The New Numbers Game

[+JohnnyVegas]

I think ARCHIVING the cache is uncalled for and unnecessary . Is Geocaching now a dictatorship? What a shame, I thought it was about people as well as the search.

Geocahing.com aka Groundspeak is a private company. They have a set of guidlines we all agree to follow when we hide a cache. If you do not like the guidlines there are other cache listing services you can use.

Traveling cache are not allowed, it is in the guidlines, try reading them.

Sure is about people as well as the search, but how does it being about people as well as the search make OK to violate the guidlines?

 

I keep hearing this lame argument that it is about someones style of play, or how you play the game, what a bunch of bull.

That is like saying if a sports team does not like some rule they can change it to suit their style of play. Mabe a baseball team could have six outfielders, or a football team could have an extra 5 palyers on the field. May a basket ball team could have 8 players on the court at one time.

[+texastracker]

This is one of the very reasons I "normally" stay out of Groundspeak. EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever). You simply care about the stats bar at the bottom of the cacher's account. To each his own..... Just trying to make it understood that some of us went to GW and don't care whether the crowd got smiley's for their count or not. Will we change the game because the German group stated they do things completely different than we do? I doubt it..... Happy caching everyone! Be safe!

[+Texas-Jacksons]

I'd like to share some facts & opinions regarding caches brought to the event, especially to those who didn't attend GW4.

 

The event was enormous! There was so much going on, so many people and such a large state park. This was only my second camping event and I felt a little overwhelmed when I first arrived at registration. There was a bulletin board at the entrance of the pavilion and I stopped to read it. On it were a dozen lat/longs posted with cache names. I wrote down the coordinates and went back to my campsite. My thoughts? “Wow, I didn’t know people were bringing caches. What a neat way to invite others to your campsite and identify yourself as a geocacher.” Note: Geocachers did not get to camp together in a single area. We were spread out across the entire park. I’d like to invite people to view the park map to get an idea of how spread out the area actually was. In the evenings the Texas-Jacksons sought out these temporary caches and met a lot of great folks in the processes. Why bring an actual cache rather than making a temp for the event only? Because some of these containers were really clever and it was a lot of fun to see & share creativity of a cache I most likely would not get to see otherwise. I’m not about the numbers so I have already deleted my logs. I’m content with knowing I found them and had a lot of fun doing it. Owners probably should have temporarily disabled their caches for the event, but I strongly disapprove of the archiving of these owners’ caches as punishment for showing off their creativity and socializing!

[+briansnat]

f you have been to ANY event you would know that icebreakers are needed. You might, but I don't just walk into a campsite and start a conversation with a stranger.

 

Where I come from we have a very unique icebreaker method. When we're at an event and we see someone unfamiliar, we walk up to them, hold out our hand and say "Hi, I'm __ (fill in your name)___." The other person then reaches for the offered hand, and grasps it firmly and shakes it while saying "Hi, I'm ___(states his name___, nice to meet you".

[+Lostby7]

I think ARCHIVING the cache is uncalled for and unnecessary . Is Geocaching now a dictatorship? What a shame, I thought it was about people as well as the search.

Geocahing.com aka Groundspeak is a private company. They have a set of guidlines we all agree to follow when we hide a cache. If you do not like the guidlines there are other cache listing services you can use.

Groundspeak has been fairly good at adapting to the will of the players and the changing nature of the game. It is certainly in their best interest to do so in this case as well. They have heard our cases and will act in a way which can benefit them or not. In the end concessions will have to be made and people will be giving and taking as is the way it should be. Rules will always be broken or worked around; grey areas will always exist. Sometimes there are consequences to pay for breaking these rules and sometimes not. I'd say right now we are all paying the consequence in these forums. We are arguing as much as "debating." I just hope the TPTB do not let this go on for much longer as currently we are all losing.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

This is one of the very reasons I "normally" stay out of Groundspeak. EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever). You simply care about the stats bar at the bottom of the cacher's account. To each his own..... Just trying to make it understood that some of us went to GW and don't care whether the crowd got smiley's for their count or not. Will we change the game because the German group stated they do things completely different than we do? I doubt it..... Happy caching everyone! Be safe!

 

Wait a minute....you are on the side that says its okay to log cache finds for temp caches, right? So how is everyone but you stuck on numbers? If you are argueing that you should get credit for these caches that violate the guidelines, then you must care about numbers too.

 

Honestly, I don't care about anyones numbers. What I do care about is people abusing the system. Do I care that they have false finds? No. Do I care that the more people log false stuff the more distorted the game becomes? Yes.

 

I'm glad that everyone had fun at GW4. Fun is what it's about. So is Baseball, but if you start scoring runs for one team everytime a player touches a base, regardless where that base is, the whole game changes.

[+Stunod]

I'd like to share some facts & opinions regarding caches brought to the event, especially to those who didn't attend GW4.

 

The event was enormous! There was so much going on, so many people and such a large state park. This was only my second camping event and I felt a little overwhelmed when I first arrived at registration. There was a bulletin board at the entrance of the pavilion and I stopped to read it. On it were a dozen lat/longs posted with cache names. I wrote down the coordinates and went back to my campsite. My thoughts? “Wow, I didn’t know people were bringing caches. What a neat way to invite others to your campsite and identify yourself as a geocacher.” Note: Geocachers did not get to camp together in a single area. We were spread out across the entire park. I’d like to invite people to view the park map to get an idea of how spread out the area actually was. In the evenings the Texas-Jacksons sought out these temporary caches and met a lot of great folks in the processes. Why bring an actual cache rather than making a temp for the event only? Because some of these containers were really clever and it was a lot of fun to see & share creativity of a cache I most likely would not get to see otherwise. I’m not about the numbers so I have already deleted my logs. I’m content with knowing I found them and had a lot of fun doing it. Owners probably should have temporarily disabled their caches for the event, but I strongly disapprove of the archiving of these owners’ caches as punishment for showing off their creativity and socializing!

 

I'm glad you were able to have fun without the extra smilies. I also think it's great that you got to see some really cool cache containers. Yes, you are exactly right, the owners should have disabled the caches before bringing them from their real posted coordinates...and they should not have allowed people to log them as finds.

I would assume the archiving of someof those caches was done as a way to stop the abuse of the system. Groundspeak was able to stop the loggings and get the message across to both the cache owners and loggers that this is not an acceptable practice. I'm fairly sure that if these caches are returned to the proper posted coords that they will be unarchived upon request.

[+MountainMudbug]

Please understand, I'm not bashing anybody, let me be clear. I would put money on the fact that 99.9% of the cachers there were awesome people that I would really enjoy meeting and hanging out with. I would love to see their unique cache containers.

But why do I need to log it as find? I can easily post a note as mentioned by Texas Jacksons. That way everybody can remember all the caches they saw and people they talked to and things they discussed, since that is the point of the event, to learn and share.

Notwithstanding that many logs read similiar to "thanks for the smiley" "TFTC" "found this one at GW4" (not a lot of time left to share in the online logs, I guess)

 

I don't get the reasoning, the logic, for logging these visiting caches as "finds" on these caches unless you want that "found log".

If a cache is listed as GC146787 hidden in upper Alaska in a uniquely hollowed out log that is totally unique, never seen before by cachers outside Alaska, and is brought to TX for sharing at GW4, that is so beyond cool. I would love to see it. But why would I want to log a find on it? Even if that log is hidden in the owners' campsite for 3 days in TX, GW4 cachers who came across that cache are still not "finding" that cache in Alaska, they're "running across it temporarily in Texas at an event".

 

It is sharing info and ideas and companionship. But not "finding" GC146787. Pretty straightforward.

 

I guess some want this attached as a reward for their time:

 

edit: upon re-reading, I fear GW4'ers will take it personally; it is not intended to be personally directed at anybody who attended the event, yet surely somebody will think so somewhere. I promise, I'm merely discussing!

Edited May 31, 2006 by MountainMudbug

[+ReadyOrNot]

Does anyone know what the original intent of the smiley system was suppose to be at inception? I agree that the cheaters disgrace the game and should be spanked for what they've done. BUT! Here in Portland, OR I just don't see the problem everyone is talking about. I generally read the logs whenever I do a cache and can't remember seeing any number cheaters.

 

The good news is that if the problem is not wide spread, it should be fairly easy for TPTB to reign in the problem RIGHT NOW. If they continue sitting around doing nothing, the problem will eventually become something that is unmanageable which will eventually hurt geocaching.

 

<CHANTING>

DO SOMETHING NOW!

</CHANTING>

 

BTW - What is the official "Powers that be" response to all this numbers talk? Don't recall seeing them involved in this topic?

[+vree]

It is sharing info and ideas and companionship. But not "finding" GC146787. Pretty straightforward.

perfect explanation. well done!

[+Criminal]

Caches are not just about a box in the woods, its about the people who place them. When I create a cache it comes from ME. So for the people who brought the temporary caches it came from their heart and they obviously wanted to have them for ice breakers or share unique containers.

 

I think ARCHIVING the cache is uncalled for and unnecessary . Is Geocaching now a dictatorship? What a shame, I thought it was about people as well as the search.

 

I would have collected the "smilies" but honestly, they don't really matter as much as I'm downright ANGRY at the caches being archived, that's REDICULOUS. And those of you who are so offended, I strongly encourage you to ask yourselves WHY, don't you think a cache is also about the people who place them, not just the box?

You are making the assumption that we were offended by the logging of pocket caches. I was not. If you want to keep the camel out of the tent, you have to do something when the camel pokes his nose under. If you wait, you cannot get him out.

 

Let’s try looking at this in a different way. If you’re driving on the freeway at 60MPH and everyone else is also driving at 60MPH, your relative speed is zero. Lane changes or getting on and off the freeway are easy, since the relative speed is zero. The same is true if everyone is going 80MPH or 40MPH. The difficulty (and danger in this analogy) comes when some are going 40, others 60, and a few maniacs are going 80MPH.

 

The same is true of geocache ‘finds’. If we’re all playing by the same set of rules, our stats have meaning. If JOECACHER wakes up on the morning of the event and ‘finds’ his car keys, ‘finds’ his car in the hotel parking lot, ‘finds’ the event, ‘finds’ 77 temporary caches at the event, and ‘finds’ 33 pocket caches, his stats are not relative to anyone else’s. He’s playing by his own rules but geocaching doesn’t make the distinction. His stats are skewed by 112 over yours (or 113 over mine since I don’t log events).

 

If the cache is ‘about the people’ as you claim, then why are ‘the people’ so angry that they cannot claim a smiley? If it’s really about ‘the people’, then ‘the people’ would be happy with finding the temporary or pocket caches and logging them with a note. Geocaching as a game certainly does include ‘the people’ or the social aspect, that’s why there are event caches. The find count, however, is all about the number of caches a player has actually found. I wish the icon for a found cache was a checkmark, not a smiley. The site would be ‘checking off’ a cache as you found them. The smiley seems to imply some sort of reward to some players, thus they feel entitled to have them for pocket caches, honorable attempts, etc.

 

Your argument is null. You are attempting to attach the social aspect of the game to the find count in an attempt to redefine the commonly understood English word “FOUND”. I don’t think anyone here has anything against these social characteristics, even me, and as I said, I don’t log events.

 

I refer to the act of logging something as ‘found’, that one did not, as cheating because that’s what it is. I didn’t make the distinction between malicious cheating and inadvertent cheating; that would have required far more information that I can get.

 

Turn this around. Say I submit a cache to geocaching and the reviewer reviews it and it’s listed. But alas, I’ve arbitrarily decided that the word ‘hide’ doesn’t have the common meaning, and there is no cache at the location. Searchers become frustrated, and after 25 DNFs, I post a note saying that I’ve included a rare geocoin as a FTF bonus. Another 25 frustrated DNFs later, I again confirm its presence. But there is no cache there. You would say that I had told a lie, that I did not follow the guidelines, and that I should be hanged. It’s no different if someone selects ‘Found It’ from the drop-down box on your Texas cache when they’re standing at an event in Florida. They did not find your cache. They may have viewed your container, but that is only one element of the geocache. By saying they found it, they have lied. It’s not an insult, it’s an observation.

 

I’m encouraged that you put so much effort and heart into your cache hides. If I ever get to Texas again I will likely seek out one of them specifically because of that. This is not a ‘witch hunt’ and it is not hostile (in fact, the only hostility seems to be from the cheaters who feel threatened), it’s an attempt to prevent the entire camel from getting inside the tent and stinking the place all up.

 

EDIT: Fixed the states

Edited May 31, 2006 by Criminal

[+BigHank]

After reading through this thread and the other related ones, one thing jumps out at me: most of the controversy appears to stem from things that happen at events. That being the case, the simple solution, to me, is to eliminate events. No events= no pocket caches, no "discovering" iconic items, no logging the fantastic feat of arriving at a pizza place or state park, etc. Of course, if by some unbelievable set of circumstances that ever happens, I'm sure we will find something else to generate controversy. If not, the forums sure would get boring quickly.

[+drat19]

After reading through this thread and the other related ones, one thing jumps out at me: most of the controversy appears to stem from things that happen at events. That being the case, the simple solution, to me, is to eliminate events. No events= no pocket caches, no "discovering" iconic items, no logging the fantastic feat of arriving at a pizza place or state park, etc. Of course, if by some unbelievable set of circumstances that ever happens, I'm sure we will find something else to generate controversy. If not, the forums sure would get boring quickly.

Hank, I get what you're saying but I think you know as well as I do that Events have a great place in our game. I've made lasting friendships and have enjoyed the fellowship and the "matching a face to a logon name" that Events provide. I've also attended out-of-my-home-state Events and have been made to feel as welcome, if not more welcome, as any of the Locals. (I've also used the time-tested technique of extending my right hand to another attendee and saying "Hi, I'm drat19, Dave, from Biloxi, MS, darned glad to meet you" as an ice-breaker, and lemme tell ya, it was just as satisfying, if not more so, than getting a smilie for a pocket cache.)

 

Clearly the issue at hand that has come to light in these discussions is the "gotta get a smilie and/or an icon" for everything you might do during an Event. THAT is what needs to somehow be corrected, whether through rule implementation/enforcement, or through community shame practices. And I find the fact that I've cited those two items as potential solutions to be pretty darned sad, actually.

Edited May 31, 2006 by drat19

[+texastracker]

This is one of the very reasons I "normally" stay out of Groundspeak. EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever). You simply care about the stats bar at the bottom of the cacher's account. To each his own..... Just trying to make it understood that some of us went to GW and don't care whether the crowd got smiley's for their count or not. Will we change the game because the German group stated they do things completely different than we do? I doubt it..... Happy caching everyone! Be safe!

 

Wait a minute....you are on the side that says its okay to log cache finds for temp caches, right? So how is everyone but you stuck on numbers? If you are argueing that you should get credit for these caches that violate the guidelines, then you must care about numbers too.

 

Honestly, I don't care about anyones numbers. What I do care about is people abusing the system. Do I care that they have false finds? No. Do I care that the more people log false stuff the more distorted the game becomes? Yes.

 

I'm glad that everyone had fun at GW4. Fun is what it's about. So is Baseball, but if you start scoring runs for one team everytime a player touches a base, regardless where that base is, the whole game changes.

My issue is not with the logged smiley's (I didn't log anything other than the event itself) it's with the fact that perfectly good caches are being archived for no feasible reason other than a few people are pissed because of a geographical issue and a count skew.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

This is one of the very reasons I "normally" stay out of Groundspeak. EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever). You simply care about the stats bar at the bottom of the cacher's account. To each his own..... Just trying to make it understood that some of us went to GW and don't care whether the crowd got smiley's for their count or not. Will we change the game because the German group stated they do things completely different than we do? I doubt it..... Happy caching everyone! Be safe!

 

Wait a minute....you are on the side that says its okay to log cache finds for temp caches, right? So how is everyone but you stuck on numbers? If you are argueing that you should get credit for these caches that violate the guidelines, then you must care about numbers too.

 

Honestly, I don't care about anyones numbers. What I do care about is people abusing the system. Do I care that they have false finds? No. Do I care that the more people log false stuff the more distorted the game becomes? Yes.

 

I'm glad that everyone had fun at GW4. Fun is what it's about. So is Baseball, but if you start scoring runs for one team everytime a player touches a base, regardless where that base is, the whole game changes.

My issue is not with the logged smiley's (I didn't log anything other than the event itself) it's with the fact that perfectly good caches are being archived for no feasible reason other than a few people are pissed because of a geographical issue and a count skew.

 

Okay, I gotcha. So your all about numbers as much as I am

 

Now, these caches that are being achived....why are they being archived again? From what I understand from the reading I've done, it seems to me that these caches that are being archived are the caches that have been removed from their listed location and brought to GW4 to be 'found' there. Is this correct?

 

If I am right, then those caches are violating a handful of guidelines, and therefore deserve to be at least temporarily disabled until they are 'fixed', in otherwords returned to their listed coords.

 

Call me crazy, but if I decide to pull one of my caches to show to a friend, that cache is no longer active until I return it to where it was listed at. If a cache can be removed from the listed coords and moved to wherever, doesn't that make it a moving cache, which are now against the guidelines?

[+Stunod]

My issue is not with the logged smiley's (I didn't log anything other than the event itself) it's with the fact that perfectly good caches are being archived for no feasible reason other than a few people are pissed because of a geographical issue and a count skew.

 

It looks like Bedrock in Baghdad was un-archived after the improper FOUND IT logs were deleted. I'm guessing all the other archived caches can expect the same result.

[+TeamRJMK]

I can see value in logging something to help track what you have found and keep a record of your finds.

 

If people want a way to log temporary event caches and caches brought to share, here's an idea -

 

TB's now have a "discovered" option to distinguish "finds" at events from "finds" in the wild. How about adding the same log type to caches and event caches?

 

If an event has temporary caches, people could log multiple "discovered" logs on the event cache page.

 

If someone brings a cache to an event, they would temporarily disable it and instruct people to log "discovered" logs, not "found it" logs.

 

(Another way to share caches at events would be to attach a TB tag & have people log it as a TB at the event, not a cache.)

 

I don't know about pocket caches - why not use travel bugs instead? That seems to be more applicable.

 

J

[+MajorT]

And the proper reply is:

If you don't like the rules of the game you are playing, stop playing.

One of the rules of the game is a cache is supposed to be at the coords it is listed at. If it's in someone's pocket, it's not allowed on this website. If you don't like that fact, don't play that game on this website.

Since the owner of this website has said that people that play THAT game on THIS website will get banned if they keep it up, it really IS that simple.

 

You seem to be very adamant that all cachers follow all the rules and guidelines as set up by GC.com. If that is the case, I ask that you please archive your wedding event, MoHo - The Main Event per these gc.com guidelines.

 

"Event Caches

 

Event caches are gatherings that are open to all geocachers and which are organized by geocachers. After the event has passed, the event cache should be archived by the organizer within four weeks. "

 

It seems that even you, the apparent gc.com hall monitor, doesn't adhere to EVERY guideline set up by gc.com.

 

 

As for my 2 cents regarding recent actions/reactions taking place, I think your policing of a practice that has been quietly accepted over the past years is abhorrible. It pains me greatly that those who run geocaching.com let the game/hobby/sport be shaped by the complainers on this forum who spout off daily about what geocaching SHOULD be about. These "traditionalists" do NOT allow for change and growth in the game and if this world were run by people like you, we'd still be living in the dark ages.

 

It's a shame that this hobby can't be shaped by the thousands of cachers out there who actively support it, rather than the few insiders who seem to want to stick to some archaic notion of what the "intent" of geocaching was created for. And I think it's extremely disappointing for the policy of THIS organization to be 'if you don't like it, stop playing", and thus not allowing for people's opinions, wants, desires of what this sport could be to be heard.

 

Finally, I was hesitant to write anything on these forums, as it seems like a place that people get attacked for their views. If there are others reading this who disagree with with what's being said here, but don't want to get into a forum fight, I urge you to write directly to the owners of Groundspeak. Maybe if they see there are voices other than the "crackdown" voices here on the forums, they'll take OUR views about what we enjoy in the game into account when they make up these rules and regulations.

 

Thanks for reading!

[+Celticwulf]

I can see value in logging something to help track what you have found and keep a record of your finds.

 

The way I've done it in the past is with the one event log...in the one attended log I note "found x,y,z,1,3,8 temp caches, DNF 2,4 and didn't try for the rest" or something to that effect.

 

I'm still having trouble understanding why people would need a seperate log for EVERYTHING they do geocaching. Heck, I just participated in a local event (which reminds me I have to mail the thing in) where none of the caches are listed on gc.com yet (might be in future) and the event isn't even listed. I went and did it with a couple of friends because it was a FUN time and brought me to new areas. We hit a few live caches on the way, and if the temps do eventually become live I'll log them at that time, but only if they actually become live and the owners say it's OK to log the "pre-finds". Either way, it got me into a cool new area that I wouldn't have visited right now, and now I want to go back and find more live caches in the future.

 

To me, my history is all there...temps in one attended log (or notes if too many to fit in one log) and finds all nicely grouped. I'm happy with this system, because any more and my pages look more cluttered. Actually, if you really want to see something amusing, go look at some of the profiles of people who have logged events multiple times. If you view their events, instead of the standard 20 logs shown per page, you only see one if they've logged the same event 20+ times. How exactly does this help keep track of things? This alone should be an indication that the practice is outside the guidelines...at least it seems that way in my book.

 

Celticwulf

[+sbell111]

... I think your policing of a practice that has been quietly accepted over the past years is abhorrible.

Huh???

 

I think every time pocket caches have been brought up, the overwhelming majority has stated that this practice is bogus. The same goes for logging caches that are brought to events. Many people have even taken a stand against logging temporary caches on the cache page.

 

How have these activities been 'quietly accepted' and why should we not have the ability to rail against them?

Edited May 31, 2006 by sbell111

[+Celticwulf]

It's a shame that this hobby can't be shaped by the thousands of cachers out there who actively support it, rather than the few insiders who seem to want to stick to some archaic notion of what the "intent" of geocaching was created for. And I think it's extremely disappointing for the policy of THIS organization to be 'if you don't like it, stop playing", and thus not allowing for people's opinions, wants, desires of what this sport could be to be heard.

 

MajorT, I had to respond and I hope you don't take this as an attack.

 

If you note, hundreds of people showed up at GW4 and had a great time. From what I've seen by the logs, much less than half of those logged the temp/pocket/moved caches (from estimates I've seen, there were 700 people at GW4, and I've seen at most 50 logs on some of the contriversial caches). To me, this does not show that "thousands" are supporting this change...and I'll bet many of the ones that did log these were TAUGHT this was the proper way to do things. But as I stated in my last post, wouldn't the fact that you can't see multiple "attended" logs listed the same way as each separate find on a separate cache indicate that this is NOT something that is supported?

 

And the game HAS changed. There were things like moving caches, locationless, etc. and they are all gone now because the basic part of our activity is finding a something with a log book at the posted coordinates. How you get those coordinates, or if there are multiple steps involved are still there, but that is the basic premise.

 

Make sense?

Celticwulf

[+MajorT]

I think every time pocket caches have been brought up, the overwhelming majority has stated that this practice is bogus.

 

Oh, you've done a survey of the entire geocaching community? I'd like to see your results, then. The few voices that post on the forums regularly don't constitute the "overwhelming majority" of cachers that make up the entire community of geocaching.com.

 

How have these activities been 'quietly accepted' and why should we not have the ability to rail against them?

 

From what I understand, pocket caches have been logged for years at events. Only now it's gone so far as to lock and archive caches?

 

Feel free to have an opinion of whether or not they're right or wrong. But because YOU think it's wrong, does that mean I have to as well?

 

Obviously not EVERYONE has a problem with it, as there have been lots of people that have logged pocket caches over the years.

[+Criminal]

I think every time pocket caches have been brought up, the overwhelming majority has stated that this practice is bogus.

 

Oh, you've done a survey of the entire geocaching community? I'd like to see your results, then. The few voices that post on the forums regularly don't constitute the "overwhelming majority" of cachers that make up the entire community of geocaching.com.

 

How have these activities been 'quietly accepted' and why should we not have the ability to rail against them?

 

From what I understand, pocket caches have been logged for years at events. Only now it's gone so far as to lock and archive caches?

 

Feel free to have an opinion of whether or not they're right or wrong. But because YOU think it's wrong, does that mean I have to as well?

 

Obviously not EVERYONE has a problem with it, as there have been lots of people that have logged pocket caches over the years.

 

‘Public opinion’ isn’t applicable. The site owners have decided what a geocache is, and pocket cachers do not fall within that definition. That I think it’s wrong doesn’t matter, they are not geocaches. By the same token, it doesn’t matter if you think they’re wrong either, they are still not geocaches. Just because the third baseman is a hockey fan doesn’t mean he can body-check the base runner, and if he got away with it several times he cannot say the rule had changed. Play by the rules, it’s really easy to do.

 

If you feel strongly (and given your hostility you do) that they should count as finds, feel free to pick up a server and start your own site.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

I think every time pocket caches have been brought up, the overwhelming majority has stated that this practice is bogus.

 

Oh, you've done a survey of the entire geocaching community? I'd like to see your results, then. The few voices that post on the forums regularly don't constitute the "overwhelming majority" of cachers that make up the entire community of geocaching.com.

 

How have these activities been 'quietly accepted' and why should we not have the ability to rail against them?

 

From what I understand, pocket caches have been logged for years at events. Only now it's gone so far as to lock and archive caches?

 

Feel free to have an opinion of whether or not they're right or wrong. But because YOU think it's wrong, does that mean I have to as well?

 

Obviously not EVERYONE has a problem with it, as there have been lots of people that have logged pocket caches over the years.

 

‘Public opinion’ isn’t applicable. The site owners have decided what a geocache is, and pocket cachers do not fall within that definition. That I think it’s wrong doesn’t matter, they are not geocaches. By the same token, it doesn’t matter if you think they’re wrong either, they are still not geocaches. Just because the third baseman is a hockey fan doesn’t mean he can body-check the base runner, and if he got away with it several times he cannot say the rule had changed. Play by the rules, it’s really easy to do.

 

If you feel strongly (and given your hostility you do) that they should count as finds, feel free to pick up a server and start your own site.

 

Dude, your posts are always the most entertaining. It helps that I agree with what you have to say (generally), but the image of the thrid-baseman body checking a runner is priceless

[+The Leprechauns]

From what I understand, pocket caches have been logged for years at events. Only now it's gone so far as to lock and archive caches?

 

Feel free to have an opinion of whether or not they're right or wrong. But because YOU think it's wrong, does that mean I have to as well?

 

Obviously not EVERYONE has a problem with it, as there have been lots of people that have logged pocket caches over the years.

Yes, it is true that pocket caches have been around for years. But so long as they didn't waste a cache page (because temporary caches aren't permitted) or move from their regular spot (because traveling caches aren't permitted), there was no guidelines violation. The guidelines do not address multiple finds on event cache pages because that is a logging issue, not a cache listing issue.

 

What's different now is the concept of bringing caches (or duplicates of caches) from their posted coordinates to an event, or using archived cache pages for a real cache with real coordinates to become a logging repository for a pocket cache. Both of those raise cache listing guideline issues, which have now been addressed. THOSE are the pages that are being archived and/or locked.

 

To the extent that TPTB weren't aware of it, it is because the practice was flying under the radar. Groundspeak is now aware of it, and took prompt action. Please don't spin it otherwise.

[+MajorT]

If you note, hundreds of people showed up at GW4 and had a great time. From what I've seen by the logs, much less than half of those logged the temp/pocket/moved caches (from estimates I've seen, there were 700 people at GW4, and I've seen at most 50 logs on some of the contriversial caches). To me, this does not show that "thousands" are supporting this change...

 

I had moved on to all the changes that have been given and taken away. Thousands did indeed log locationless caches, virtual caches, etc. That wasn't just a reference to pocket caches. I feel those types of caches were taken away by people like you who feel that caching should only be about finding something that has a log. I don't feel that way. I feel like geocaching had the opportunity to grow and change and become better than what it was. And it did. Only to have it taken away. And why was it taken away? Because people complained about it. That was my initial point.

 

MajorT, I had to respond and I hope you don't take this as an attack.

 

If you note, hundreds of people showed up at GW4 and had a great time. From what I've seen by the logs, much less than half of those logged the temp/pocket/moved caches (from estimates I've seen, there were 700 people at GW4, and I've seen at most 50 logs on some of the contriversial caches).

 

Well, I haven't started logging my finds from GW4, so I never had the chance to log them, as the caches were archived and locked. I suspect maybe the same for others??

 

And the game HAS changed. There were things like moving caches, locationless, etc. and they are all gone now because the basic part of our activity is finding a something with a log book at the posted coordinates. How you get those coordinates, or if there are multiple steps involved are still there, but that is the basic premise.

 

Again, you make my point for me. The game did change, and those changes were taken away by those people within the geocaching community that have the one basic view that you stated above. Not one single person I cache with has the view that you do. We all enjoy virtuals and many enjoyed locaitonless as well.

 

By the way, the temp caches that I found at GW4 DID involve me punching coords into my GPSr, going out, finding the cache and signing the log.

[+sbell111]

I think every time pocket caches have been brought up, the overwhelming majority has stated that this practice is bogus.

Oh, you've done a survey of the entire geocaching community? I'd like to see your results, then. The few voices that post on the forums regularly don't constitute the "overwhelming majority" of cachers that make up the entire community of geocaching.com.

I don't need a survey. Your position was that they were 'quietly accepted'. My point was that they were not. Do a search for proof.

From what I understand, pocket caches have been logged for years at events. Only now it's gone so far as to lock and archive caches?

You are correct. Often, in life, we don't fix problems until they grow to a size that can no longer be ignored. Its a human failing.

Feel free to have an opinion of whether or not they're right or wrong. But because YOU think it's wrong, does that mean I have to as well?

True. However, just because you enjoy these practices does not mean that they should be allowed if they violate the guidelines.

Obviously not EVERYONE has a problem with it, as there have been lots of people that have logged pocket caches over the years.

Many people drink-and-drive and get away with it for years, but it is not right and they still don't have a valid excuse when they cause an accident and hurt someone else.

 

Edited for clarity, I hope.

Edited May 31, 2006 by sbell111

[+Celticwulf]

OK, I'm getting confused here...a lot of people are posting that "this practice has been going on for YEARS" (emphasis my own), but am I the only one realizing that Geocaching has only been around for just over 6 years now, and things have changed over time. At what point were events created...I'm guessing not right away...and even the guidelines for events themselves have changed.

 

Up until recently, many of the people around the country had no idea that "pocket caches" even existed, and when I personally heard about it I went "WTF, that's dumb". I haven't seen this activity in my area, so I'd say MN is not in the "thousands" that support pocket caches. Multi-logging events is a different topic which is much discussed, but that is NOT the issue with these Pocket caches and moved cache containers which is really what lit the flames this weekend. And as I've stated before, until things got out of hand with this weekends activities, I'll bet TPTB were hoping that people would realize what they were doing was violating the guidelines on their own and stop doing it. This didn't happen, so they made sure that people NOW realize this is not acceptable.

 

So how can we be discussing "years" when we haven't been around for what I'd consider "years"??

 

Celticwulf

[+MajorT]

‘Public opinion’ isn’t applicable. The site owners have decided what a geocache is, and pocket cachers do not fall within that definition. That I think it’s wrong doesn’t matter, they are not geocaches. By the same token, it doesn’t matter if you think they’re wrong either, they are still not geocaches. Just because the third baseman is a hockey fan doesn’t mean he can body-check the base runner, and if he got away with it several times he cannot say the rule had changed. Play by the rules, it’s really easy to do.

 

If you feel strongly (and given your hostility you do) that they should count as finds, feel free to pick up a server and start your own site.

 

Ahh... and we come full circle!

 

And now we can start over again with my original post!!

 

And there's no hostility here. Just someone with a differing opinion than your own.

[+Moosiegirl]

It's a disservice to call these pocket snot rags "pocket caches." I don't care about "the numbers" but I do care about folks who circumvent the features of the site in order to log someone's pocket lint.

 

If these converted listings are reported they will be archived and locked. If after a warning folks continue to make them they will be banned.

 

My goodness. The activity used to be about the journey to discover new locations.

 

Jeremy, do you really think it is fair to call this play AFTER THE FACT? I agree that there were temp. caches at GW4 that probably would have been best left behind, but in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance. Several of my friends brought creative hides to GW4 that have been archived. They either have to find a new location and re-list them, or let them die for all time. I just can't see the sense in that.

 

Some history: a certain retiree in Houston is a master at creative urban micro hides, nearly all wheel-chair accessible. Some are at great places, some are incredibly inventive containers, some are awe-inspiring camo. What damage is done if these creative hides are showcased at an event? I actually think he was a ''pioneer'' in the temporary cache thing, and people liked it so much, they copied it! I don't know if any of his hides were at GW4, but I would hate to think of any of them being archived.

 

The majority of the caches brought to GW4 were hidden, coordinates were given, and people who logged them had to go find them to do it. A lot of miles of hiking were logged in that park to find them (not to mention the hiding), and for those who flew in to the event, it might have been their only chance to log caches.

 

What I'm trying to say is, why give a blanket condemnation to this practice, when a set of guidelines could be established to keep it true to the game while still allowing it to occur? If it's limited only to the new genre ''mega-event'', then so be it. Temporary caches don't really seem appropriate for local events, anyway. Or if you see fit to ban it altogether, then so be it. But archiving caches and slamming the practice after ''the cows are out of the barn and into the hayfield'' seems to me to be counterproductive.

 

We have a cacher in Austin who has done three of the most absolutely creative hides, based on scientific concepts/theorems, and he's working on more. Each is a learning experience as well as a cache. I had gained permission to take them to GW4, but ran out of time to pick them up. Now I suppose that cacher is very glad that I DID run out of time. Three of the best caches in Central Texas would have been archived, in spite of the fact that 700+ people would have been exposed to his creativity and might have taken his ideas back to their locales. Isn't there something wrong with that picture?

 

Please, Jeremy, look at rescinding those archive orders and make any action you take a rule for future events. My friend, a new cacher (Dec. 05), took one of her creative hides; it's been archived. I would hate for her to be turned off to geocaching by this heavy-handed action.

 

Thanks for listening! Happy Trails.

[+SanDiegoSunrise]

I was on the organizing committed for GEOWOODSTOCK 4 and I had no idea that pocket caches and temporary caches were illegal. I spent over 75 hours of my spare time leading up to this event just so geocachers around the country could have a good time down here in Texas. What do I get for the effort?--an archived cache and being labeled a cheat. This pocket cache (GCR6CP) was a part of my "...geocaching addict" series that pokes fun at geocachers. It had been disabled after being muggled recently, so I brought a logbook with its waypoint to the event so people could take a peek at some local (but a long drive) caches and maybe be tempted to drive all the way up to the Frisco, Little Elm, Denton area and check out some of the great (and devious) hides that we offer.

 

Want to know how many people signed this "pocket snot rag"? 7 Seems I was too busy chatting with everyone to have them sign it. Want to know how many caches I had time to find in 4 days? 13 permanent (real) caches. Wow--13 caches in 48 hours. I am a real numbers cheat, aren't I? As head of registration, I fielded a lot of generic questions concerning the event. Want to know the question asked 10 times more than ANY other question? Where are the temp-cache coordinates posted? I guess we have a lot of cheaters like me out there (many of them pre-mid'04 cachers)--or maybe we have a lot of honest cachers who don't know what is now legal or not in this ever evolving "game".

 

Yep, I didn't take the guidelines into consideration--my bad. But who is thinking of guidelines when we are out having fun and not hurting anyone? How many of you have hiked over a mile to a cache and didn't have a pen to sign the logbook (or the pen was out of ink)? Do you check the guidelines to make sure it is okay to log a "find" because your name isn't in the logbook? Of course not. I have done many a lamppost cache and since my 5yr old, Jack Attack, just loves to grab these and the other "micro spew", should I be checking the guidelines to see if I cheated because I didn't huckle buckle it?

 

Is this the part where you want me to appologize for being a post-mid'04 geocaching "camel who is stinking up the tent"? Sorry, I am too busy applying calamine to my PI rash, hanging with my new caching buddies, and counting down the hours to Geowoodstock 5...

[+pghlooking]

EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever).

So basically you are saying the way the rules are now doesn't allow for fun in Geocaching? Finding a cache at it's true location isn't as fun as having the owner bring it to you and signing the container. Why would anyone actually want to hike to the cache when they can have it brought to them? Sounds lazy to me. It boggles me to think people are that hung up with a virtual smiley that they will do anything. Do these people really have such low self images that they will do anything to pretend to be winners at something, even when there is no competition?

 

All this logging of events multiple times is a joke. How many times can you attend the same event in the same day. that should be an easy lock down for GC and would start putting an end to some of this. It has been said that this hurts noone and play your own way. That doesn't work and it does hurt the community. 2 major ways are new people think this is what Geocaching is all about. I have heard someone say that is Geocaching was all in the woods they wouldn't even do it since they are afraid of snakes and deer, and can't stand to be anywhere they can't see houses. The other major way it hurts is over population of caches for the sake of numbers. Do we really need a magnetic keyholder on every guardrail and lamp post? I thought caching was about the journey and adventure and learning about new places and things while meeting others. I didn't realize it was about kissing guardrails and seeing how small a cache you can put in the middle of Muggleville and try your newly acquired stealth spray out.

[+sbell111]

... in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance.

Couldn't these great caches be shown at the event without having everyone log a find on the cache (since it doesn't meet the guidelines)?

[+WalruZ]

This is one of the very reasons I "normally" stay out of Groundspeak. EVERYONE of you are stuck on numbers! You don't care that people had fun. You don't care that people were able to make memories (getting smileys or whatever). You simply care about the stats bar at the bottom of the cacher's account.

 

What utter twaddle.

 

The only reason to log temporary caches or log event caches multiple times is to run up numbers, and the only reason to run up numbers is because the person doing the running up WANTS higher numbers, because the person doing the running up CARES ABOUT higher numbers.

 

To imply that WE are the ones who only care about numbers is duplitious. What the people who object to these sorts of practices care about is HONEST numbers. The people participating in these sorts of smiley harvests either don't know what they're doing, or don't know what honest numbers are, or don't care about honesty. But they DO care about numbers, bucause that's why they do it.

[+The Leprechauns]

... in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance.

Couldn't these great caches be shown at the event without having everyone log a find on the cache (since it doesn't meet the guidelines)?

Absolutely. On several occasions I've brought a collection of evil micro containers to show off at events. My hope is that it will inspire others to be creative, and hide something truly evil instead of just another film canister or hide-a-key. At the last event when I did this, in March, those micros were a fun topic of conversation and lots of people came over to my table to admire them.

 

I never gave a thought to handing out smilies for this experience. It was enough to attend the event and talk with people, including talking about hiding better caches.

 

EDIT: I see that pghlooking just posted. He was at that event and we had a good time talking. I can't recall whether he looked at the collection of fake doohickeys and miniature whatsits, but if he did, I believe he had fun without getting extra smilies.

Edited May 31, 2006 by The Leprechauns

[+drat19]

I was on the organizing committed for GEOWOODSTOCK 4 and I had no idea that pocket caches and temporary caches were illegal. I spent over 75 hours of my spare time leading up to this event just so geocachers around the country could have a good time down here in Texas. What do I get for the effort?--an archived cache and being labeled a cheat. This pocket cache (GCR6CP) was a part of my "...geocaching addict" series that pokes fun at geocachers. It had been disabled after being muggled recently, so I brought a logbook with its waypoint to the event so people could take a peek at some local (but a long drive) caches and maybe be tempted to drive all the way up to the Frisco, Little Elm, Denton area and check out some of the great (and devious) hides that we offer.

 

Want to know how many people signed this "pocket snot rag"? 7 Seems I was too busy chatting with everyone to have them sign it. Want to know how many caches I had time to find in 4 days? 13 permanent (real) caches. Wow--13 caches in 48 hours. I am a real numbers cheat, aren't I? As head of registration, I fielded a lot of generic questions concerning the event. Want to know the question asked 10 times more than ANY other question? Where are the temp-cache coordinates posted? I guess we have a lot of cheaters like me out there (many of them pre-mid'04 cachers)--or maybe we have a lot of honest cachers who don't know what is now legal or not in this ever evolving "game".

 

Yep, I didn't take the guidelines into consideration--my bad. But who is thinking of guidelines when we are out having fun and not hurting anyone? How many of you have hiked over a mile to a cache and didn't have a pen to sign the logbook (or the pen was out of ink)? Do you check the guidelines to make sure it is okay to log a "find" because your name isn't in the logbook? Of course not. I have done many a lamppost cache and since my 5yr old, Jack Attack, just loves to grab these and the other "micro spew", should I be checking the guidelines to see if I cheated because I didn't huckle buckle it?

 

Is this the part where you want me to appologize for being a post-mid'04 geocaching "camel who is stinking up the tent"? Sorry, I am too busy applying calamine to my PI rash, hanging with my new caching buddies, and counting down the hours to Geowoodstock 5...

I'd like to address the "pre-mid'04/Micro Spew part of your post, since those are my pet issues.

 

I have never referred to the post-mid'04 widespread outbreak of Micro Spew as cheating. I have, and continue to, refer to Micro Spew as a CHEAPENING of stats. I consider stats run up during this new era of our game to be an unfair comparison to stats accumulated during the earlier periods of our game. However, caches that fit the cache listing guidelines were hunted, containers were located, and logbooks were signed, so the stats are legit. However (and I say this yet again), this only matter IF STATS MATTER TO YOU, and if YOU WANT TO COMPARE YOUR STATS TO OTHERS'. If you don't, this is a moot discussion.

 

My stats-CHEAPENING thesis is significantly different from the CHEATING thesis being discussed as regards the logging of caches that didn't meet the cache listing guidelines.

 

Together, however, the CHEAPENING and CHEATING aspects of The New Numbers Game that this thread was opened to discuss, and their overall effect on our game, are what is at issue here.

[+Celticwulf]

OK, to respond to SanDiegoSunrise and Moosiegirl: The problem is not with the caches or the event. It sounds like the event was great and those that were there had a wonderful time. Just from what little I've seen on who was there, I would consider going to see people I've only read about.

 

The problems stems from logging these things online in a manner outside of the guidelines. At an event, you can have temps, pocket caches, bingo, jenga, twister, or evil monkey wrangling if you so choose...all of that is not illegal (well, maybe the monkey one but I dunno ). Logging finds on caches that you have not found at the posted coordinates is what the issue is. It really blew up with people logging a cache that IS currently located in Iraq, and having people that saw a temp at GW4 meant to be a tribute for the soldiers over there log a find on a CACHE IN IRAQ. Unless GW4 is magic, I don't think anyone that was at GW4 "found" that cache. What everyone did was have fun at GW4, make sense?

 

In regards to Moosiegirl: it looks like TPTB are willing to work with cache owners who are willing to get thier caches reactivated. As seen with the Iraq cache, once the false "find" logs were removed and notes put in thier place, and the owner worked with the reviewer, the cache was reactivated and all of the goodies that people brought to share with the troops will be able to be placed in the cache later. Bringing containers, showing hiding methods, showing logs from caches...these are all GOOD things to have happen at events, but they are things that should be in your memory or as a note, not just a smiley on a cache page you didn't really visit.

 

*is beginning to wonder if some of the new posters are actually reading through the whole thread before posting...*

 

Celticwulf

[+Driver Carries Cache]

... in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance.

Couldn't these great caches be shown at the event without having everyone log a find on the cache (since it doesn't meet the guidelines)?

 

Exactly!

 

Hey, it would definitely be cool to check out devious hides placed by fellow cachers! Isn't there a post further down the forums that's doing exactly that (Pictures - Cool Cache Containers (ccc's)). Haven't a huge number of folks logged on and marveled at these splendid pieces of work? Do we then deserve to log them for reading the post?

 

If I wanted to meet fellow cachers in a campground, I'd give you the coordinates of the ice chest and invite you to come over and find a cold one! (no logging necessary).

 

Driver Carries Cache

(madmike)

 

(edited to add link)

Edited May 31, 2006 by Driver Carries Cache

[+sbell111]

... This pocket cache (GCR6CP) was a part of my "...geocaching addict" series that pokes fun at geocachers. It had been disabled after being muggled recently, so I brought a logbook with its waypoint to the event so people could take a peek at some local (but a long drive) caches and maybe be tempted to drive all the way up to the Frisco, Little Elm, Denton area and check out some of the great (and devious) hides that we offer. ...

Just out of curiosity, how does a logbook in your pocket make me want to visit Frisco?

[+ODragon]

So how can we be discussing "years" when we haven't been around for what I'd consider "years"??

If the gossip is true, the first ones were at GW1. That was in 2003, making it around for ~3 years. Using the term "years" seems proper in this context.

[+Wacka]

This stuff is occuring in a VERY small % of cases.

Just go out and have fun and don't worry what other people do.

 

Life is too short to worry about such piddling stuff (as I have seen in two cases in the last two weeks).

[+sbell111]

So how can we be discussing "years" when we haven't been around for what I'd consider "years"??

If the gossip is true, the first ones were at GW1. That was in 2003, making it around for ~3 years. Using the term "years" seems proper in this context.

Actually, I am embarressed to admit that I logged a pocket cache in February of 2002.

 

EDIT: To atone for my sin and practice what I preach, I just changed my 'found' log to a 'note'.

Edited May 31, 2006 by sbell111

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Pocket Caches are not cheating. They are perfectly acceptable and widely used.

 

Please be careful with wild and inflamatory accusations of cheating and the like just because some play the game differently than you do.

 

Pocket Caches are not Groundspeak-approved nor listed - most appear at events, some are hidden at the event, some are in people's pockets, some are on a table in plain view - regardless, they are allowed or denied solely at the whim of the event owner.

 

Since the event owners, like cache owners, own the logs they can choose to allow geocachers to log the event multiple times, once for each pocket cache found, or not.

 

This is in no way cheating. Provided the event owner allows them it's up to you as a cacher whether you log them or not... but it is not your right to call those of us who do cheaters.

 

Pocket Caches are NOT moving caches and are not banned. In fact, unless Groundspeak drastically revises cahe and event ownership rules, they CAN'T be banned!

 

Stats are not and never will be the measure of a geocacher nor an indicator of a players status in this game.

 

Anyone who holds dear to or measures their self-worth by stats will be constantly frustrated by those of us who care not one whit for them. They are meaningles except as each cacher defines his own.

 

As to the numbers hysteria, I rarely log caches online: I have logged less than one third of my finds in the last year or more, and I know many cachers that log only some of their finds, so all of the numbers-ho-related insults are seriously misguided.

 

Ed

Edited May 31, 2006 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+pghlooking]

EDIT: I see that pghlooking just posted. He was at that event and we had a good time talking. I can't recall whether he looked at the collection of fake doohickeys and miniature whatsits, but if he did, I believe he had fun without getting extra smilies.

I missed the sharing part but probably because I was talking elsewhere. I have done temp caches at events, but I choose not to log bogus smilies for no reason, like yourself.

[+The Leprechauns]

EDIT: I see that pghlooking just posted. He was at that event and we had a good time talking. I can't recall whether he looked at the collection of fake doohickeys and miniature whatsits, but if he did, I believe he had fun without getting extra smilies.

I missed the sharing part but probably because I was talking elsewhere. I have done temp caches at events, but I choose not to log bogus smilies for no reason, like yourself.

You were too busy drooling over my v1 Moun10Bike Coin. The micros were right next to it. You wuz blinded and bedazzled.

[+VegasCacheHounds]

It's a disservice to call these pocket snot rags "pocket caches." I don't care about "the numbers" but I do care about folks who circumvent the features of the site in order to log someone's pocket lint.

 

If these converted listings are reported they will be archived and locked. If after a warning folks continue to make them they will be banned.

 

My goodness. The activity used to be about the journey to discover new locations.

 

Jeremy, do you really think it is fair to call this play AFTER THE FACT? I agree that there were temp. caches at GW4 that probably would have been best left behind, but in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance. Several of my friends brought creative hides to GW4 that have been archived. They either have to find a new location and re-list them, or let them die for all time. I just can't see the sense in that.

 

Some history: a certain retiree in Houston is a master at creative urban micro hides, nearly all wheel-chair accessible. Some are at great places, some are incredibly inventive containers, some are awe-inspiring camo. What damage is done if these creative hides are showcased at an event? I actually think he was a ''pioneer'' in the temporary cache thing, and people liked it so much, they copied it! I don't know if any of his hides were at GW4, but I would hate to think of any of them being archived.

 

The majority of the caches brought to GW4 were hidden, coordinates were given, and people who logged them had to go find them to do it. A lot of miles of hiking were logged in that park to find them (not to mention the hiding), and for those who flew in to the event, it might have been their only chance to log caches.

 

What I'm trying to say is, why give a blanket condemnation to this practice, when a set of guidelines could be established to keep it true to the game while still allowing it to occur? If it's limited only to the new genre ''mega-event'', then so be it. Temporary caches don't really seem appropriate for local events, anyway. Or if you see fit to ban it altogether, then so be it. But archiving caches and slamming the practice after ''the cows are out of the barn and into the hayfield'' seems to me to be counterproductive.

 

We have a cacher in Austin who has done three of the most absolutely creative hides, based on scientific concepts/theorems, and he's working on more. Each is a learning experience as well as a cache. I had gained permission to take them to GW4, but ran out of time to pick them up. Now I suppose that cacher is very glad that I DID run out of time. Three of the best caches in Central Texas would have been archived, in spite of the fact that 700+ people would have been exposed to his creativity and might have taken his ideas back to their locales. Isn't there something wrong with that picture?

 

Please, Jeremy, look at rescinding those archive orders and make any action you take a rule for future events. My friend, a new cacher (Dec. 05), took one of her creative hides; it's been archived. I would hate for her to be turned off to geocaching by this heavy-handed action.

 

Thanks for listening! Happy Trails.

 

I still have one question that I asked earlier....

 

If a cache is removed from its listed coordinates, how is it still active? Either it needs to be disabled, as its not availbe to be found, or its now a Moving Cache, which is against the guidelines and should be archived.

 

I think it is great that some cachers wanted to showcase some of their caches, but me holding up an ammo can that I once used as a cache container does not mean the person I'm showing it to found the cache. I don't think anyone here has said that it is lame that cachers were showcasing their cool caches, just that people were logging finds on these as if they actually went out and found the cache.

[+sbell111]

Pocket Caches are not cheating. They are perfectly acceptable and widely used. ...

Pocket Caches are NOT moving caches and are not banned. In fact, unless Groundspeak drastically revises cahe and event ownership rules, they CAN'T be banned!

I think you will agree that they are either moving caches, temporary caches, or caches that have been moved since they were listed. Either way, they go against the guidelines and they should not be logged on GC.com. Therefore, in my mind, they are cheating.

[+drat19]

Pocket Caches are not cheating. They are perfectly acceptable and widely used.

 

Please be careful with wild and inflamatory accusations of cheating and the like just because some play the game differently than you do.

 

Pocket Caches are not Groundspeak-approved nor listed - most appear at events, some are hidden at the event, some are in people's pockets, some are on a table in plain view - regardless, they are allowed or denied solely at the whim of the event owner.

 

Since the event owners, like cache owners, own the logs they can choose to allow geocachers to log the event multiple times, once for each pocket cache found, or not.

 

This is in no way cheating. Provided the event owner allows them it's up to you as a cacher whether you log them or not... but it is not your right to call those of us who do cheaters.

 

Pocket Caches are NOT moving caches and are not banned. In fact, unless Groundspeak drastically revises cahe and event ownership rules, they CAN'T be banned!

 

As to the numbers hysteria, I rarely log caches online: I have logged less than one third of my finds in the last year or more, and I know many cachers that log only some of their finds, so all of the numbers-ho-related insults are seriously misguided.

 

Ed

Ed, I'm going to leave the replies to the majority of your post above to others, but I would like to address directly your last paragraph:

 

As to the numbers hysteria, I rarely log caches online: I have logged less than one third of my finds in the last year or more, and I know many cachers that log only some of their finds, so all of the numbers-ho-related insults are seriously misguided.

I respectfully disagree with your statement above. I believe the Numbers Ho related statements (ok, "insults" if you like) are not only NOT seriously misguided, but in fact are quite WELL TARGETED. All of these issues to which this thread and the others related to it are referring, whether about stat CHEAPENING, stat CHEATING, or what have you, speak pointedly and directly to the fact that the accumulation of smilie counts are changing the overall character of our game.

 

I recognize the counter-argument that says, "Don't worry about anyone else's stat but your own", but the fact is that stat comparison is a fact of life in our game, whether in the context of conversation, forum posting, log entries, or what have you. If that's going to be the case, and whether or not someone "wins" or "loses" or there's a "prize" at the end of it or not (obviously, there's NOT), there needs to be some consistency as to how those stats are accumulated. Since we're now seeing some glaring examples of how far people are willing to stretch that consistency, we find ourselves at this crossroads.

[+Recdiver]

It's a disservice to call these pocket snot rags "pocket caches." I don't care about "the numbers" but I do care about folks who circumvent the features of the site in order to log someone's pocket lint.

 

If these converted listings are reported they will be archived and locked. If after a warning folks continue to make them they will be banned.

 

My goodness. The activity used to be about the journey to discover new locations.

 

Jeremy, do you really think it is fair to call this play AFTER THE FACT? I agree that there were temp. caches at GW4 that probably would have been best left behind, but in my experience at Texas events, the temporary caches were brought and placed to showcase creative hides and concepts, and to give others a chance to see them when they might not otherwise have the chance. Several of my friends brought creative hides to GW4 that have been archived. They either have to find a new location and re-list them, or let them die for all time. I just can't see the sense in that.

 

Some history: a certain retiree in Houston is a master at creative urban micro hides, nearly all wheel-chair accessible. Some are at great places, some are incredibly inventive containers, some are awe-inspiring camo. What damage is done if these creative hides are showcased at an event? I actually think he was a ''pioneer'' in the temporary cache thing, and people liked it so much, they copied it! I don't know if any of his hides were at GW4, but I would hate to think of any of them being archived.

 

The majority of the caches brought to GW4 were hidden, coordinates were given, and people who logged them had to go find them to do it. A lot of miles of hiking were logged in that park to find them (not to mention the hiding), and for those who flew in to the event, it might have been their only chance to log caches.

 

What I'm trying to say is, why give a blanket condemnation to this practice, when a set of guidelines could be established to keep it true to the game while still allowing it to occur? If it's limited only to the new genre ''mega-event'', then so be it. Temporary caches don't really seem appropriate for local events, anyway. Or if you see fit to ban it altogether, then so be it. But archiving caches and slamming the practice after ''the cows are out of the barn and into the hayfield'' seems to me to be counterproductive.

 

We have a cacher in Austin who has done three of the most absolutely creative hides, based on scientific concepts/theorems, and he's working on more. Each is a learning experience as well as a cache. I had gained permission to take them to GW4, but ran out of time to pick them up. Now I suppose that cacher is very glad that I DID run out of time. Three of the best caches in Central Texas would have been archived, in spite of the fact that 700+ people would have been exposed to his creativity and might have taken his ideas back to their locales. Isn't there something wrong with that picture?

 

Please, Jeremy, look at rescinding those archive orders and make any action you take a rule for future events. My friend, a new cacher (Dec. 05), took one of her creative hides; it's been archived. I would hate for her to be turned off to geocaching by this heavy-handed action.

 

Thanks for listening! Happy Trails.

 

I still have one question that I asked earlier....

 

If a cache is removed from its listed coordinates, how is it still active? Either it needs to be disabled, as its not availbe to be found, or its now a Moving Cache, which is against the guidelines and should be archived.

 

I think it is great that some cachers wanted to showcase some of their caches, but me holding up an ammo can that I once used as a cache container does not mean the person I'm showing it to found the cache. I don't think anyone here has said that it is lame that cachers were showcasing their cool caches, just that people were logging finds on these as if they actually went out and found the cache.

 

I'm with you VCH. I fail to see the logic here. If someone wants to showcase a clever cache more power to them. However if they let people log it when it is not in the original location then that is wrong no matter how you twist it. "heavy-handed action" I don't think so. I see it more as enforcement of the guidelines.

[+NoLemon]

By the way, the temp caches that I found at GW4 DID involve me punching coords into my GPSr, going out, finding the cache and signing the log.

 

No one has a problem with you finding the caches. The issue is with logging the find on this website. The caches weren't listed on geocaching.com so why do you feel like you should log them on the website? If you have to log them on-line somewhere, how about trying to log them on one of the other listing sites?