Jump to content

A New Way To Count Your Finds


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I have been gazing though the entire forum out there about Pocket Caches, is it a cache, what makes it a cache and so on. I don’t think the problem lies with what people are finding, but with how Geocaching.com counts the caches we find. Well, I had a little time after work today, so I started messing around with “Geocache information for the user page” (where they count the finds). Here’s what I came up with!

 

02eb765b-2ee7-4f96-a965-1de38e88b96e.jpg

 

I think if they broke down the finds a little more in detail, it would make everybody happier. Then who cares if somebody did 800 pocket caches? You will be able to see how they jump up to 4000 finds in one month (week). I just would like to see some of the integrity back in geocaching again.

What do you think? Something needs to be done about it! Or is it to late? :P

 

Nice touch with the Pocket cache Icon :)

Link to comment

I have been gazing though the entire forum out there about Pocket Caches, is it a cache, what makes it a cache and so on. I don’t think the problem lies with what people are finding, but with how Geocaching.com counts the caches we find. Well, I had a little time after work today, so I started messing around with “Geocache information for the user page” (where they count the finds). Here’s what I came up with!

 

02eb765b-2ee7-4f96-a965-1de38e88b96e.jpg

 

I think if they broke down the finds a little more in detail, it would make everybody happier. Then who cares if somebody did 800 pocket caches? You will be able to see how they jump up to 4000 finds in one month (week). I just would like to see some of the integrity back in geocaching again.

What do you think? Something needs to be done about it! Or is it to late? :P

Nice touch with the Pocket cache Icon :)

Well then, continuing with your thesis, I would posit that it would be at least as important to have at least one more dimension in the matrix, this one breaking down finds by Terrain rating. And, I would posit that the total column shoudl count finds for unique events only once toaward the totals, even if a person claimed 66 finds/attends for one event.

Link to comment

The concept of a 5 star difficulty pocket cach has my mind so far in the gutter it's not even funny. The Vinny version is a grid 25 deep before you get to half stars and then it's about 100 give or take. 100x14.

 

Just having a grid leads to cache bingo, not to mention a quest to fill each blank spot in it like some try to fill out their icons.

Link to comment

The concept of a 5 star difficulty pocket cach has my mind so far in the gutter it's not even funny.

 

That was making fun of all the talks about Pocket Caches.

 

 

 

Just having a grid leads to cache bingo, not to mention a quest to fill each blank spot in it like some try to fill out their icons.

 

It still would be a better way to see what kinds of caches a cacher is really doing...

Link to comment

I almost feel like the terrain rating is less subjective than the difficulty rating. If it came down to having the grid either/or...terrain would be a better choice IMO.

 

Even if it made caching even more about filling in the blank spots, why not? Cachers would be more motivated to branch out that way and the cachers that supposedly don't care about numbers wouldn't notice anyway.

 

I also kind of like noting pocket caches BECAUSE it makes them more like TBs and less something to boost your find count. Pocket caches SO aren't finds especially after locationless and moving caches becoming archived, but some people really get a kick out of signing pocket lint so why deny them the joy when it doesn't count as a cache???

 

That's my 2 cents.

Link to comment

How about this... If your hunt ends at a container of some size that is permanent (according to the guidelines) with a logbook inside (also the guidelines), then you get a find, otherwise NO! If TPTB allow pocket caches and roaming/temporary caches, this game/sport is going to lose its personality.

 

Isn't there same way to implement all this crazy event-based garbage over at Waymarking somehow?

Link to comment

How about this... If your hunt ends at a container of some size that is permanent (according to the guidelines) with a logbook inside (also the guidelines), then you get a find, otherwise NO!

 

Agreed...as a CACHE find. I don't understand why they count them as caches instead of making themselves a TB anyway, BUT...what about a third option? A MET option? It would be neat to log people (no log book required...or could be) that you actually met in person along the way and looking back at it in a few years. How cool.

 

This is becoming another pocket cache debate. Ewww, yucky...sorry.

 

Love the grid, though. Already since I started back in August, it's been refined once (loved it). I kind of wonder what this not-being-able-to-change-your-caching-name-to-clear-up-space thing is clearing up space for...

Link to comment

I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think i'm just gonna count when I find and sign a log. I hate to put myself at such a disadvantage. I'll be proud of my 72 smilies in a year.

 

TeamBarstool

Edited by TeamBarstool
Link to comment

I almost feel like the terrain rating is less subjective than the difficulty rating. If it came down to having the grid either/or...terrain would be a better choice IMO.

 

That's my 2 cents.

heh... you haven't seen some of the caches in central AZ, where caches rated 1.5 and 2 for terrain say "you need a quad or ATV for this cache."

But in general I agree with you, terrain would be better than difficulty. And I really do like the grid! I'd like to see my own finds broken down like that (but I don't want to take the time to do it myself!)

Link to comment
I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think you just hit on something there. A smiley for every piece of trash picked up at a CITO. I mean why just log one attended for a CITO when you can log 50, 100 or more attendeds for every piece picked up? Throw in a few dozen pocket caches and you can walk away from a CITO adding a couple hundred finds to your count.

 

This will have the benefit of making CITOs more popular and provice incentive for people to pick up more trash when there.

Link to comment

The grid is cool but won't work since other cachers are ones who make th ratings of their cache and they are subjective. There are always debates as to whether the terrain should be higher or lower than the cache owner states. If you get more "points" for the higher terrain/difficulty, it will only encourage the numbers hound to increase and over rate their caches so they can pump hteir egos even higher.

 

We have come to a time where allowing members to hide their numbers and GC putting a lock on events that they can only be logged as attended once, is needed. This won't cure the numbers addicted, but will certainly start bringing the game back to where it was meant to be, in the woods searching for new places.

Link to comment

I almost feel like the terrain rating is less subjective than the difficulty rating. If it came down to having the grid either/or...terrain would be a better choice IMO.

 

That's my 2 cents.

heh... you haven't seen some of the caches in central AZ, where caches rated 1.5 and 2 for terrain say "you need a quad or ATV for this cache."

But in general I agree with you, terrain would be better than difficulty. And I really do like the grid! I'd like to see my own finds broken down like that (but I don't want to take the time to do it myself!)

Link to comment

The grid is cool but won't work since other cachers are ones who make th ratings of their cache and they are subjective. There are always debates as to whether the terrain should be higher or lower than the cache owner states. If you get more "points" for the higher terrain/difficulty, it will only encourage the numbers hound to increase and over rate their caches so they can pump hteir egos even higher.

 

We have come to a time where allowing members to hide their numbers and GC putting a lock on events that they can only be logged as attended once, is needed. This won't cure the numbers addicted, but will certainly start bringing the game back to where it was meant to be, in the woods searching for new places.

 

What is a "Pocket Cache"???????????????

Link to comment

i wouldn't need the grid broken down by difficulty. in fact, i'm kind of a high-terrain low-difficulty kinda cacher, and i agree that difficulty doesn't really apply to some of the cache types, but i certainly like your idea. a quick look and you could tell how many "real" caches are in the stable. i think that offering enough detail on the profile page to make that distinction easily apparant would make a lot of people happy. wouldn't change the situation with re-logging or archive-logging, but would definitely be a step forward on other problems. nice work, there. :)

Link to comment

a pocket cache, GP, is a cache of some type carried around by some cachers at events. they are kind of like an icebreaker, but are viewed by many as moving or traveling caches, and generally have not been submitted to GC, and therefore not within GC guidelines for cache hides. you will also find them referred to as pocket lint, and there has been a great deal of discussion about them, and other fascinating controversies, lately in these forums.

Link to comment

I like the idea of a break down of the D/T stars. In answer to the dilemma of getting the grid on the page, you don't really have to.

 

Groundspeak is already using a script to pop up photos on the cache pages. To use it (simple explanation) you simply insert some HTML and when the pointer hovers over it the page is displayed.

 

To display the gird, the gird is "hidden" in the script and you could make it so when the pointer hovers over the total count of a type the grid pops up giving a break down of the D/T.

 

You could do the same thing with the total find count.

Link to comment

I like the idea of breaking down the stats further, but I would still would rather see something like this implemented, which would require almost no work as far as I know...just adding a separate "select distinct" sql statement i believe:

 

uniques.jpg

Edited by ThePropers
Link to comment

I like the idea of breaking down the stats further, but I would still would rather see something like this implemented, which would require almost no work as far as I know...just adding a separate "select distinct" sql statement i believe:

 

uniques.jpg

 

I really hope this forum kick starts something! ThePropers, thanks for adding your input on the matter.

I would love to see more ideas people have..

 

I think breaking down the stats further would be a better option for everybody (unless people are scared to show there real stats).

That was only a rough draft that I did. I think Geocaching.com can make a better STATS page and bring the numbers to the right fields. I really think it’s time to do something about it or they will start losing geocachers left and right ( including me).

Link to comment

 

I really hope this forum kick starts something! ThePropers, thanks for adding your input on the matter.

I would love to see more ideas people have..

 

I think breaking down the stats further would be a better option for everybody (unless people are scared to show there real stats).

That was only a rough draft that I did. I think Geocaching.com can make a better STATS page and bring the numbers to the right fields. I really think it’s time to do something about it or they will start losing geocachers left and right ( including me).

 

I don't think I'd quit geocaching, but I'm already jaded towards the whole "congrats to so-and-so on X finds" and the handing out of gold ammo cans at events since you have no idea how many caches someone actually has found (as opposed to how many finds they've logged). I don't really care about micro finds vs traditional or difficulty, but I do care when someone else gets recognition for x number of finds even though a lot of those may be logging their own finds, logging an event 20+ times, or pocket caches.

Edited by ThePropers
Link to comment

Why not just keep it simple and satisfy the Mt. Everest contingent at the same time? Difficulty + Terrain x number of finds = your rung of imortality on the geocaching ladder of fame and fortune. Entities that have no diff/terr component? A straight 5 'points' each or some such. If you wanted, you could add a bias bonus to either terrain or diff and then have some sort of 'kicker' that would take into consideration how long you had been a member of the community. And I suppose to round out the whole thing, there ought to be some siginificant weight given to overall hide count with it's own diff/terr calculation. I think that just about covers it. Uhhhh, forget the 'simple' part. :):D:D

Edited by Team Cotati
Link to comment
I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think you just hit on something there. A smiley for every piece of trash picked up at a CITO. I mean why just log one attended for a CITO when you can log 50, 100 or more attendeds for every piece picked up? Throw in a few dozen pocket caches and you can walk away from a CITO adding a couple hundred finds to your count.

 

This will have the benefit of making CITOs more popular and provice incentive for people to pick up more trash when there.

 

Hey.. the really scary thing is that somewhere someone has aleady read this, thinks you are serious, and is currently logging in his 400 caches from this afternoon's CITO. :)

Link to comment
I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think you just hit on something there. A smiley for every piece of trash picked up at a CITO. I mean why just log one attended for a CITO when you can log 50, 100 or more attendeds for every piece picked up? Throw in a few dozen pocket caches and you can walk away from a CITO adding a couple hundred finds to your count.

 

This will have the benefit of making CITOs more popular and provice incentive for people to pick up more trash when there.

 

Hey.. the really scary thing is that somewhere someone has aleady read this, thinks you are serious, and is currently logging in his 400 caches from this afternoon's CITO. :)

 

At least it will be the cleanest square mile on the planet! :D

Link to comment

I'm all for progress, and I really respect folks that try to improve things. But I don't see this as an improvement. What's wrong with using Excel spreadsheets. Maintain your own specialized stats. Half the fun of keeping personal stats is being able to enter them yourself and change the parameters used to judge them as YOUR needs change. I personally don't want to look at all that stuff.

 

In addition, we have seen several forum posts on difficulty ratings and how they don't satisfy various cacher's differing definitions of "difficulty."

 

I know it doesn't "sound" like it, but I'm really writing this in a soft, convesational tone. I like to cache, and I like a simple break down of the number of caches I've found. When you have an interesting, and interested, group such as this, you will always find a group that doesn't like the way you want things done. Keep it simple and let us all figure out what we want to keep track of on our own. BTW, are the difficulty figures for left- or right-handed cachers. LOL

Link to comment

...Keep it simple and let us all figure out what we want to keep track of on our own. BTW, are the difficulty figures for left- or right-handed cachers. LOL

You have raised an interesting and fascinating issue, one which is of extreme importance to my newlv-formed geopolitical party (more details below.) You see, morbidity and mortality rates related to handednes (i.e., for left-handers versus right-handers) was one of my fields of study while in graduate school. I have long maintained -- as a left-hander myself -- that since left-handers live, on average, a 13% shorter lifespan than right-handers, that left handers, should therefore receive a handicap adjustment to their geocache find scores of plus 13%. Therefore, I (and my newly formed geopolitical party, known formally as First Things First: Handedness Equity and Neutrality in Calculation of Geocaching Scores) maintain that if a left-hander has 100 actual finds, and a right-handed geocacher has 100 actual finds, the score for the left-hander should be increased by 13%, thus yielding a find count of 113, to compensate for the handicap due to handedness.

 

Further, since there are also variances in morbidity and mortality rates due to bloodline, which is most easily assesed by genetic DNA ancestry studies, I would like to suggest that each geocacher be forced to undergo genetic DNA ancestry testing (the fee averages about $187 in the USA), and that each geocacher be assigned a handicap adjustment score ranging from -25% to +25%, dependent upon their ancestral DNA heritage. For example, if genetic DNA ancestry studies should show that I come from a line of relatively long-lived persons who are 9% more physically fit than the norm for tasks such as hiking, climbing, reaching, etc. (all necessary prerequisite skills for finding geocaches) then I should be assigned a negative handicap score of 9%, meaning that my actual find counts should be adjusted downward by 9% due to my inherited physical advantage as evidenced by genetic DNA lineage studies.

 

The members of my geopolitical party and I wish to thank you for having raised this timely issue. :huh:

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment

I have been gazing though the entire forum out there about Pocket Caches, is it a cache, what makes it a cache and so on. I don’t think the problem lies with what people are finding, but with how Geocaching.com counts the caches we find. Well, I had a little time after work today, so I started messing around with “Geocache information for the user page” (where they count the finds). Here’s what I came up with!

 

02eb765b-2ee7-4f96-a965-1de38e88b96e.jpg

 

I think if they broke down the finds a little more in detail, it would make everybody happier. Then who cares if somebody did 800 pocket caches? You will be able to see how they jump up to 4000 finds in one month (week). I just would like to see some of the integrity back in geocaching again.

What do you think? Something needs to be done about it! Or is it to late? :huh:

 

Nice touch with the Pocket cache Icon ;)

 

Hey, you forgot that all important category called "I am logging this cache even tho I didn't find it" for those who think finding one stage of a multi means you get to log it.

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

Link to comment

why are there so many people in these forums that think micros, small, regular etc should all be divided up? Have you forgotten some unknown and multi caches are all micros or small? If they were to go to the system shown here, they'd have to add even more categories for

 

micro, small, regular, large multi

 

micro, small, regular, large puzzle

 

What is it people do not understand about the distinction between cache TYPES and cache SIZES?

Link to comment

footTRAX, I'm a stats fan. The more ways you break them out the more ways people can have fun with them.

 

As soon as I thought up the bingo idea, I realized that just making a grid would create new cache games. That's a good thing.

I am already playing that game, with my own numbers and Fizzymagic's "FindStats" utility. I am surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the ability of FindStats to analyze a GPX file and produce the "grid" of difficulty and terrain combinations.

 

Since I am only competing against myself, I like it that the website doesn't include this as a feature. If I wanted to race a friend to see who can fill in their grid first, we could trade .txt files from FindStats privately.

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

:huh:

 

I can see you're well qualified to call cachers you've never met demented and sad. ;)

 

Go to a few events <snip> (the rest of what I have to say isn't worth the effort to type.)

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment

I'm all for progress, and I really respect folks that try to improve things. But I don't see this as an improvement. What's wrong with using Excel spreadsheets. Maintain your own specialized stats. Half the fun of keeping personal stats is being able to enter them yourself and change the parameters used to judge them as YOUR needs change. I personally don't want to look at all that stuff...SNIP....

 

I agree. This website doesn't have to break down things for everybody. If you are interested do it yourself.

For those who are really into stats, Fizzymagic wrote these neat apps that break everything down for you. Numbers of caches by type, size, state, country, terrain, difficulty, average terrain, average difficulty, number of unique finds. Its perfect for the stats hungry people among us and the rest of us don't have to look at a cluttered stats page.

Link to comment

I'm all for progress, and I really respect folks that try to improve things. But I don't see this as an improvement. What's wrong with using Excel spreadsheets. Maintain your own specialized stats. Half the fun of keeping personal stats is being able to enter them yourself and change the parameters used to judge them as YOUR needs change. I personally don't want to look at all that stuff...SNIP....

 

I agree. This website doesn't have to break down things for everybody. If you are interested do it yourself.

For those who are really into stats, Fizzymagic wrote these neat apps that break everything down for you. Numbers of caches by type, size, state, country, terrain, difficulty, average terrain, average difficulty, number of unique finds. Its perfect for the stats hungry people among us and the rest of us don't have to look at a cluttered stats page.

 

I don't think breaking down the stats would hurt! It would just show more in detail what other cachers are finding. I think this would start shaping the game in the right way.

 

Let’s say if you only do 1/1 micros and have a 1000 finds, then you would be able to tell what kind of caches the person likes and does.

 

Let’s say 800 pocket caches a person did, it would show it in the stat. So on, so on!

 

I think this might open up people’s eyes a little more about the way people cache.

It can only enhance the Stat page!

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

:anicute:

 

I can see you're well qualified to call cachers you've never met demented and sad. :blink:

 

Go to a few events <snip> (the rest of what I have to say isn't worth the effort to type.)

I did pocket caches at a previous event. The ones we did, however, were hidden in the lodge and surrounding areas, not in someone's pocket. I agree, using name calling here about something you have not done is really unfair to some people, some of whom may have been attending their first event.

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

:anicute:

 

I can see you're well qualified to call cachers you've never met demented and sad. :blink:

 

Go to a few events <snip> (the rest of what I have to say isn't worth the effort to type.)

I did pocket caches at a previous event. The ones we did, however, were hidden in the lodge and surrounding areas, not in someone's pocket. I agree, using name calling here about something you have not done is really unfair to some people, some of whom may have been attending their first event.

However, I've been to a few events and I think beefsquad's analogy was right on and very funny.

 

(Also, I didn't know that Claire's last name was 'Standish'.)

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

:anicute:

 

I can see you're well qualified to call cachers you've never met demented and sad. :blink:

 

Go to a few events <snip> (the rest of what I have to say isn't worth the effort to type.)

I did pocket caches at a previous event. The ones we did, however, were hidden in the lodge and surrounding areas, not in someone's pocket. I agree, using name calling here about something you have not done is really unfair to some people, some of whom may have been attending their first event.

However, I've been to a few events and I think beefsquad's analogy was right on and very funny.

 

(Also, I didn't know that Claire's last name was 'Standish'.)

 

You haven't bothered to attend an event since 2003. Things have changed much in that time.

 

I was AT GW4. I signed every durn pocket cache that I came across and had fun doing it. I never intended to log them online for my own reasons and ethics has nothing to do with it. That's my game. It did the same at GW3.

 

Calling a situation demented and sad when you have NO qualification to do so is welllll, (you supply the adjective.)

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think you just hit on something there. A smiley for every piece of trash picked up at a CITO. I mean why just log one attended for a CITO when you can log 50, 100 or more attendeds for every piece picked up? Throw in a few dozen pocket caches and you can walk away from a CITO adding a couple hundred finds to your count.

 

This will have the benefit of making CITOs more popular and provice incentive for people to pick up more trash when there.

Either that or it might encourage people to go out the night before and spread some more trash around. :blink:

Link to comment

o.k o.k wait a second. i didn't want to offend people. i've just been reading these forums lately and the way people were going back and forth on this pocket cache subject it reminded me a little bit of one of my favorite movies. I just thought that maybe we could step back and laugh a little bit. I didn't intend to call any specific people "demented and sad". so i apologize . i enjoy geocaching and i enjoy joking around. its a hobby so i am trying not to take it so seriously. but i guess there are just to many emotions involved in this topic.

Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches read the forums?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache not geocaching.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's the forums aren't the same as other kinds of caches geocaching.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are it is. What do you guys do in your pocket caches the forums?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches the forums we... we talk about pockets caching , properties of pockets caches.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

Fixed.

 

Like this version better Snoogans? :):lol:

Link to comment

:)

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches read the forums?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache not geocaching.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's the forums aren't the same as other kinds of caches geocaching.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are it is. What do you guys do in your pocket caches the forums?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches the forums we... we talk about pockets caching , properties of pockets caches.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

 

Fixed.

 

Like this version better Snoogans? :):lol:

 

wow thats a much better version

:):)

Link to comment

WHY DOES IT MATTER. Shee people complain about the number people. If GC.COM counts it as a cache it is a cache. I am sure in the early days of micros that people didn't think they were cache. Then just do this a real cache is ONLY a 5 gallon buck in DU tradition. Ammo cans are not caches because they are smaller then a 5 gallon bucket. So now how does you count add up. DOES IT MATTER???????

cheers

Link to comment

Attention K-Mart shoppers ... while supplies last ... the Blue Light Special is now located in aisle 4. There you will find 'sad and demented yet social dorks' seeking pocket caches. You will be amazed at the hours of entertainment you can have watching these dorks searching each others pockets. Don't miss this Blue Light Special in aisle 4 ... this could be you last chance to see what fun it is to reach into a pocket and pull out a 'surprise'.

Edited by clearpath
Link to comment

John Bender: Hey, Cherry. Do you do pocket caches?

Claire Standish: That's a fake cache.

John Bender: So?

Claire Standish: So pocket cache's aren't the same as other kinds of caches.

John Bender: Ah... but to dorks like him, they are. What do you guys do in your pocket caches?

Brian Johnson: Well, in pocket caches we... we talk about pockets , properties of pockets.

John Bender: So it's sorta social, demented and sad, but social. Right?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

my apologies to John Hughes and " The Breakfast Club but this is how it sounds to me, all this pocket cache business. I just enjoy finding the caches.

:lol: classic

Link to comment
You haven't bothered to attend an event since 2003. Things have changed much in that time.

OK, I'll bite. Tell me what has changed about events that would make me change my mind. :)

I was AT GW4. I signed every durn pocket cache that I came across and had fun doing it. I never intended to log them online for my own reasons and ethics has nothing to do with it. That's my game. It did the same at GW3.

So? :(

Calling a situation demented and sad when you have NO qualification to do so is welllll, (you supply the adjective.)

Whatever. :D

Link to comment
I'm just a newbie , but are the c.i.t.o. counts for each piece of stuff picked up?

 

I think you just hit on something there. A smiley for every piece of trash picked up at a CITO. I mean why just log one attended for a CITO when you can log 50, 100 or more attendeds for every piece picked up? Throw in a few dozen pocket caches and you can walk away from a CITO adding a couple hundred finds to your count.

 

This will have the benefit of making CITOs more popular and provice incentive for people to pick up more trash when there.

Sorry I have to disagree here. If you pick up an empty pop can and I pick up a used truck tire I should get more smilies then you, so I suggest for the sake of fairness that smilies for CITO be determined by weight. For each pound of trash you pick up and dispose of properly you get a smiley.

Link to comment

Maybe it's time to just do away with counting finds altogether.

If it doesn't matter anyway, then why should we need to count them.

Maybe they should change the word FOUND to "Come Across".

sterb048.gif

As long as they leave the forum post counts in tact I'm fine with eliminating the cache find totals ... :drama:

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...