Jump to content

The New Numbers Game


drat19
Followers 13

Recommended Posts

Up here in flyover terretory, we have these geo-picnic events, where we eat hotdogs, drink soda and beer and sit around the campfire and gab about geocaching, and show each other our geocoins.. Then we load coordinates in our GPSrs and go scrambling off into the woods, climbing up and down ravines in great herds and find temporary geocaches. We get to actually geocache with famous, revered cachers from far away exotic places like Chicago and Indianpolis.Then we go home and log these temporary caches on the event cache page. It's great fun. We like it and it doesn't hurt anybody. I even had a spice jar hanging on my collar called "Wandering Patrick." 50 people signed its log, They all petted me, many logged it on the event cache page. We keep track of our stats. We are not cheaters. We're just dudes and dudettes and little duders and dog-dudes doing what we like to do, the way we like to do it :) : GEOCACHING IN INDIANA! :)

 

Sounds like a lot of fun! However, again I ask, why do you feel the need to get smilies for those temporary caches you had fun finding with your fellow event attendees? Why is it acceptable to log finds on geocaching.com for caches that are not listed on the site?

 

According to your profile, you have attending 30 events. But when I actually list the events you've been to, only 5 are shown. How is this not mis-representing the truth? Which is it? Have you been to 30 events or 5 events?

 

Don't bait the litle white dog. He bites!! And don't think you can confuse him with logic, either. Pick a different fight. He explained his position, it's his opinion. He's outside peeing right now. :D

Link to comment

I realize I am new to this sport/game (so flame if you choose); however, I really thought the point of this activity was walking in the woods or city looking for ammo cans, micros, etc. I had thought about attending an event this summer (MidWest GeoBash 2006), but I don't know now. This debate seems so silly. To this novice, it appears simple. Find a cache that is approved by this organization, sign the paper log (not the container), trade swag/bugs, sign the log on-line (if you choose), and then go look for more at your own pace. It doesn't have to be harder than that.

 

You are so right. Events do not interest me at all. I used to like bowling, but I got tired of being told I couldn't bowl because "the League" was going to bowl. I switched to golf for awhile, until I had to start calling ahead to see if the course was open, or if they had a "scramble" going on.

Why do people have to organize every sport they play into a competition? Whatever happened to doing something "just for the fun of it'. I'm always glad to meet fellow catchers on the trail, and wouldn't mind a "Greet and eat", but you can take your big organized events and ...... :):) (rant off)

Link to comment

Up here in flyover terretory, we have these geo-picnic events, where we eat hotdogs, drink soda and beer and sit around the campfire and gab about geocaching, and show each other our geocoins.. Then we load coordinates in our GPSrs and go scrambling off into the woods, climbing up and down ravines in great herds and find temporary geocaches. We get to actually geocache with famous, revered cachers from far away exotic places like Chicago and Indianpolis.Then we go home and log these temporary caches on the event cache page. It's great fun. We like it and it doesn't hurt anybody. I even had a spice jar hanging on my collar called "Wandering Patrick." 50 people signed its log, They all petted me, many logged it on the event cache page. We keep track of our stats. We are not cheaters. We're just dudes and dudettes and little duders and dog-dudes doing what we like to do, the way we like to do it :) : GEOCACHING IN INDIANA! :)

 

Sounds like a lot of fun! However, again I ask, why do you feel the need to get smilies for those temporary caches you had fun finding with your fellow event attendees? Why is it acceptable to log finds on geocaching.com for caches that are not listed on the site?

 

According to your profile, you have attending 30 events. But when I actually list the events you've been to, only 5 are shown. How is this not mis-representing the truth? Which is it? Have you been to 30 events or 5 events?

I actually don't have as much of a problem with the multi-event logging as some others around here...UNTIL THE MOMENT ANYONE WHO HAS DONE THAT WANTS TO COMPARE HIS/HER STATS WITH ANYONE ELSE. Then, the question of "level playing field" comes in...did you attend 5 events, or 30? etc etc etc

 

Until then, they can feel free to "do what they like to do, the way they like to do it".

Link to comment

It looks to me like the people that are complaining just really don't understand temporary and/or pocket caches and have never had the great joy in participating in them. :) Its too bad that you'll never get to see the value in them because they were great fun! You MISSED IT! :) ...

You might want to reread my post a page or two back. I've participated. They still aren't geocaches and shouldn't be logged as finds on GC.com.

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Link to comment

I realize I am new to this sport/game (so flame if you choose); however, I really thought the point of this activity was walking in the woods or city looking for ammo cans, micros, etc. I had thought about attending an event this summer (MidWest GeoBash 2006), but I don't know now. This debate seems so silly. To this novice, it appears simple. Find a cache that is approved by this organization, sign the paper log (not the container), trade swag/bugs, sign the log on-line (if you choose), and then go look for more at your own pace. It doesn't have to be harder than that.

I think that you have made the argument perfectly and plainly.

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Except forum posts from Pittsburgh. Those are safe. You can believe them.

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Except forum posts from Pittsburgh. Those are safe. You can believe them.

I believe that.

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Except forum posts from Pittsburgh. Those are safe. You can believe them.

Well, true if you don't count that Keystone clown. :)

Link to comment

Up here in flyover terretory, we have these geo-picnic events, where we eat hotdogs, drink soda and beer and sit around the campfire and gab about geocaching, and show each other our geocoins.. Then we load coordinates in our GPSrs and go scrambling off into the woods, climbing up and down ravines in great herds and find temporary geocaches. We get to actually geocache with famous, revered cachers from far away exotic places like Chicago and Indianpolis.Then we go home and log these temporary caches on the event cache page. It's great fun. We like it and it doesn't hurt anybody. I even had a spice jar hanging on my collar called "Wandering Patrick." 50 people signed its log, They all petted me, many logged it on the event cache page. We keep track of our stats. We are not cheaters. We're just dudes and dudettes and little duders and dog-dudes doing what we like to do, the way we like to do it :) : GEOCACHING IN INDIANA! :)

 

Sounds like a lot of fun! However, again I ask, why do you feel the need to get smilies for those temporary caches you had fun finding with your fellow event attendees? Why is it acceptable to log finds on geocaching.com for caches that are not listed on the site?

 

According to your profile, you have attending 30 events. But when I actually list the events you've been to, only 5 are shown. How is this not mis-representing the truth? Which is it? Have you been to 30 events or 5 events?

I actually don't have as much of a problem with the multi-event logging as some others around here...UNTIL THE MOMENT ANYONE WHO HAS DONE THAT WANTS TO COMPARE HIS/HER STATS WITH ANYONE ELSE. Then, the question of "level playing field" comes in...did you attend 5 events, or 30? etc etc etc

 

Until then, they can feel free to "do what they like to do, the way they like to do it".

 

Hey Drat 30 or 5 isnt bad I know of a cacher who has logged over 260 events

but its actually only about 26 or 27 :D;):P

 

LOL just checked he logged his last event over 40 times :)

Edited by vagabond
Link to comment

Up here in flyover terretory, we have these geo-picnic events, where we eat hotdogs, drink soda and beer and sit around the campfire and gab about geocaching, and show each other our geocoins.. Then we load coordinates in our GPSrs and go scrambling off into the woods, climbing up and down ravines in great herds and find temporary geocaches. We get to actually geocache with famous, revered cachers from far away exotic places like Chicago and Indianpolis.Then we go home and log these temporary caches on the event cache page. It's great fun. We like it and it doesn't hurt anybody. I even had a spice jar hanging on my collar called "Wandering Patrick." 50 people signed its log, They all petted me, many logged it on the event cache page. We keep track of our stats. We are not cheaters. We're just dudes and dudettes and little duders and dog-dudes doing what we like to do, the way we like to do it :) : GEOCACHING IN INDIANA! :)

 

Sounds like a lot of fun! However, again I ask, why do you feel the need to get smilies for those temporary caches you had fun finding with your fellow event attendees? Why is it acceptable to log finds on geocaching.com for caches that are not listed on the site?

 

According to your profile, you have attending 30 events. But when I actually list the events you've been to, only 5 are shown. How is this not mis-representing the truth? Which is it? Have you been to 30 events or 5 events?

I actually don't have as much of a problem with the multi-event logging as some others around here...UNTIL THE MOMENT ANYONE WHO HAS DONE THAT WANTS TO COMPARE HIS/HER STATS WITH ANYONE ELSE. Then, the question of "level playing field" comes in...did you attend 5 events, or 30? etc etc etc

 

Until then, they can feel free to "do what they like to do, the way they like to do it".

 

Hey Drat 30 or 5 isnt bad I know of a cacher who has logged over 260 events

but its actually only about 26 or 27 :D;):P

Yikes. But once again, that's fine...until THE MOMENT they want to compare stats.

Link to comment
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.

 

JV has stolen my thunder :) He is correct that Groundspeak.com is a private company that has a set of rules/guidelines that we have all agreed to follow when we signed up as members. You can play the game of geocaching any way you want as long as it does not violate the rules/guidelines.

 

If you cannot abide by the rules/guidelines of this web site, then you are free to take your game to another web site. Or you can try to persuade Jeremy & Co. to change the rules to fit your style of play. As in real life, if you want to violate the rules, you must be willing to accept the consequences. If you cannot accept the consequences of your actions, then abide by the rules or leave!

 

Jeremy & Co. have been a little lax in enforcing the rules in the past. I think the abuses of the rules that took place at GW4 have shown them the folly of laxity. But they cannot enforce the rules all by themselves. When we notice possible rule violations, we should politely point them out to the violator, the cache owner, a reviewer, or gc.com, as appropriate. :D:P:);)

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Except forum posts from Pittsburgh. Those are safe. You can believe them.

Well, true if you don't count that Keystone clown. :)

 

:)

Link to comment

To add to what I said and what Lep said, I've also been to events with temp caches, and I enjoyed them a lot, but I do not feel that my experience was in anyway cheapened by not being able to log them online.

 

That is my thought. I went to an event once where there were pocket caches, but they were not logged online anywhere. They were just normal no smilie temp caches. The event used them as a get out and meet people game, and to motivate people they gave some sort of prize. I think something like all who found all of them got put in a drawing or something. So they served their purpose. People happily mingled and had fun and I don't remember anyone complaining that there was no place to log them online. One person did ask me if they had cache pages and I explained that they didn't and why, and that was fine with them.

 

For everyone who really wants a smilie for such things, I ask where is the harm in enjoying them without one? The only thing I come up with is wanting to keep track of all logs signed. But then you can place a note saying you found x number of event caches and/or use something like keenpeople.com to keep track. Takes a bit of work, but it is not all that hard.

Link to comment

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.

...

 

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? ...

 

Having organized events for several different types of organizations I know that the first thing to do is to become familiar with the rules of the organization so the event does not run afoul of the rules. Common sense, which of course is not commonly used. Sorry if this comes off as an attack of SDS, I know he meant well. But foolishness is foolishness.

Link to comment

For everyone who really wants a smilie for such things, I ask where is the harm in enjoying them without one? The only thing I come up with is wanting to keep track of all logs signed. But then you can place a note saying you found x number of event caches and/or use something like keenpeople.com to keep track. Takes a bit of work, but it is not all that hard.

 

*applauds and agrees completly*

 

Celticwulf

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

 

The cache of mine that was archived was certainly not a pocket cache! Now that I think about it..... even if it fit, you REALLY wouldn't want my (now archived) cache in your pocket. :(

 

It was done for the fun of it. I never heard a negative comment from anyone who saw the comtainer. I saw plenty of smiles and shared many a belly laugh with it's finders. There was no deceit in the cache page. If you read the logs and my logging requirements you would see that this cache was all about FUN. Yeah.... I guess you could say it was "all about the numbers". I bet all of the finders would agree it was the laughs and not the smileys that were the most important numbers for this (now archived) cache. As a side note, there were MANY people who enjoyed this cache without logging it if that makes any of you feel better. Some may say this could've been just as funny without it being a cache..... 'taint so! Ask anyone who found it!

Link to comment

I was on the organizing committed for GEOWOODSTOCK 4 and I had no idea that pocket caches and temporary caches were illegal.

So in the year you have been caching and have hid 24 caches you have never read the guidlines

 

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.

Well, maybe you should have spent and extra 20 minutes to read the guidlines

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".

 

ever evolving game, says who, a bunch of people that do like certain rules so they decide that those rules do not appl to them, let me find a little violin to play for you

 

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?

So you admit that you do not care about the guidlines and that you are above them

 

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)?

 

Well what I have done is gone back to my truck to get a pen or pencil the one time that happened to me, What is a mile anyway.

 

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...

Link to comment

Everyone plays in there own way.

 

Personally, i like seeing how many caches i've found. i have actually found everyone i've logged. the only thing not accurate is my hidden caches, ive hidden a bunch more, but adopted them out when i moved from California. but no big deal. I know, and I dont care if others do or not.

Link to comment
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)?

 

Well what I have done is gone back to my truck to get a pen or pencil the one time that happened to me, What is a mile anyway.

 

 

We have done that before. I know of one cacher who used his own blood to sign a log. I dont recommend this for many reasons. And someone else mentioned signing a cache in leaf juice. Another used a bit of charcoal to sign. There are ways to sign a log without a pen or pencil.

Edited by Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking
Link to comment
I know of one cacher who used his own blood to sign a log.
Been there. Done that. FWIW, I was already bleeding from injuries sustained getting to the cache. It's not like I stabbed myself or anything.
And someone else mentioned signing a cache in leaf juice.
Done that, too.
Another used a bit of charcoal to sign.
And that, too.

 

For me, if I don't sign the log, it's not a find. Period. And if the cache is not at the coordinates where it was hidden and approved, it's not a find, either.

 

This does not strike me as nuclear physics. And trust me, I would know if it were.

Edited by fizzymagic
Link to comment
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)?

 

Well what I have done is gone back to my truck to get a pen or pencil the one time that happened to me, What is a mile anyway.

 

 

We have done that before. I know of one cacher who used his own blood to sign a log. I dont recommend this for many reasons. And someone else mentioned signing a cache in leaf juice. Another used a bit of charcoal to sign. There are ways to sign a log without a pen or pencil.

 

Its happened to me. I've used the lit end of a cigar, a stick dipped in mud, my finger dipped in dirt and a rock to sign the cache.

Link to comment

As to your original comment about people logging geocoins and TBs at events:

 

If the event has a GC number than it is a cache! New feature May 2nd, 2006 per Jeremy!!!!!

 

"Lately there has been an increase in logging activity for Travel Bugs and Geocoins. Unfortunately many people were picking up and dropping these items into the same geocache so they could increase their find count or receive a new trackable icon in their profile. As a result we have created a new log type which also goes towards your profile count without causing unnecessary extra movements for the trackable item.

 

The new log type is called "Discovered it" and can be used if you have the tracking number for the icon. Please use this if you have no plans to move the Travel Bug or geocoin to a new location."

 

Therefore ..... DISCOVERED IT is a legitimate legal numbers log that should be used at any cache where you find a TB or geocoin and do not want to move it.

 

:( ImpalaBob

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

 

The cache of mine that was archived was certainly not a pocket cache! Now that I think about it..... even if it fit, you REALLY wouldn't want my (now archived) cache in your pocket. :(

 

It was done for the fun of it. I never heard a negative comment from anyone who saw the comtainer. I saw plenty of smiles and shared many a belly laugh with it's finders. There was no deceit in the cache page. If you read the logs and my logging requirements you would see that this cache was all about FUN. Yeah.... I guess you could say it was "all about the numbers". I bet all of the finders would agree it was the laughs and not the smileys that were the most important numbers for this (now archived) cache. As a side note, there were MANY people who enjoyed this cache without logging it if that makes any of you feel better. Some may say this could've been just as funny without it being a cache..... 'taint so! Ask anyone who found it!

You used your cache page for a second cache which was not approved by GC and used it for logging of bogus finds in TX at GW4. It is physically impossible to be at 2 places at once, at least to the best of my knowledge, so how can people be logging it in TX when the posted coordinates were in FL? You purposely circumvented the GC guidlines to do whatever you wanted. You broke the rules and now your cache has been archieved, correctly so. Call it what you want, but GC was right on this one. Why is it so hard for you (general you not just you buy everyone eklse who thinks their cache was archieved erroneously) people understand something so simple as "break the rules, cache gets archieved". Fun doesn't mean it is right. I used to drive fast with my friends and car surf down the highway. It was a lot of fun actually, but just because it was fun for the few of us doing it, it doesn't make it right.

Link to comment

Sorry, the Boss has spoken!

 

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 was clearly talking about "converted" caches in that quote, not caches created for the event.

 

Actually, he doesen't like temp caches either. He commented on the issue one year ago.

 

See this great thread Ridiculous Event Number Game?]

 

His (Mopar's) point is that it might be impossible or extremely difficult to do the programming that would be required to make it possible for the Temp caches to show up as a different Icon in the stats.

The point is irrelevant. Temp caches aren't allowed on the site. And as I indicated in countless threads in the past, I think logging attended twice for an event is stupid, and posting additional logs to "match" whatever "count" you determined your numbers should be is equally stupid. However I have no plans to be the point police and create complicated rules for determining what counts as a find. That is up to the cache listing owner to decide.

 

However I do reserve the right to stop abuse on this web site, and frown highly upon fake logs on archived caches (or any cache) just to boost numbers here - such as counting finds on other listing sites. Just because I don't want to be the point police doesn't mean I can't take appropriate action against the users who decide to abuse the features of this site.

 

But as I also said before, I don't lose sleep over it. I stand by my stance that there are no "points" for geocaching and no score to be kept. The site does not keep score but simply offers a history of your finds.

Link to comment

How can you even compare 35 parking lot micros to six traditionals at the end of five mile hikes into the woods? Comparing numbers is relative.

Sorry Drat micros are there for people who can't do long hikes but still want the enjoyment of the scavenger hunt and even for people who can do the long hikes, but would also prefer to be out caching during their lunch hour rather then hanging around the workplace (my bro). Have you thought about trying to get your own attribute for your kind of hunts?

I like knowing how many finds I've got, but only I know what each one represents in time spent and enjoyment.

I feel a little sorry for the members at the TX GW4. I hope their enjoyment at finding all those caches in one day wasn't ruined by bickering. It's all relative. They probably shouldn't have defaced the containers though.

Link to comment

How can you even compare 35 parking lot micros to six traditionals at the end of five mile hikes into the woods? Comparing numbers is relative.

You're right. You can't. That's my point. As long as we're not comparing stats, this is a moot point. However, stat comparisons go on ALL THE TIME in our game nowadays, and it obviously matters to some people because of "milestone congratulations", references to one's stats in forum posts, events, etc., and the fact that this thread has gone over 10 pages now. I believe that Spewed Micros have CHEAPENED those stats, and of course caches logged against GC guidelines has CHEATED those stats.

 

I say YET AGAIN: If stats are the private concern of the people who ran theirs up, however they did it, THEN THIS DOES NOT MATTER. But clearly, people DO want to compare and it DOES matter; if it didn't, why would people be using all these new methods to increment their numbers?

Link to comment

Why is it so hard for you (general you not just you buy everyone eklse who thinks their cache was archieved erroneously) people understand something so simple as "break the rules, cache gets archieved".

 

Could you direct me to the where it says this in the guidelines? I looked around, but couldn't really find anything that stated that. Although when I'm reading quickly, sometimes I accidentally skip over things.

 

This is a legitimate question, not a hypothetical one, so attackers, please lay off. I'm actually curious as to what the guidelines have to say about "breaking the rules, cache gets archived". I didn't see anything specific regarding the idea that altering the nature of an already approved cache (ie. using an established GC # to log temp and pocket caches) will get your cache archived and locked.

 

I'm not looking for answers like "it's implied", etc. I want to see the verbage that's actually on the gc.com website. I appreciate your help. Thanks!! :(

Link to comment

Why is it so hard for you (general you not just you buy everyone eklse who thinks their cache was archieved erroneously) people understand something so simple as "break the rules, cache gets archieved".

 

Could you direct me to the where it says this in the guidelines? I looked around, but couldn't really find anything that stated that. Although when I'm reading quickly, sometimes I accidentally skip over things.

 

This is a legitimate question, not a hypothetical one, so attackers, please lay off. I'm actually curious as to what the guidelines have to say about "breaking the rules, cache gets archived". I didn't see anything specific regarding the idea that altering the nature of an already approved cache (ie. using an established GC # to log temp and pocket caches) will get your cache archived and locked.

 

I'm not looking for answers like "it's implied", etc. I want to see the verbage that's actually on the gc.com website. I appreciate your help. Thanks!! :(

 

You may argue this point, but I see it quite clearly here as from the guidelines:

 

"Cache Permanence

 

When you report a cache on the Geocaching.com web site, geocachers should (and will) expect the cache to be there for a realistic and extended period of time. Therefore, caches that have the goal to move (“traveling caches”), or temporary caches (caches hidden for less than 3 months or for events) most likely will not be listed."

 

If it's not "permanent", it's not listed. If a person alters a permanent cache to use it for traveling or temporary caches, it no longer is permanent and therefore is de-listed or rather archived.

 

Alter the cache (make a permanent temporary or traveling) / not be listed (archived)

Link to comment

I'm no lawyer, but maybe this from the TOU:

 

3. License to Use Site; Restrictions

Groundspeak hereby grants You a non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable license to view and use the Site in accordance with this Agreement and any guidelines or policies posted on the Site. Groundspeak reserves the right to suspend or revoke, in its sole discretion, the license hereunder and to prevent You from accessing all or any portion of the Site with or without notice or reason and without liability on the part of Groundspeak.

 

Groundspeak may change, suspend, or discontinue any portion of the Site, or any service offered on the Site, at any time, including but not limited to any feature, database, application, or content. Groundspeak may also impose limits on certain features offered on the Site with or without notice.

Link to comment

I also think the text in the "guidelines" which says

If the Geocaching.com web site is contacted and informed that your cache has been placed inappropriately, your cache may be archived or disabled and you may be contacted with any information provided by the individual or organization who contacted us.
informs you that they may archive any geocache they decide is inappropriate.
Link to comment

I personally don’t care what people do to get their numbers up. I only use the stats mainly for two things.

 

1st. Being to keep record of what I do. I have my own standards on what and how I will log a cache, TB, and coin. If other cachers standards are not like mine so what. Mine are for me.

 

2nd. The only part I look at other cachers numbers is when it come to a DNF on one of my caches. If someone marks one my caches with a DNF I do look at their numbers to establish whether or not the DNF indicates a possible lost cache. What do I mean – if someone with less than 50 caches DNF one my caches I will only take that as they are a beginner and nothing more than they could not find it. If a more seasoned cacher DNF my cache I will prompted to go check the cache. Now beginner or not, multiple DNF always gets a check.

 

Do I care that John Doe has 1500 finds and he got 250 over the weekend? NO..

 

Do I think that it can “cheapen” the sprit of the sport? Yes

 

Do stats matter? Yes and no – does not matter personally but I have too have something to gauge ones experience when they say they had/have a problem with a cache.

 

Like I said I have my own rules I follow and expect no one else to follow and hold nothing against others that don’t. Short example:

 

I will not log a Geocoin that I actually don’t move. I have seen many Geocoins at events where I could have taken the numbers and log the coin as seen. But I decided for my own stats I wanted to know how many I have moved not seen. If others log every coin they have seen then good for them that’s their choice.

 

Currently in one my caches there is a geocoin that I have not had or seen. The temptation to go to my own cache and grab the coin to move is very tempting but I won’t since I would not truly consider that as a found coin or one given to me to move. More than likely when someone finds the cache I will never see the coin in the area again. Oh well.. But I think for my own rules and count that I want to keep that getting the coin out one my caches is wrong. Do I care if others do that – not at all. My rule for me.

 

My main point in the whole stats thing is most numbers mean nothing. But at same time I need to utilize to those numbers to establish someone experience and if they padded or what ever you want to call it their numbers then I unfortunately I’m mislead.

Link to comment

In a local forum, someone who WAS there said there were nine "pocket caches".

All this angst over NINE caches!

Some people need to get a life!

There's a bookmark list with over 150 already, most having been archieved already and hopefully the rest will be soon. If you really think there are only 9 pocket caches out there pretending to be real approved caches, then you need to stop believing everything you read on the internet.

Except forum posts from Pittsburgh. Those are safe. You can believe them.

Pitt12thMan.jpg

:( Oh I believe all right.

Link to comment

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.

...

 

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? ...

 

Yeah I can see how that would hurt. Would it have been easier if they'd archived the cache for being outside of the guidelines and called you ignorant (of the rules) instead of a cheat. :(

Link to comment

Sorry, the Boss has spoken!

 

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 was clearly talking about "converted" caches in that quote, not caches created for the event.

 

Actually, he doesen't like temp caches either. He commented on the issue one year ago.

 

See this great thread Ridiculous Event Number Game?]

 

His (Mopar's) point is that it might be impossible or extremely difficult to do the programming that would be required to make it possible for the Temp caches to show up as a different Icon in the stats.

The point is irrelevant. Temp caches aren't allowed on the site. And as I indicated in countless threads in the past, I think logging attended twice for an event is stupid, and posting additional logs to "match" whatever "count" you determined your numbers should be is equally stupid. However I have no plans to be the point police and create complicated rules for determining what counts as a find. That is up to the cache listing owner to decide.

 

However I do reserve the right to stop abuse on this web site, and frown highly upon fake logs on archived caches (or any cache) just to boost numbers here - such as counting finds on other listing sites. Just because I don't want to be the point police doesn't mean I can't take appropriate action against the users who decide to abuse the features of this site.

 

But as I also said before, I don't lose sleep over it. I stand by my stance that there are no "points" for geocaching and no score to be kept. The site does not keep score but simply offers a history of your finds.

 

Thanks, I was looking for that post yesterday.

 

Yes, it's clear that he doesn't like temp caches or multiple event logs, but it's just as clear that he intends to do nothing about them, unless and until he changes his mind. What he does oppose strongly enough to do something about is logs to archived caches on finds from other listing sites and GC.com listed caches becoming travelling caches at events.

 

Let me state again, I am agreement with those in opposition to all these practices in principle, that is, I have not and would not log pocket caches, event temps or caches not listed on GC.com. However, I am not a big fan of how others' opposition to these practices is demonstrated in the forums.

 

Let's look at an example. Tommy is the outdoorsy type. He hikes, mountain bikes and camps whenever he gets the chance. He already owns a GPSr that he uses for these activities, and one day he sees a report in his local paper about Geocaching. Intrigued, he goes to the website and does some research. There are a few caches right in his neihborhood, so he loads up the coords and takes a walk.

 

Tommy doesn't know it, but he's already been bit. He wonders about the caches that are for members only, so he gets a premium membership. That weekend he heads off into the mountains to look for a 4/5 cache. It takes all day, but it was a blast. After posting a glowing log about what a great time he had, Tommy gets an email from the cacher who placed the cache.

 

They correspond a few times, and then Tommy gets invited to a cache event at a local park. Tommy shows up at the event and meets many of the people who's logs he's been reading for the last three weeks. There are a number of temp caches hidden at the event, and Tommy finds and logs five of them. On returning home, Tommy sees that the caches he found are not listed on GC.com. He emails his buddy and is told that the accepted practice is to log them on the event page, so he does.

 

Perusing the forums one afternoon, Tommy finds a thread that states unequivocally that he is a LIAR. Not only that, he's a CHEATER, and he has RUINED THE GAME FOR EVERYONE ELSE. Posting in the thread to try and defend his actions, Tommy is told that his rationalizations are on par with those of NAZIS and PEDOPHILES.

 

Welcome to Geocaching, Tommy.

 

While I don't agree with posting multiple event caches, pocket caches, archived and illegal traveling caches, in general I like the people who do these things better than those who oppose them.

 

edit:My italics got out of hand.

Edited by CheshireFrog
Link to comment
,.....Tommy gets invited to a cache event at a local park. Tommy shows up at the event and meets many of the people who's logs he's been reading for the last three weeks. There are a number of temp caches hidden at the event, and Tommy finds and logs five of them. On returning home, Tommy sees that the caches he found are not listed on GC.com. He emails his buddy and is told that the accepted practice is to log them on the event page, so he does.

 

Perusing the forums one afternoon, Tommy finds a thread that states unequivocally that he is a LIAR. Not only that, he's a CHEATER, and he has RUINED THE GAME FOR EVERYONE ELSE. Posting in the thread to try and defend his actions, Tommy is told that his rationalizations are on par with those of NAZIS and PEDOPHILES.

 

Welcome to Geocaching, Tommy.

 

While I don't agree with posting multiple event caches, pocket caches, archived and illegal traveling caches, in general I like the people who do these things better than those who oppose them.

 

edit:My italics got out of hand.

 

You actually are right. Once someone has been insulted, it is almost impossible to get them to admit they were wrong.

Link to comment

I see that I have been quoted a couple of times in this thread from the same thread that happened last year.

 

I made all my arguments back then, and my stance hasn't changed as far as temp caches at events. (Just the temp caches, not the pocket caches, retirement cards, etc) I have stayed out of this one- I took enough abuse the last time.

 

As far as the thread from last year, let me summarize:

 

Some people don't like loggin them, and have valid points.

 

Some people do log them, and also have valid points.

 

Jeremy PERSONALLY doesn't care for it, but is not going to disallow it- he says it is up to the cache owner.

 

The same suggestion was made on that thread to have a seperate icon for event temps, but Jeremy made no bones that he was completely unwilling to do so.

 

I do know that the Wisconsin geocaching association was setting up its first big event a few years back, they contacted tptb asking about making seperate cache pages for the event temps. They were asked at that time to not waste bandwith with them and to log the temps on the event page instead. That is the policy that has been followed ever since. After last years blowup on these forume the membership was asked to vote on whether we should continue the policy, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the policy as- is.

Edited by Docapi
Link to comment

After last years blowup on these forume the membership was asked to vote on whether we should continue the policy, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the policy as- is.

 

Well yeah, those who wanted to ban multi-logging voted once, those who want to keep multi-logging voted more than once :laughing: (joke)

Link to comment

Why is it so hard for you (general you not just you buy everyone eklse who thinks their cache was archieved erroneously) people understand something so simple as "break the rules, cache gets archieved".

 

Could you direct me to the where it says this in the guidelines? I looked around, but couldn't really find anything that stated that. Although when I'm reading quickly, sometimes I accidentally skip over things.

 

This is a legitimate question, not a hypothetical one, so attackers, please lay off. I'm actually curious as to what the guidelines have to say about "breaking the rules, cache gets archived". I didn't see anything specific regarding the idea that altering the nature of an already approved cache (ie. using an established GC # to log temp and pocket caches) will get your cache archived and locked.

 

I'm not looking for answers like "it's implied", etc. I want to see the verbage that's actually on the gc.com website. I appreciate your help. Thanks!! :laughing:

 

Major,

You've hit the nail on the head there. There are at least four different sources of guidance at play here:

 

1) The "Rules of Geocaching". From the getting started page, Geocaching FAQ:

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

2. Leave something in the cache

3. Write about it in the logbook

Where you place a cache is up to you.

 

That's it. Period. End of story.

 

Moving on then, next we have the:

 

2) Cache Listing Requirements / Guidelines

 

Note, that these are the requirements and guidelines for LISTING a cache. They have absolutely nothing to do with how you log them. Note also, that for the most part, these are just that: GUIDELINES. As such, they are largely open to interpretation by the various powers that be.

 

Next, we have the so-called:

 

3) Geocacher's Creed

 

Here is where we find things like "don't hoard travel bugs", "trade up or don't trade at all" and other things that are often cited around here as "rules". These are not rules, either. The "creed" is completely voluntary and has no enforcability.

 

Finally, there is:

 

4) Generally accepted practice

 

I think the problem is that most of the high and mighty think that #3 and #4 are both also #1. Yes, it's "generally accepted" that you only record one found log on a cache. But it's not a rule. If someone wants to visit a cache every month or every day for that matter and log a find, so be it. THERE IS NO RULE AGAINST IT. If someone wants to log an event 87 times, that's THEIR PREROGATIVE.

 

So to answer your question, there are numerous citations in the guidelines that say "we MAY archive your cache if....". None of those guidelines say anything about logging requirements, though, they all have to do with cache placement. Yes, you might get your cache archived if it's a moving cache, for instance, but there is no rule against multiple logs, for example.

 

By the way, for the "that's the way it's always been" crowd, here is a curious tidbit from the getting started page:

 

Are there any variations in the game?

 

YES! We strongly encourage it, actually. Geocaching is a game that constantly reinvents itself, and the rules are very flexible. If you have a new idea on how to place a cache, or a new game using GPS units, we'd love to hear about it.

 

Interesting. So even the "hard and fast" rules are neither hard nor fast it would seem.

 

So what's the bottom line? No matter how much a practice is "generally accepted" or how long it's been that way, that's no reason for anyone to assume that that's a rule and is inviolate, nor is any one person's OPINION on how logs should be handled more or less valuable than any others. To claim that your way of doing things is the RIGHT way or the ONLY way, even if it IS the "generally accepted" practice, is elitist at best.

 

For instance, while I don't do it, I can certainly see why some people might want to log a find every time they visit a cache. Maybe to some people, that number indicates how many finds they have made, and not how many distinct caches they have found. Maybe they like to keep track of how many attempts they've made. Maybe that is THEIR BUSINESS and not anyone else's. I seriously doubt that the powers that be would frown heavily upon someone who decided that that was how they wanted to play the game.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 13
×
×
  • Create New...