know for a fact, are) spoilers. It was my understanding that there is a warning above the logs about possible spoilers being included in the logs, and that photos have to be clicked on to be viewed from the main page for each site.

I know some people really like to hunt for the caches, especially unusual ones. I, at this point (relatively new) prefer to find them relatively easily - I find the fun in getting there (as I said, at this point - that may change), and would welcome, in some cases, the ability to look at a photo of the general area or the cache itself, rather than driving a half hour somewhere, hunting around for half an hour to an hour, and going home with a DNF.

Since the warning is there, and no one is forced to look at any photos, is it the general opinion that spoiler photos shouldn't be posted at all, or is the warning, and extra clicks to see them, sufficient? I'm just looking for opinions as a newbie.

7.2k · March 13, 2006

Since the warning is there, and no one is forced to look at any photos, is it the general opinion that spoiler photos shouldn't be posted at all, or is the warning, and extra clicks to see them, sufficient? I'm just looking for opinions as a newbie.

There are at least two angles of the issue. One is from the finders' point of view where, as you mention, they might want the option of viewing spoiler pictures. Sure, you can not look at them.

The other angle is from the owner's point of view. He might think he would like to keep the cache difficult to find. Depending on the nature of the spoiler it could drop the difficulty to a 1 star. If the owner wants all finders to work for the find, then spoilers should not be posted.

Respect the owner's wishes of the level of information you attach to a log.

March 13, 2006

Since the warning is there, and no one is forced to look at any photos, is it the general opinion that spoiler photos shouldn't be posted at all, or is the warning, and extra clicks to see them, sufficient? I'm just looking for opinions as a newbie.

There are at least two angles of the issue. One is from the finders' point of view where, as you mention, they might want the option of viewing spoiler pictures. Sure, you can not look at them.

The other angle is from the owner's point of view. He might think he would like to keep the cache difficult to find. Depending on the nature of the spoiler it could drop the difficulty to a 1 star. If the owner wants all finders to work for the find, then spoilers should not be posted.

Respect the owner's wishes of the level of information you attach to a log.

I haven't yet seen anything in any of the descriptions that says "do not post spoilers" - I can see ones where they say "email me for a hint after logging a DNF", which I could translate to mean the same thing, but otherwise, most don't seem to have this specific information.

7.2k · March 13, 2006

Well, that warning on the cache page about spoilers that you mentioned has a link to the definition of the term.

Say your were reading a movie site where folks could leave their impressions of the movies they saw. Some movies have some pretty good twists. If someone blabbed the ending of a good movie the it could be spoiled for you. Same here.

The warning is to alert folks that there may be spoilers in the logs. It's not an invitation to post spoilers.

March 13, 2006

Well, that warning on the cache page about spoilers that you mentioned has a link to the definition of the term.

Say your were reading a movie site where folks could leave their impressions of the movies they saw. Some movies have some pretty good twists. If someone blabbed the ending of a good movie the it could be spoiled for you. Same here.

The warning is to alert folks that there may be spoilers in the logs. It's not an invitation to post spoilers.

I guess I was viewing it that since you had to click 1-2 more times, intentionally picking the things that were spoilers, it wasn't making them publically available or right out there for everyone to see - you had to work to get them. I guess it is more my impression of the idea - I'm looking for more information, which isn't always there, where someone else may want to do all of the extra hunting.

7.2k · March 13, 2006

...you had to work to get them.

Yeah, a couple of extra clicks in order to turn a 3.5 star cache into a 1 star. Yep, that's incentive for a cache owner to place harder caches. Uh-huh.

Let's put it this way. If a spoiler comes across one of our caches, we ask for it to be removed. Depending on the spoiler, we might delete it and then email the logger.

Again, respect the cache owner's wishes when it comes to spoilers.

March 13, 2006

...you had to work to get them.

Yeah, a couple of extra clicks in order to turn a 3.5 star cache into a 1 star. Yep, that's incentive for a cache owner to place harder caches. Uh-huh.

Let's put it this way. If a spoiler comes across one of our caches, we ask for it to be removed. Depending on the spoiler, we might delete it and then email the logger.

Again, respect the cache owner's wishes when it comes to spoilers.

Then, as I said earlier, how do we know what the wishes are? Do we have to assume they don't want the information out there, or is there some way to tell? Otherwise, there's no point in taking pictures at all, as far as I can see, unless it's just pictures of me standing there, but without anything related to the cache, like location, placement, or a picture of the cache itself.

Who rates them, anyway? Doesn't the cache owner?

Edited March 13, 2006 by drinkeii

3.3k · March 13, 2006

I haven't yet seen anything in any of the descriptions that says "do not post spoilers" - I can see ones where they say "email me for a hint after logging a DNF", which I could translate to mean the same thing, but otherwise, most don't seem to have this specific information.

On many of my clever puzzle or clever hide caches. I post the following, Any spoilers, encrypted or not, will be promptly deleted..

guess I was viewing it that since you had to click 1-2 more times, intentionally picking the things that were spoilers, it wasn't making them publically available or right out there for everyone to see - you had to work to get them. I guess it is more my impression of the idea - I'm looking for more information, which isn't always there, where someone else may want to do all of the extra hunting.

The problem with this line of thinking, is that plenty of cachers like to view the gallery, to see the scenery. They don't always know that your picure is a bonofide spoiler. This can and may detract from their fun. I prefer to visit a difficult cache, knowing little about the actual cache. Finding the "unknown container" is a fun challenge for me.

If I show up and already know what I'm looking for, it detracts from my fun.

7.2k · March 13, 2006

Then, as I said earlier...

Now, it just sounds like you're trying to justify your error.

The word "spoiler" should give you a bit of indication it is a bad thing. You know, "spoiler." Why would anyone thing a spoiler is a good thing? If it's not a good thing, then why thing it's a normal thing? If it's not a normal thing, why should a cache owner go out of his way to warn against something that is not normal?

Besides, using your logic then, where spoilers are okay, where's the "it's okay to post spoilers in the logs" in the description?

3k · March 13, 2006

Then, as I said earlier, how do we know what the wishes are? Do we have to assume they don't want the information out there, or is there some way to tell?

I think it's best to just always assume cache owners don't want spoiler pictures posted, even if they don't specifically say so. If they wanted spoiler pictures on their cache page, they would have posted some.

Otherwise, there's no point in taking pictures at all, as far as I can see, unless it's just pictures of me standing there, but without anything related to the cache, like location, placement, or a picture of the cache itself.

There are plenty of ways to take interesting pictures without giving anything away. People do it all the time.

March 13, 2006

Then, as I said earlier...

Now, it just sounds like you're trying to justify your error.

The word "spoiler" should give you a bit of indication it is a bad thing. You know, "spoiler." Why would anyone thing a spoiler is a good thing? If it's not a good thing, then why thing it's a normal thing? If it's not a normal thing, why should a cache owner go out of his way to warn against something that is not normal?

Besides, using your logic then, where spoilers are okay, where's the "it's okay to post spoilers in the logs" in the description?

I read the warning that spoilers may be in the logs as the "ok to post spoilers, you have been warned". Seems to make sense to me. Otherwise, it should be stated "DO NOT POST SPOILERS". Besides, what is considered a spoiler? When a person posts their cache and gives a descripion of the cache, or specific directions to where it is, isn't that considered a spoiler too, if everyone wants to hunt for everything?

I guess I tend to read things very logically, and sometimes not the way they are intended.

9.2k · March 13, 2006

Kit Fox beat me to my first point. It is not a matter of clicking several times in order to see a spoiler photo intentionally; anyone viewing the gallery for the cache will see them. I frequently view galleries because I enjoy looking at the vast collection of photos on the site. This is especially true locally; I first get to know a new local geocacher by seeing their pictures.

CR beat me to my second point. The cache owner is basically king of their cache listing, provided the cache listing meets the site's guidelines. If they don't like the words in your log, or the photo you attached, they can delete your entire log. Normally an owner will allow you to re-log without the spoiler text or spoiler photo. If this ever happened to me, I would accept that invitation rather than arguing about it, because the owner's other option is to not allow a re-log.

March 13, 2006

If you would like to take pictures and post them under your personal profile section .... that would be OK.

Otherwise it is considered bad form to post any pictures on the cache page that give away any more information than the owner of the cache wants disclosed.

When a cache owner wants to get really evil they may often post pictures that have no relationship to the actual cache to throw you completely off track ..... true spoilers! ImpalaBob

3.9k · March 13, 2006

I received an email regarding a cache I found well over a year ago. This was a super easy cache. It was hidden in an opening of a tree, nothing tricky you knew where it was from 100 feet away. I got an email from the cache owner a couple of weeks ago kindly asking me to delete the picture. I didn't see the point but then again, I didn't have to. It's not my cache. He thought the picture took away from the overall experience of hunting his cache and I respected that. Then of course I went back to the cache site and posted signs everywhere with arrows saying: The Cache is Here! The Cache is Here!

March 13, 2006

I received an email regarding a cache I found well over a year ago. This was a super easy cache. It was hidden in an opening of a tree, nothing tricky you knew where it was from 100 feet away. I got an email from the cache owner a couple of weeks ago kindly asking me to delete the picture. I didn't see the point but then again, I didn't have to. It's not my cache. He thought the picture took away from the overall experience of hunting his cache and I respected that. Then of course I went back to the cache site and posted signs everywhere with arrows saying: The Cache is Here! The Cache is Here!

I'm assuming that the last part is sarcastic. I see the point. Guess I'll post stuff in my profile rather than on the pages themselves. Thanks for the info.

4.5k · March 13, 2006

The way i see it, the cache owner put out the cache and published it the way he/she wants it to be. If he didn't include spoiler hints or pictures, then it's probably likely that he doesn't want anyone else posting them on his cache page! :anicute:

I know some people really like to hunt for the caches, especially unusual ones. I, at this point (relatively new) prefer to find them relatively easily - I find the fun in getting there (as I said, at this point - that may change), and would welcome, in some cases, the ability to look at a photo of the general area or the cache itself, rather than driving a half hour somewhere, hunting around for half an hour to an hour, and going home with a DNF.

As with alot of things in life, geocaching can seem a bit daunting at first even when you're looking for less difficult caches. Early on, the hints and spoilers can save the day in some cases but after becoming more experienced you'll most likely want more of a challenge. Finding caches without the aid of spoilers will most likely make it more fun for you. It definitely gets easier as you go... :anicute:

Oh, and DNFs are part of the game!

3.9k · March 13, 2006

I received an email regarding a cache I found well over a year ago. This was a super easy cache. It was hidden in an opening of a tree, nothing tricky you knew where it was from 100 feet away. I got an email from the cache owner a couple of weeks ago kindly asking me to delete the picture. I didn't see the point but then again, I didn't have to. It's not my cache. He thought the picture took away from the overall experience of hunting his cache and I respected that. Then of course I went back to the cache site and posted signs everywhere with arrows saying: The Cache is Here! The Cache is Here!

I'm assuming that the last part is sarcastic. I see the point. Guess I'll post stuff in my profile rather than on the pages themselves. Thanks for the info.

Here's another option: If you think your photo would be considered a spoiler, email it to the cache owner and ask him, "Would you mind if I post this picture." I've done that before and most of the time they'll say No Problem and they always appreciate that I asked.

Edited March 13, 2006 by JMBella

March 13, 2006

I received an email regarding a cache I found well over a year ago. This was a super easy cache. It was hidden in an opening of a tree, nothing tricky you knew where it was from 100 feet away. I got an email from the cache owner a couple of weeks ago kindly asking me to delete the picture. I didn't see the point but then again, I didn't have to. It's not my cache. He thought the picture took away from the overall experience of hunting his cache and I respected that. Then of course I went back to the cache site and posted signs everywhere with arrows saying: The Cache is Here! The Cache is Here!

I'm assuming that the last part is sarcastic. I see the point. Guess I'll post stuff in my profile rather than on the pages themselves. Thanks for the info.

Here's another option: If you think your photo would be considered a spoiler, email it to the cache owner and ask him, "Would you mind if I post this picture." I've done that before and most of the time they'll say No Problem and they always appreciate that I asked.

That seems like an awful lot of extra work to post a picture or two. Not really worth it - I'll come up with something else, if I intend to take any more pictures.

Thanks again for the help, everyone!

Edited March 13, 2006 by drinkeii

2k · March 13, 2006

I have a cache where I have posted the spoiler photos myself. I figured since the terrain is rated a 4.5 the cacher surely wanted to make sure he or she found the cache once they got there. (Natural Rock Arch View). One of the first finders hiked the 3.5 miles and made the 700' climb on to find that they had left their spoiler photos back at their car. They then hiked back to the car got the photos and hiked back up to the cache. That's dedication.

:rolleyes:

7.2k · March 14, 2006

I read the warning that spoilers may be in the logs as the "ok to post spoilers, you have been warned". Seems to make sense to me. Otherwise, it should be stated "DO NOT POST SPOILERS". Besides, what is considered a spoiler?

I highlighted the reason what the page doesn't say "Do not post spoilers." Folks want to argue everything down to the most finite detail. So, what is a spoiler? It could be different things to different folks. Something a cache owner doesn't consider a spoiler a hunter could very well think it is. That's why is shouldn't say "don't post spoilers."

The important thing is you thought it a spoiler.

March 14, 2006

"I know some people really like to hunt for the caches, especially unusual ones. I, at this point (relatively new) prefer to find them relatively easily - I find the fun in getting there (as I said, at this point - that may change), and would welcome, in some cases, the ability to look at a photo of the general area or the cache itself, rather than driving a half hour somewhere, hunting around for half an hour to an hour, and going home with a DNF."

On the other hand, why drive all that distance if you can look at a picture and know exact;u where it is instantly. People gamble not because they win every time, but because there is the chance of winning.

I would vote for not posting picture spoilers, unless there is some way to call them up on demand rather than have them viewed when scanning previous posts.

2.3k · March 14, 2006

Reply from "cache test dummies"is the rule I would follow. Some of my hides have spoilers,some not.I have advised this in my description of the caches. Simple!

March 14, 2006

Spoilers can effect micros, which I hate doing, in that they would surely make the hiding spot more "visible" in a photo. I've hidden caches in places with a multitude of hiding spots and actually post a picture to make it a tad easier, on the environment and to find.

I can't believe everyone really checks all the photos posted on a cache page unless their already having problems finding it. Worrying about spoilers seems pretty lame when all you need to do is follow the FOOTPRINTS in the snow or mud! I suppose paved city caching in parks might be a tad different. YMMV.

Photos (mainly Of The Spoiler Type)

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation