Turmoil at the Top

September 9, 2006

As of 9/8/2006

Edited September 9, 2006 by WalruZ

7.3k · September 9, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not. <_<

September 9, 2006

If I had the time (work gets in the way), and money (family, bills, food etc., thus the need for work) I'm sure I could get numbers like that also. It would be great to be able to spend that much time feeding mosquitos, finding every thorn in a field, getting caught in the rain, or trying to look like I'm supposed to be here when muggles look at you sideways.

An idea, anyone want to sponsor me so I could become a professional cacher! <_< :blink:

September 9, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

Why do people keep on saying this? The amount of attention paid to high number cachers and high number caching clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Locally, and you can see this in the local forums, there are always threads congratulating people their 100th, 300th, 700th or whatever finds. Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

This is not a contest sponsored by an organization with rules and prizes, but a contest nevertheless. Persuit of this mythical prize creates unpleasant situations. It is very easy to say something like "cache for yourself and don't worry about other's number" but it is quite hard to do that in practice.

Personally I don't see a solution.

Paul

1.5k · September 9, 2006

So??? <_<

September 9, 2006

Well, I'll be the first to say "congrats" to both TeamAlama and CCCA rather than throw out some cheap shot about numbers.

September 9, 2006

1. TeamAlamo - 16700

2. CCCooperAgency - 16625

So this means that TeamAlamo gets home field advantage during the playoffs?

dave

2.1k · September 9, 2006

Personally I don't see a solution.

That is an interesting perspective. I, personally, don't see a problem.

People are interested in this little drama. It adds interest to the game and is worthy of a forum topic. And it is interesting to read the local area congratulatory forum topics. Anyway... we've been through all this a hundred times. <_<

9.3k · September 9, 2006

The amount of attention paid to high number cachers clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Perhaps one man's contest is another man's DILLIGAS?

2.2k · September 9, 2006

As of 9/8/2006

1. TeamAlamo - 16700

1. CCCooperAgency - 16625

Those are really amazing numbers. I can remember way back when one of our local cachers was the first in the area to reach 100 and I was amazed at that. I never dreamed that anyone would hit 1000 finds at that time, much less over 16,000.

7.3k · September 9, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

Why do people keep on saying this? The amount of attention paid to high number cachers and high number caching clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Locally, and you can see this in the local forums, there are always threads congratulating people their 100th, 300th, 700th or whatever finds. Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

This is not a contest sponsored by an organization with rules and prizes, but a contest nevertheless. Persuit of this mythical prize creates unpleasant situations. It is very easy to say something like "cache for yourself and don't worry about other's number" but it is quite hard to do that in practice.

Personally I don't see a solution.

Paul

Oh, goodness. You completely misunderstood my point. And unfortunately I don't feel like trying to make you understand right now. :blink:

September 9, 2006

we've been through all this a hundred times.

You have maybe. I've been through this 137 times. You'll never catch up. I'm winning.

1.8k · September 9, 2006

Why do people keep on saying this? The amount of attention paid to high number cachers and high number caching clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Personally I don't see a solution.

Paul

I figure those who get wrapped up worrying about someone else's numbers, and elevating those with the huge numbers, probably get wrapped up also worrying about which celebraty is sleeping with whom, whose marriage is on the rocks, and how much will Tom get for his next movie?

Me, I got into caching for the fun. I don't care who is sleeping with whom, as long as my wife sleeps with me there will be no bloodshed. And what Tom gets for his next movie will probably be more than he is worth, but none if it will get into my bank account, and none of my bank account will get into his. So basically, who cares!

Live your own life, let them live theirs. Then, no solution is needed, as no problem exists.

September 9, 2006

I guess I was misunderstood a bit.

Clearly there is a problem for some. This can't be denied, we see this everyday in the forums. And if there is a problem with numbers then there must be a value associated with numbers, and a higher value for higher numbers. And whenever there are numbers some competitive folks will compare those numbers. Maybe it is the number of hotdogs eaten, or the furthest around the world in a ballon, or the fastest mile run, but some competitive folks will assign importance to the numbers. Therefore there is a de facto contest. To deny that this exists is wrong.

Now it is certainly true that this problem doesn't exist for all cachers, indeed, it might not exist for most. I used to be bothered by others' numbers until I had a moment of realization about it. Now numbers mean very little to me. Not nothing, just very little. For those whom it isn't a problem, I congratulate you and hope to be there someday. (My personal bugaboo is first to finds, I like them, I count them, and I'm happy when I beat others to them.)

But to deny that the numbers don't create discontent for some cachers, well, I just don't get it. It clearly does.

Paul

7.3k · September 9, 2006

I guess I was misunderstood a bit.

Clearly there is a problem for some. This can't be denied, we see this everyday in the forums. And if there is a problem with numbers then there must be a value associated with numbers, and a higher value for higher numbers. And whenever there are numbers some competitive folks will compare those numbers. Maybe it is the number of hotdogs eaten, or the furthest around the world in a ballon, or the fastest mile run, but some competitive folks will assign importance to the numbers. Therefore there is a de facto contest. To deny that this exists is wrong.

Now it is certainly true that this problem doesn't exist for all cachers, indeed, it might not exist for most. I used to be bothered by others' numbers until I had a moment of realization about it. Now numbers mean very little to me. Not nothing, just very little. For those whom it isn't a problem, I congratulate you and hope to be there someday. (My personal bugaboo is first to finds, I like them, I count them, and I'm happy when I beat others to them.)

But to deny that the numbers don't create discontent for some cachers, well, I just don't get it. It clearly does.

Paul

So, I guess I was responding from my personal opinion that it's not a contest. I cannot speak for others, however.

September 9, 2006

Umm, I think I saw a thread that proved it's not about the numbers. I'll see if I can find it.

3.2k · September 9, 2006

I think the rules should be changed so that when each cacher reaches 16,700 finds they have to stop caching until the rest of us catch up.

2.7k · September 9, 2006

Anyone with over 500 finds should be required to list no more than 1 find per day thereafter so we can "level the playing field" for the rest of the cachers in the world that want to "compete fairly". <_<

7.3k · September 9, 2006

*pout*

Can we at least average it out so that it turns into one a day? 365 caches a year tain't that bad.

3.2k · September 9, 2006

Is it the numbers or not?? How about if it is set up like my old, and long gone, '56 Chevy... when it got to 99,999 it reset to zero. Do that here and see who goes for that 100000th cache. <_<

1.5k · September 9, 2006

7.3k · September 10, 2006

I wanna go caching! :blink:

Stop talking about caching. <_<

2.5k · September 10, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

It was no contest from the moment I read local cache logs being logged while the cacher was at an event in another state. And now with a 6500+ lead over the next contender, it's still no contest! :blink:

September 10, 2006

A topic posted by someone who cared about numbers replied to by someone that couldnt care less but had a few too many on a night out and wanted to post a smiley so here it comes

...

..

no here it is

...

..

... no here it is

no...

here

<_<

P.S. Couldnt care less!

1.5k · September 10, 2006

nevermind... thanks C.N.

Edited September 10, 2006 by DocDiTTo

7.3k · September 10, 2006

A topic posted by someone who cared about numbers replied to by someone that couldnt care less but had a few too many on a night out and wanted to post a smiley so here it comes

...

..

no here it is

...

..

... no here it is

no...

here

P.S. Couldnt care less!

<_<

September 10, 2006

Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

Where's my gold ammo can? I feel left out. <_<

7.3k · September 10, 2006

Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

Where's my gold ammo can? I feel left out.

If someone gives me a gold ammo can, I'll smack them. :blink: Although, with some of the people I know, that might be an incentive. <_<

2k · September 10, 2006

It would just be harder to camo then the regular ammo cans are. It would be a bit heavier though so I probably wouldn't take it as far back into the hills when I was making my new cache. I could name it El Dorado.

3.5k · September 10, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

Why do people keep on saying this? The amount of attention paid to high number cachers and high number caching clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Locally, and you can see this in the local forums, there are always threads congratulating people their 100th, 300th, 700th or whatever finds. Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

This is not a contest sponsored by an organization with rules and prizes, but a contest nevertheless. Persuit of this mythical prize creates unpleasant situations. It is very easy to say something like "cache for yourself and don't worry about other's number" but it is quite hard to do that in practice.

Personally I don't see a solution.

Paul

Y'know, when my dad turned 75 we all got him congratulatory birthday cards, but none of us called Uncle Ben a loser for only making it to 71.

There's a difference between recognizing a milestone achievement and holding a contest.

Bret

7.2k · September 10, 2006

Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

Where's my gold ammo can? I feel left out.

If someone gives me a gold ammo can, I'll smack them. Although, with some of the people I know, that might be an incentive.

Man, we just got a Home Depot down the street.

(runs down to grab some gold paint...)

4.5k · September 10, 2006

Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

Where's my gold ammo can? I feel left out.

If someone gives me a gold ammo can, I'll smack them. Although, with some of the people I know, that might be an incentive.

I made my 1000th a few months back and didn't get mine either. Ambrosia,,, i'll take yours if you don't want it!

As far as being a contest, geocaching itself is not. However, there are cachers, myself included, who like the fun friendly competiton that goes on with some of the different aspects of geocaching. Examples like breaking our most to find in a day records, seeing who in our group spots the cache first, or just being FTF on a cache are all fun little contests of a sort!

On big numbers,,, They aren't accurate these days since alot of cachers like to play "their way". I take these with a grain of salt and i really just don't care about them too much.

2.5k · September 10, 2006

You guys get gold for just 1K? We only get silver for 1K around here. Not sure how many to win a gold box. I hope I win one someday.

2.5k · September 10, 2006

Y'know, when my dad turned 75 we all got him congratulatory birthday cards, but none of us called Uncle Ben a loser for only making it to 71.

That's because he was already a winner for his high quality rice.

2.3k · September 10, 2006

You guys get gold for just 1K? We only get silver for 1K around here. Not sure how many to win a gold box. I hope I win one someday.

2,000.

September 10, 2006

I think the real question here is how many tick bites and cases of PI come with that many cache finds?

September 10, 2006

Y'know, when my dad turned 75 we all got him congratulatory birthday cards, but none of us called Uncle Ben a loser for only making it to 71.

There's a difference between recognizing a milestone achievement and holding a contest.

Bret

Now, that is the most intelligent post I have ever seen on the 'numbers/no numbers', 'contest/no contest' subject.

September 10, 2006

As of 9/8/2006

1. TeamAlamo - 16700

1. CCCooperAgency - 16625

The only consistent issue that I have noticed in relation to this:

Both teams mentioned spend very little or no time posting in the forums;

Those who discuss it, sweat it, worry over it, and can't seem to get past it spend WAY, WAY too much time reading and posting in the forums.

My point? Push yourself away from the monitor, get out there before it begins to snow and get caching!

7.3k · September 10, 2006

Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

Where's my gold ammo can? I feel left out.

If someone gives me a gold ammo can, I'll smack them. Although, with some of the people I know, that might be an incentive.

Man, we just got a Home Depot down the street.

(runs down to grab some gold paint...)

I'll be happy just as long as I get to hug the Puppymonster.

7.3k · September 10, 2006

As of 9/8/2006

1. TeamAlamo - 16700

1. CCCooperAgency - 16625

The only consistent issue that I have noticed in relation to this:

Both teams mentioned spend very little or no time posting in the forums;

Those who discuss it, sweat it, worry over it, and can't seem to get past it spend WAY, WAY too much time reading and posting in the forums.

My point? Push yourself away from the monitor, get out there before it begins to snow and get caching!

Man! I gotta go caching!

2.1k · September 10, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

It was no contest from the moment I read local cache logs being logged while the cacher was at an event in another state. And now with a 6500+ lead over the next contender, it's still no contest!

Humm... Where exactly did you read this? I hope it was not here in the forums and that you took it as truth!

3.3k · September 10, 2006

I got to visit with Team Alamo, EMC of Northridge, an DGreno today at the SCG Geofest. None of them were aware of this thread, they were too busy finding caches. Team Alamo told me that he was about 400 caches behind on his find logs. I did notice that they didn't receive star treatment today, and they were down to earth, when cachers "chewed the fat" with them.

They are pround of the Team Obsessed coins.

38.2k · September 10, 2006

My point? Push yourself away from the monitor, get out there before it begins to snow and get caching!

Some of us work, so this is all we have during the day.

2.7k · September 10, 2006

If numbers are there kind of fun so be it. I prefer a nice hike in some backcountry, don't even need a cache to look for, just some piece of CO will do for me.

1.8k · September 10, 2006

1. TeamAlamo - 16700

2. CCCooperAgency - 16625

So this means that TeamAlamo gets home field advantage during the playoffs?

dave

Were it I, I'd settle for great seats AT the playoffs. Congratulations to all cachers who found caches this weekend. I went over #300 at Fragglestock!

1.8k · September 10, 2006

If numbers are there their kind of fun so be it. I prefer a nice hike in some backcountry, don't even need a cache to look for, just some piece of CO will do for me.

fixed and I wish I could be there with you.

3.2k · September 10, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

It was no contest from the moment I read local cache logs being logged while the cacher was at an event in another state. And now with a 6500+ lead over the next contender, it's still no contest!

Humm... Where exactly did you read this? I hope it was not here in the forums and that you took it as truth!

The discussions have been in the forums forever... evidence is elsewhere. If you look you can find it, but it's such a great day to go caching, so I wouldn't bother.

1.4k · September 10, 2006

They'd only be in turmoil if this were a contest. And it's not.

Why do people keep on saying this? The amount of attention paid to high number cachers and high number caching clearly indicates to me that it is a contest.

Locally, and you can see this in the local forums, there are always threads congratulating people their 100th, 300th, 700th or whatever finds. Gold ammo cans are given on 1,000th finds.

This is not a contest sponsored by an organization with rules and prizes, but a contest nevertheless. Persuit of this mythical prize creates unpleasant situations. It is very easy to say something like "cache for yourself and don't worry about other's number" but it is quite hard to do that in practice.

Personally I don't see a solution.

Paul

One solution would be to not let anyone (including the actual cacher's account) see the numbers, I bet this is why Waymarking doesn't have "numbers". But then again, looking at the popularity of Waymarking vs. Geocaching and the number of complains when locationless (and any future virtual, earthcache, etc.) caches became "non-smiley", "non-scoring contest" Waymarking, I think the PTB realize that while it is too much of a "contest" for some, eliminating smileys/scoring would probably cut the popularity of geocaching and the site greatly. My theory as to why they do not re-allow the virtuals, locationless, etc. is both because they don't want to cry "failure" on the Waymarking site (and certainly there's some activity on there) and because I think the heavy log load on easy virtuals and locationless probably started to jam up the geocaching site and caused the switch to Waymarking.

As for us, don't have the time to compete as a contest. Anyway, our real goal with caching is to discover new parks and trails we haven't learned of otherwise (and the kids love trading swag).

Edited September 10, 2006 by HaLiJuSaPa

7.2k · September 10, 2006

Interesting.

The original post made no comment, except to note that Team Alamo has passed CCCooperAgency. A few people congratulated them in this topic, but many are trying to find angst in the original post. When I read it, I did not see angst, just that "turmoil at the top" meant a change in the order as the two are now neck and neck with each other. Yet, people see "turmoil" and begin angst ridden numbers talk.

Congrats to both Team Alamo and CCCooperAgency for all their personal accomplishments and for finding something in their life that they really enjoy. While some folks here are finding issues and creating grief, they are finding caches and having fun. So was I yesterday! Seven finds and about 5 hours having a blast at a geo-event. Man, was the food good and the conversation fun!

Maybe this topic could be turned into a congrats topic instead? Good to see a few have tried that.

September 10, 2006

turmoil

n 1: a disorderly outburst or tumult; "they were amazed by the

furious disturbance they had caused" [syn: disturbance,

disruption, commotion, stir, flutter, hurly

burly, to-do]

2: violent agitation [syn: tumult]

3: disturbance usually in protest [syn: agitation, excitement,

upheaval, hullabaloo]

Congrats to both teams. Anyone want to start a pool on a date that they reach 20,000?

Turmoil at the Top

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment