Jump to content

What’s Going On Here? 2


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Well, I have no idea what you are talking about, but they way that everyone loves to debate things in here, I'll sit back and watch.

 

<_<

 

Agreed. So far I've learned that people who log pocket caches are Liars, Cheaters, Racists, Pedophiles, take steroids and that Geocaching would be better off without them. This community has started to look like neighboring armed encampments. I can't wait to see what happens next. <_<

Link to comment

We've covered pocket caches and multi logging events. So what does everyone think of "retirement cards"?? <_<

um, not 100% sure I know what they are, but I've gotten the impression that they are similar to pocket caches -- logging finds on archived caches. If so, I say the same for them as I do for pocket caches - no. To me, logging on an archived cache that is no longer at it's listed location (so, I'm not talking you go out, not knowing it was archived, and find the cache where the cache page said it would be), shouldn't occur. It can create confusion as to whether or not the cache is still there (at the listed coords), and can thereby affect other cachers. I see this as quite different from multiple logs on events, but know that others do not - that gray area that Fizzy Magic mentioned.

 

Close. After a cache has been archived, the owner carries the logbook around and allows geocachers he meets to log a "find" on the cache.

Link to comment

We've covered pocket caches and multi logging events. So what does everyone think of "retirement cards"?? <_<

 

Thanks, you had to suck me into this. I see "retirement card" find claims for many of our local archived caches (Pennsylvania) from geocachers all over the eastern part of the country. What bothers me is I actually hiked and found many of these caches and signed the log. I can't relate to the geocacher who would think this is a reasonable way to play this game. I think this is even worse than the pocket caches, and yes, I think pocket caches are wrong.

Link to comment

We've covered pocket caches and multi logging events. So what does everyone think of "retirement cards"?? <_<

 

Thanks, you had to suck me into this. I see "retirement card" find claims for many of our local archived caches (Pennsylvania) from geocachers all over the eastern part of the country. What bothers me is I actually hiked and found many of these caches and signed the log. I can't relate to the geocacher who would think this is a reasonable way to play this game. I think this is even worse than the pocket caches, and yes, I think pocket caches are wrong.

 

As I understand it eastern PA is where they got their start.

Link to comment

We've covered pocket caches and multi logging events. So what does everyone think of "retirement cards"?? <_<

 

Oh crap. Now you did it. I had never heard of a "Pocket Cache" before this thread.

But now you had to bring up "Retirement Cards"

One of my very early finds was placed by the BIG number Cacher.

I have few enough finds that I can keep ALL of them on my watch list.

 

First comes the archive. I would have been happy to adopt it, but ...

Then I read about the "Retirement Card" logs. WTF!

 

At least 1 person had the right idea and back dated it to April Fools Day. How appropriate.

 

Obviousy the peope that logged those Retirement Cards view their Smiley count differently than I do. That doesn't make them bad people. But we are NOT playing the same game.

Link to comment

I honestly don't think anyone (at least most here) are trying to cheat! Most just want to keep a record of caches they have found. But they need to keep that record in the right place. If the cache they found is not an active GC listed cache, then that right place is not on GC.com.

 

Sounds pretty simple, make yourself a record book at home and record your non GC finds there. Make your own webpage and record them there, or go to another site like Keenpeople and record them there. You do have options. When it comes time to count up your smilies, just add these to your legitimate GC finds and you're set. <_<

 

One thing i find strange: Some of you say that you want an accurate record of caches you have found. I can understand that, but logging an Event cache several times in order to keep your find count right sure isn't the answer. This only makes your Event cache count become way off! <_<

Link to comment
For example, the community already generally agrees that entirely ficititious logs are not acceptable. We also agree that logging finds on your own caches is bad form.

 

But beyond that, there is a gray area. Next in line comes logging a cache as a find because you couldn't find it but you tried hard. Then comes logging a find on an archived cache on this site because you found a cache listed on another site. Then comes logging a missing cache as a find if you replace the container with a new one. Then comes logging a missing cache as a find if the owner says it is OK. Then comes logging additional finds on a cache if the owner gives you a "bonus" find for something else. Then comes logging pocket caches. Then comes logging multiple finds at an event. Then comes logging multiple finds on a cache that has moved. Finally comes logging a cache found by a group as a find for each member of the group.

 

Wow. That was such a cool post, I thought it deserved its own graphic.

2b8e4859-fc41-40a7-a6d1-bfa1c3dca3df.jpg

 

...and my respect for people who do it is diminished considerably.

...but if other people do so it doesn't affect my respect for them.

 

Not to detract from this great post, but my respect for a person, even in the Geocaching world, is not dependent on their find count or the list of caches they've found or not found. When I see a find count, I go, "Hmmm. Isn't that interesting," and then move on. If it's a log on a cache the ONLY bearing the person's find count would mean to me is how reliable their DNF is. If a person has found 5,107 caches and they log a DNF on a cache that is a difficulty 1, I would think that cache is missing. In the forums, a person's find count usually doesn't enter into how I respond. Most of the people I have conversations with, I couldn't tell you their find count.

 

I posted in the other forum, and from the quotes above, some of this might be repeats from this lengthy thread, but I'll say my couple of quips here:

How can you cheat when nobody wins? Did I miss the prize?
...everyone should do what they think is right and STOP worrying about what the other guy is doing.
I would also add that cachers should probably stop worrying about how others feel regarding what they are doing.
Link to comment

Well, I have no idea what you are talking about, but they way that everyone loves to debate things in here, I'll sit back and watch.

 

<_<

 

Agreed. So far I've learned that people who log pocket caches are Liars, Cheaters, Racists, Pedophiles, take steroids and that Geocaching would be better off without them. This community has started to look like neighboring armed encampments. I can't wait to see what happens next. <_<

I wish I had a ribbon to give you, that is the single stupidest post in the entire thread. I never, at any time, called or referred to another player as either a racist or a pedophile. Your asinine attempt to throw gasoline on the fire is indicative of how weak your position is. Instead of adding something intelligent to the debate, you are trying to twist my words into a personal attack against me. Go back, re-read my post. If your intellect is too feeble to comprehend what I was saying, please just stay out of the conversation.

Link to comment

 

Look, I’m not pushing for more rules or additional icons. This is a game based on the honor system. I started this thread to discuss the ethics of these pocket caches. That’s what a forum is for, to discuss and debate. So far, despite the angry rhetoric and off-topic distractions, no one has intelligently defended the practice of logging pocket caches.

 

I would think this fact would speak plainly for itself, but I feel compelled to translate it.

 

It hasn't been because it can't be.

Link to comment
Wow. That was such a cool post, I thought it deserved its own graphic.

And the more I look at that graphic, the more I think it's hard to define where some of those very middle points fall. Particularly, these items:


  • Logging a missing cache as a find if you replace the container with a new one.
  • Logging a missing cache as a find if the owner says it is OK.
  • Logging additional finds on a cache if the owner gives you a "bonus" find for something else.
  • Logging pocket caches.
  • Logging multiple finds at an event.

I would think that individual people might also put them at different shades of gray. The order above is how Fizzy sees them from worst offensive to least offensive. Me...


  • Logging pocket caches.
  • Logging a missing cache as a find if you replace the container with a new one.
  • Logging a missing cache as a find if the owner says it is OK.
  • Logging multiple finds at an event.
  • Logging additional finds on a cache if the owner gives you a "bonus" find for something else.

So we have the clear black and white, and some very dark grays and very pale grays, and this wide nebulous area of gray in the middle.

Edited by Markwell
Link to comment

I wish I had a ribbon to give you, that is the single stupidest post in the entire thread. I never, at any time, called or referred to another player as either a racist or a pedophile. Your asinine attempt to throw gasoline on the fire is indicative of how weak your position is. Instead of adding something intelligent to the debate, you are trying to twist my words into a personal attack against me. Go back, re-read my post. If your intellect is too feeble to comprehend what I was saying, please just stay out of the conversation.

 

Go back and reread my posts. What's my position? Do I agree that logging PCs and finds from other sites is wrond? Do I disagree? I'm fairly certain you have no idea, although my posts were clear enough on that.

 

Nope, I'd have to disagree with you. The single stupidest post in this thread was the post where you compared those who DO log PC's and archived caches to pedophiles and racists, and that IS what you did. It was being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory, and contributed nothing to the discussion.

 

As far as staying out of the conversation, I'll jump in when I please, thank you very much. You started this thread with a point to make, actually one I agreed with when you started it. I still agree with the main point, but when this thread degenerated to calling those who disagreed with that point liars and cheaters and started comparing them to criminals it stopped being a discussion and became high comedy.

 

Let's be honest: The only reason someone would conciously pad their stats by logging non GC listed caches on archived caches is because the stats mean more to them than any enjoyment they get out of playing the game. And, conversely, the only people who care enough about them doing that to push this thread as far as it's gone are people who are so wrapped up in their own stats that they can't stand the thought of some poser intruding on their territory.

 

YOU started this thread, and it's been running circles over well travelled ground for six pages now without making any headway. You don't like what I've got to say? Either learn to live with disappointment or close the thread. In the meantime I'm having a blast.

Link to comment

The single stupidest post in this thread was the post where you compared those who DO log PC's and archived caches to pedophiles and racists, and that IS what you did. It was being inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory, and contributed nothing to the discussion.

No, I did not. I compared the justification that claiming a false find is acceptable because you don’t think it is hurting anyone, to the very same justification used by those two groups for their activities. Nice try.

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

No, I did not. I compared the justification that claiming a false find is acceptable because you don’t think it is hurting anyone, to the very same justification used by those two groups for their activities. Nice try.

 

Then let me ask you, why did you pick probably the two most offensive examples you could come up with to illustrate your point?

Link to comment

 

If looking for, and finding out about, how people cheat at this game we play upsets you...don't go looking...

 

Jamie - NFA

 

Yeah, I guess you can say that about Barry Bonds, Milli Vanilli, Rosie Ruiz, Jayson Blair, et. al. Why should anybody care?

 

2 thoughts...

 

1) geocaching is a fun pastime, not professional baseball, where careers and multi-million dollar awards and endorsements are at stake...also, what Barry Bonds and Milli Vanilli did was illegal, inflating your smiley count is not.

 

2) I didn't say that I don't care, or that you (or Criminal) shouldn't care...I suggested that if it bothers him as much as it seems to (he seems to spend an awful lot of time watching how other people play the game), that he should not go looking for trouble as much.

 

I don't approve of pocket caches, or other methods of boosting numbers outside of finding caches, but I'm not going to end the practice by whining about it in the forum.

 

I don't approve of people turning without using their signals, but I don't drive around looking for instances of this behavior and/or post repetitively about it in the driving safety forum.

 

Happy Monday!

 

Jamie - NFA

Wow since it doesn't bother you it shouldn't bother the rest of us. <_< Oh sorry I forgot it was all about you. Thanks for clearing that up.

Link to comment

The only upside I see is at least a pocket cache means actually finding something... unlike a 'retirement card/event' <_< .

 

I meant to comment on this earlier. The find count in your stats does not reflect 'somethings' that you have found, it reflects geocaches that you've found. These people didn't find the caches, they found someone walking around at an event.

 

It definately seems that I don't have the majority opinion, but I have signed a few pocket caches, its not a big deal, I found and physically signed the logbook, I also found the cache that was hidden in the meeting area as well and signed it, I also signed a few caches that were not approved yet but were placed for the event. It was fun, I met a ton of geocachers in my part of the state, and now I've got some new people to go caching with.

 

For me, its not about the numbers, its about having fun. I won't log a find on a cache that I have not signed, if its a pocket cache, or a travel bug that is on a living creature, so be it. (Hi Bruno)

 

Do we really need so many rules lawyers in a game thats supposed to be fun?

What if your idea of what is fun is spoiling my idea of fun?

Although numbers isn't why I do this people who log lame pocket caches or log archived caches lessen the worth of the caches I've found. So yes that is spoiling the enjoyment I get out of the activity.

Link to comment

Wow since it doesn't bother you it shouldn't bother the rest of us. <_< Oh sorry I forgot it was all about you. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

If it bothers you that much,why not address it in a more meaningful method? Maybe contact a counselor, therapist or other healthcare professional? Going around and around here doesnt seem to be helping much, does it?

 

What if your idea of what is fun is spoiling my idea of fun?

Although numbers isn't why I do this people who log lame pocket caches or log archived caches lessen the worth of the caches I've found. So yes that is spoiling the enjoyment I get out of the activity.

 

How does anyones actions "lessen the ""worth"" of the caches you found? Does it change the scenery near your last find? Does it change the view from the trail on another find? Does it reach back in your memory, and strip the enjoyment from your mind?

 

Or, is it Really really just because others wont "value" your find count? You dont care about numbers tho-so why would this bother you?

 

The comments Ive seen by many in this thread lead me to believe thier are folks who have some issues with thier self esteem. If a smilie count here means that much..... More than what it really is = <_<

- then I really am Glad I dont suffer from this illness.

 

Do whatever you want, it will Not affect me in the slightest way.

 

Better go check my stats now, see if I am worthy enough to contribute

Link to comment

No, I did not. I compared the justification that claiming a false find is acceptable because you don’t think it is hurting anyone, to the very same justification used by those two groups for their activities. Nice try.

 

Then let me ask you, why did you pick probably the two most offensive examples you could come up with to illustrate your point?

Exactly, to make the point.

 

Let's all be clear about something. Just because I am strongly against a practice, my opinion does not make me like you any less. If BellyButtonLint wants to lie about which caches he's found, I don't hate him for it. If we met at an event I'd still smile and shake his hand. If he wanted to try to convince me that it’s OK, I’d listen and discuss it with him. If, in the end, we could only agree to disagree, then so be it.

 

I had never heard of pocket caches, I wanted to discuss it. I was hoping for a simple debate about the practice. There are over 300 replies on this topic, and over 5600 views. Some of the people reading this thread had no opinion either way, if we had been able to have intelligent discussion, they might have learned something (either agreeing with me or not). That’s what I was asking for, that’s why I was trying to keep it on topic, and that’s why I kept asking for someone who thinks pocket caches are acceptable to speak up and defend their position.

 

I don’t work for Groundspeak, I don’t make or influence policy, I’m just a cacher like anyone else. There is no reason for hostility. It is my position that to log a cache as found that you didn’t is a lie. If someone feels guilty (or threatened) about their stats, such a statement might get their panties in a bunch. If someone felt confident that it is acceptable to cache this way, they would have offered up some reasonable defense and we could have had a really delightful discussion.

 

It’s run its course.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...