Multi-logging Event Caches Solution

[CoyoteRed]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

The problem, it seems, is that for every action there is an unintended consequence. Could be the pocket caches (archived cache version) are the result of it being frowned upon to multi-log events. Just like the lame micro explosion could have come from the crack down on virts.

 

Considering there is now the Additional Waypoint function why not allow temporary event caches to be listed within that--along with a new waypoint type--and those caches be logged on that event.

 

Some advantages:

• Gives the temporary caches a home.
  
• Allows for better record keeping of past found caches
  
• No need for seperate cache pages to be handed out at the event.
  
• Removes the incentive for logging on cache pages that aren't the caches found.
  
• Definitively answers the question of the appropriateness of multi-logging an event.
  

There is no need for an reviewer to approve a temporary cache location simply for the fact it is temporary.

 

Thoughts?

[+RichardMoore]

On the CITO caches there are options when logging for both "attended" and "found".

Are you figuring on something like that for all event caches?

If so, it sounds good.

 

My one concern would be people trying to find the temporary caches before the day of the event, even though they're not there.

Would it be possible to have those additional waypoints hidden on the cache page until the day of the event?

[CoyoteRed]

Would it be possible to have those additional waypoints hidden on the cache page until the day of the event?

 

I've not used the function yet, but I think so.

 

I'll probably do this on an upcoming event listing each temporary cache as "Final" (weird, yes) and see how that works out. It might not even be possible to have more than one "Final," I don't know.

[+nfa]

I did this at my Last CITO Event with 2 temp caches listed as waypoints...

 

Polliwog Pond CITO Event

 

Jamie - NFA

[Mushtang]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

(stuff removed)

 

Thoughts?

 

I have one. Why do you have a "solution" to a non-problem? How is it a problem that folks are logging finds on events more than once? How does this hurt anyone?

[+Audion64]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

(stuff removed)

 

Thoughts?

 

I have one. Why do you have a "solution" to a non-problem? How is it a problem that folks are logging finds on events more than once? How does this hurt anyone?

 

By the same thinking... How does not allowing people to log multiple finds on a single event 'hurt' someone? Oh wait, oh yea, their chances at winning the smiley trophy will be reduced.

 

How does one found/attended log per event and multiple notes saying you found such and such temporary cache during the event hurt anyone?

 

Either way, nobody is going to be hurt... if there is no prize for most smileys.

Edited June 4, 2006 by Audion

[Mushtang]

 

By the same thinking... How does not allowing people to log multiple finds on a single event 'hurt' someone? Oh wait, oh yea, their chances at winning the smiley trophy will be reduced.

 

How does one found/attended log per event and multiple notes saying you found such and such temporary cache during the event hurt anyone?

 

Either way, nobody is going to be hurt... if there is no prize for most smileys.

 

Well, I'd say that there are a LOT of people that have fun logging events as Attended more than once for all the temp caches they found, and if you remove the ability then they won't get to do something they enjoy doing.

 

So there's an example of how changing the way it works will hurt someone.

 

Tell me how leaving things as they are will hurt you, or anyone else. Oh wait, oh yea, nobody gets hurt when someone else "cheats" by logging multiple times.

[+welch]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

The problem, it seems, is that for every action there is an unintended consequence. Could be the pocket caches (archived cache version) are the result of it being frowned upon to multi-log events. Just like the lame micro explosion could have come from the crack down on virts.

 

Considering there is now the Additional Waypoint function why not allow temporary event caches to be listed within that--along with a new waypoint type--and those caches be logged on that event.

 

Some advantages:

• Gives the temporary caches a home.
  
• Allows for better record keeping of past found caches
  
• No need for seperate cache pages to be handed out at the event.
  
• Removes the incentive for logging on cache pages that aren't the caches found.
  
• Definitively answers the question of the appropriateness of multi-logging an event.
  

There is no need for an reviewer to approve a temporary cache location simply for the fact it is temporary.

 

Thoughts?

So basically it'd be like the event had dozens of bonus caches that the owner is specifically granting permission to log??

[+5¢]

 

By the same thinking... How does not allowing people to log multiple finds on a single event 'hurt' someone? Oh wait, oh yea, their chances at winning the smiley trophy will be reduced.

 

How does one found/attended log per event and multiple notes saying you found such and such temporary cache during the event hurt anyone?

 

Either way, nobody is going to be hurt... if there is no prize for most smileys.

 

Well, I'd say that there are a LOT of people that have fun logging events as Attended more than once for all the temp caches they found, and if you remove the ability then they won't get to do something they enjoy doing.

 

So there's an example of how changing the way it works will hurt someone.

 

Tell me how leaving things as they are will hurt you, or anyone else. Oh wait, oh yea, nobody gets hurt when someone else "cheats" by logging multiple times.

 

Would that fun you are talking about the cut and paste logs that read.........

 

Logging event cache one.

 

Logging event cache two.

 

Dang, that was fun just typing here in the forums. Wait, I have an idea. I will use my cut paste examples in different posts thereby upping my post count.

[Mushtang]

 

By the same thinking... How does not allowing people to log multiple finds on a single event 'hurt' someone? Oh wait, oh yea, their chances at winning the smiley trophy will be reduced.

 

How does one found/attended log per event and multiple notes saying you found such and such temporary cache during the event hurt anyone?

 

Either way, nobody is going to be hurt... if there is no prize for most smileys.

 

Well, I'd say that there are a LOT of people that have fun logging events as Attended more than once for all the temp caches they found, and if you remove the ability then they won't get to do something they enjoy doing.

 

So there's an example of how changing the way it works will hurt someone.

 

Tell me how leaving things as they are will hurt you, or anyone else. Oh wait, oh yea, nobody gets hurt when someone else "cheats" by logging multiple times.

 

Would that fun you are talking about the cut and paste logs that read.........

 

Logging event cache one.

 

Logging event cache two.

 

Dang, that was fun just typing here in the forums. Wait, I have an idea. I will use my cut paste examples in different posts thereby upping my post count.

 

Yes, exactly! You're starting to get it. If cut and pasting 4 word logs multiple times to a single event cache is fun for someone, and it's okay with the cache owner and this site, then more power to them! Their find count goes up and they're happy. Your find count is more accurate in your eyes, and since numbers don't matter anyway then you're happy.

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

[+IV_Warrior]

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

 

You mean other than detracting from the integrity of the game?

[+alexrudd]

Sarcasm detector anyone?

 

If nothing else, multiple "attended" logs are extremely irritating when trying to see who actually attended - both online and in offline databases with the 5-log PQ limit.

 

I'd rather an individual GPX file from an event page gave me 20 user's attended logs than one user's copy+pasted "found cache x" logs.

[CoyoteRed]

If nothing else, multiple "attended" logs are extremely irritating when trying to see who actually attended - both online and in offline databases with the 5-log PQ limit.

 

This is true. The return of the "Found It" option would be nice. You "attend" the event and you "find" the event caches.

 

I don't really see much of an issue in the area of programming. It would be a relatively easy fix for what is apparently a concern for a good portion of the community.

[+Audion64]

 

Yes, exactly! You're starting to get it. If cut and pasting 4 word logs multiple times to a single event cache is fun for someone, and it's okay with the cache owner and this site, then more power to them! Their find count goes up and they're happy. Your find count is more accurate in your eyes, and since numbers don't matter anyway then you're happy.

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

 

Bolding by me.

 

The point is.... it is NOT OK with this site. It's clearly defined that temporary caches are not allowed to be listed on the site. If and when that fact changes.. log away, I'll shut up. Until then, play by the rules and guidelines which this site has set forth or I guess you'll need to go log your temporary event caches on some other site.

Edited June 4, 2006 by Audion

[+RichardMoore]

 

Yes, exactly! You're starting to get it. If cut and pasting 4 word logs multiple times to a single event cache is fun for someone, and it's okay with the cache owner and this site, then more power to them! Their find count goes up and they're happy. Your find count is more accurate in your eyes, and since numbers don't matter anyway then you're happy.

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

 

Bolding by me.

 

The point is.... it is NOT OK with this site. It's clearly defined that temporary caches are not allowed to be listed on the site. If and when that fact changes.. log away, I'll shut up. Until then, play by the rules and guidelines which this site has set forth or I guess you'll need to go log your temporary event caches on some other site.

It is up to the cache owner to decide what is acceptable or not acceptable on a cache they are responsible to maintain.

 

For the most part your local community will dictate what is acceptable and what is not. In some areas it is acceptable to log multiple finds on a multi or an event cache. In others it is highly frowned upon. As for a community standard that is embraced by the majority of cachers, I don't believe there is one.

 

I have my opinions on this but I will keep them to myself

[Mushtang]

... easy fix for what is apparently a concern for a good portion of the community.

 

Apparent to whom? Do you define "good portion" as "A bunch of people on the forums"? You may have actually taken a poll of a good portion of all geocachers, and if so I'd be curious to see your data that supports your claim above.

[Mushtang]

 

Yes, exactly! You're starting to get it. If cut and pasting 4 word logs multiple times to a single event cache is fun for someone, and it's okay with the cache owner and this site, then more power to them! Their find count goes up and they're happy. Your find count is more accurate in your eyes, and since numbers don't matter anyway then you're happy.

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

 

Bolding by me.

 

The point is.... it is NOT OK with this site. It's clearly defined that temporary caches are not allowed to be listed on the site. If and when that fact changes.. log away, I'll shut up. Until then, play by the rules and guidelines which this site has set forth or I guess you'll need to go log your temporary event caches on some other site.

 

Temporary caches are NOT okay with the site, but multiple logs certainly are. We haven't been debating if temporary caches should be allowed or not.

 

Note that by "Temporary Caches" I mean caches that have their own GC number but are listed knowing they'll be archived within 3 months. Those are the kind that the site doesn't approve of.

 

TPTB don't care (and have said so before) if extra caches are used at events and the event owner allows multiple finds on the event page. Jeremy said that he thought multiple logs at events was stupid, but wasn't going to keep people from doing it.

 

So I'm still curious why there needs to be a "solution" to a non problem.

[+Glenn]

 

Yes, exactly! You're starting to get it. If cut and pasting 4 word logs multiple times to a single event cache is fun for someone, and it's okay with the cache owner and this site, then more power to them! Their find count goes up and they're happy. Your find count is more accurate in your eyes, and since numbers don't matter anyway then you're happy.

 

BTW, I didn't ask how it's possible for it to be fun for someone to log multiple finds. My question was: How does leaving things the way they are hurt anyone? Nobody has answered that question yet.

 

Bolding by me.

 

The point is.... it is NOT OK with this site. It's clearly defined that temporary caches are not allowed to be listed on the site. If and when that fact changes.. log away, I'll shut up. Until then, play by the rules and guidelines which this site has set forth or I guess you'll need to go log your temporary event caches on some other site.

 

Temporary caches are NOT okay with the site, but multiple logs certainly are. We haven't been debating if temporary caches should be allowed or not.

 

Note that by "Temporary Caches" I mean caches that have their own GC number but are listed knowing they'll be archived within 3 months. Those are the kind that the site doesn't approve of.

 

TPTB don't care (and have said so before) if extra caches are used at events and the event owner allows multiple finds on the event page. Jeremy said that he thought multiple logs at events was stupid, but wasn't going to keep people from doing it.

 

So I'm still curious why there needs to be a "solution" to a non problem.

Making multiple attended logs for the same event by the same person is confusing at best. Having one attended log and then found it logs for each event cache will make things a lot easier for the event organizer to track and will allow attendees to keep better and accurate stats. I don't see how an improvement like this would hurt anyone except maybe those that want to obscure the nature of their find count.

[+Glenn]

Making multiple attended logs for the same event by the same person is confusing at best. Having one attended log and then found it logs for each event cache will make things a lot easier for the event organizer to track and will allow attendees to keep better and accurate stats. I don't see how an improvement like this would hurt anyone except maybe those that want to obscure the nature of their find count.

I forgot to add. There also needs to be a way to separate the attended count from the event caches finds in my stats. One counter for events attended and another for event caches found.

Edited June 5, 2006 by Glenn

[+Renegade Knight]

All temp caches need the same level of review as regular caches. So what you have is an investment in time for the reviewer that is the same for a standard cache. If there was that kind of time available then we could just have temp caches and single find caches.

 

Also (and you should like this part. ) it would create numbers run events with lame caches even by my defintions. Events for the sake of finding caches are not listable but ignoring that what's the point of caches that are not listable?

 

If reveiwers had to approve them then why not make them permanent anyway? The work to list a temp cache is the same as a work to list a permanent cache.

[+welch]

 

Making multiple attended logs for the same event by the same person is confusing at best. Having one attended log and then found it logs for each event cache will make things a lot easier for the event organizer to track and will allow attendees to keep better and accurate stats. I don't see how an improvement like this would hurt anyone except maybe those that want to obscure the nature of their find count.

Doesn't this assume TPTB want to give more stats? Considering the number of times requests for leadersboards, more detail stats, different 'scoring' have come up without change it would seem unlikely they've start counting attends and event finds seperate. Or that a new tab would be set for 'none permanent' finds would be made.

[CoyoteRed]

All temp caches need the same level of review as regular caches.

 

No they don't. The cache will exist if it is listed here or not. The temporary caches I'm familiar with couldn't pass the tests for permanent placements simply for the fact most would violate proximity guidelines. Additionally, considering they only exist, at best, for a few days then there is no reason to review the location. If I wanted a cache to pass the review process then I would place a permanent cache. Most caches I've seen at events are "training caches" for new folks to find or caches with a major twist for the more experienced participants. The very nature of these caches warrant no review.

[+Audion64]

The very nature of these caches warrant no review.

 

And therefore warrant not being listable on this site and therefore warrant not being loggable on this site.

 

If people want to create and find temporary caches for whatever reason; be it training or just something extra for people to do at events, fine. But if people are really doing them for those reasons then it should be irrelavent to them whether they get a smiley for it or not.

 

Kinda like people giving money to charity... but only if it's tax deductable... is their heart really in it or are they just doing it for a tax writeoff?

[+Team Shydog]

Would the "Discovered" option along with "Temp. Cache Waypoint" work? No smiley given, but a record of Temp. cache finds kept and the ability to make an entry for a temp. cache find. Just in case you want to say more than "Found event cache#1"

[+Glenn]

 

Making multiple attended logs for the same event by the same person is confusing at best. Having one attended log and then found it logs for each event cache will make things a lot easier for the event organizer to track and will allow attendees to keep better and accurate stats. I don't see how an improvement like this would hurt anyone except maybe those that want to obscure the nature of their find count.

Doesn't this assume TPTB want to give more stats? Considering the number of times requests for leadersboards, more detail stats, different 'scoring' have come up without change it would seem unlikely they've start counting attends and event finds seperate. Or that a new tab would be set for 'none permanent' finds would be made.

I was to trying not to use the words, new icon.

 

The only solution to the multi-logging on event caches problem need not be to allow only one log per event. But if that is the only solution people are willing to discuss then that will be the only solution.

[+welch]

 

Making multiple attended logs for the same event by the same person is confusing at best. Having one attended log and then found it logs for each event cache will make things a lot easier for the event organizer to track and will allow attendees to keep better and accurate stats. I don't see how an improvement like this would hurt anyone except maybe those that want to obscure the nature of their find count.

Doesn't this assume TPTB want to give more stats? Considering the number of times requests for leadersboards, more detail stats, different 'scoring' have come up without change it would seem unlikely they've start counting attends and event finds seperate. Or that a new tab would be set for 'none permanent' finds would be made.

I was to trying not to use the words, new icon.

 

The only solution to the multi-logging on event caches problem need not be to allow only one log per event. But if that is the only solution people are willing to discuss then that will be the only solution.

??? icon? I didn't use the word icon, I said stats. Like X regulars, Y multis, Z event temps. Unless they'll be grouped into the exisiting catgories (which is bought to upset someone) you need another number. (Even then some will probably complain this is gc.com sanctioned numbers padding.) Requests for changes in the stats usually get no result, a 1/1 and 5/5 are still both one smilie. There is still no way to cloak ones own numbers. There is still no detailed stats page for average difficulty of caches found, etc etc. If it counting event temps differently hurts anyone or not is moot if Jeremy et al. won't make the change.

 

(why did you quote me for this?) I agree, there a many possiable ways to change the logging of events/event caches. Personally, I don't care very much either way for how events end up. The way I see it whatever happens at the event is the event. If I hunt and find every event cache, sit at the HQ all day swapping stores, or check in and then go play frisbee on the law, its still only one find to me. But obvisously not everyone does it that way, or any ONE way. We have people that want their event finds shown so much they're multi logging caches, or logging pages for caches they've been to. We have people calling the other people cheaters etc for the way their logging. And we have people trying to get the event caches accounted for on this site in some way that isn't a work-a-round.

I was actually thinking its kinda amusing the way events have evolved... once upon a time an event needed some caching element like building a group cache, or hunting nearby caches. Now the guidelines say as long as by geocachers for geocachers they can meet without specific caching (pizza night anyone?), they even say an event shoudn't be just for setting up a cache trains. People used to submit caches placed for an event, but it was decided it was a waste to have the reviewers spend their time on something that will only be around for a week or two then get archived. I think at that time the reviewer's suggestion was to just have people log the caches placed for the event on the page. Now I think a number of the caches placed for events wouldn't qualify as they break other guidelines (logbooks, promixity, and moving for pocket caches). Which makes sense, if they won't be listed and won't be reviewed it doesn't matter if it fits the guidelines perfectly. And now we're getting back to wanting to list them on the website

[+Marky]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

(stuff removed)

 

Thoughts?

 

I have one. Why do you have a "solution" to a non-problem? How is it a problem that folks are logging finds on events more than once? How does this hurt anyone?

 

Well, the reason I'd like some different kind of found log that isn't an attended is that I'd like my stats page to accurately indicate the number of events I've attended, and not the number of temporary caches I've found.

 

--Marky

[+Glenn]

I was just thinking about the arguments of logging event caches and I might have a possible solution.

 

(stuff removed)

 

Thoughts?

 

I have one. Why do you have a "solution" to a non-problem? How is it a problem that folks are logging finds on events more than once? How does this hurt anyone?

 

Well, the reason I'd like some different kind of found log that isn't an attended is that I'd like my stats page to accurately indicate the number of events I've attended, and not the number of temporary caches I've found.

 

--Marky

Exactly. As it stands now if someone attends 3 events and finds 50 temp/event caches at each event then logs them their stats will show them attending 150 events. Temp caches at events are not going away any time soon. It would be nice if these two numbers (events attended and temp event caches found) where two separate numbers.