I see teams....

[+biosearch]

What I'm wondering, and it may not be possible and if it is it is so obvious that I can't see it.... wondering if a team can be put together which includes multiple members in order that one log can be made for the entire group. The perfect solution would be for one internet log, under the team name, would add a log for each member of the team... There isn't anything like that, is there?

[+The Leprechauns]

No, the site does not have the functionality to do what you're asking.

 

There have been a few threads on this subject in the Geocaching.com website forum, where feature requests are made. The reception to the idea has been mixed, at best.

[The EAM Team]

Well, can't you just make one user name and post the finds under that one? You'd only get one log though, I guess.

 

My user name says Team, but we're not really a team - just me and the kids. Should I have not used the word Team?

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Well, can't you just make one user name and post the finds under that one? You'd only get one log though, I guess.

 

My user name says Team, but we're not really a team - just me and the kids. Should I have not used the word Team?

 

It sounds like you're a team to me. The word 'Team' is fine in your user name.

[+Trucker Lee]

Well, can't you just make one user name and post the finds under that one? You'd only get one log though, I guess.

 

My user name says Team, but we're not really a team - just me and the kids. Should I have not used the word Team?

 

Per my Webster's, team n. a group of people working or playing together.

 

EAM, you qualify.

 

Now, for the OP. As to one log showing for multiple persons, NO THANK YOU. The word team, like the word "marriage" implies that two or more have come together to work/be as one. Therefore, one log is all that is needed. Besides, if only two of a ten member "team" are actively caching, why should all the others get credit while sitting in front of the tube?

[+Renegade Knight]

I tend to think of it the other way around. Sort of like the SETI project where members contribute to the team. Each member log adds one to the team (unless it's a duplicate find).

 

Teams would be people who sign up as part of the team, but each member can do their own logs. Members could also quit and take their contributions with them.

[+cimawr]

 

Teams would be people who sign up as part of the team, but each member can do their own logs. Members could also quit and take their contributions with them.

 

 

Hrm. Problem with THAT is, what if "their contribution" was a cache, and the remaining members can't or won't take care of them? There's a case like that in my area, where the account owns 13 caches - 5 in Maryland, 7 in Massachusetts, 1 in Kansas.

 

Thing is, AFAICT, there's only one remaining member, who orginally lived in Maryland, and that person has moved to Kansas. Although some of the caches were supposed to be maintained by a family member who's *not* a cacher, that hasn't happened.

Of the 5 Maryland ones, two are archived - by the local reviewer, not by the owners, and two, both of which I've found, are in not-very-good shape.

The remaining one has been destroyed but remained listed as active for three months after it was reported destroyed. There's no question that the cache is gone, since the person who reported it had found it more than a year previously, and had made several repeat visits to drop off TBs.

That particular cache is 3 miles from my S.O.'s house, so I finally e-mailed the owner.... the account e-mail bounced. I then contacted the local reviewer who changed it to unavailable two weeks ago; there has been no action or response - IOW, it, too, will soon be archived.

 

5 of the Mass ones were adopted for maintenance by an active Mass cacher, so those are still functional; the other two were archived by the owner (probably by the member who lived in Mass at the time s/he quit caching).

 

Of course, that sort of thing happens with one-person accounts, too. But it does seem like one person in the account took care of the caches s/he had placed in his/her local area before leaving, and the other one didn't.

[+biosearch]

My oldest daughter has created her own user name. My youngest is trying to come up with a name. If they keep with this in their later years, when they are FINALLY out of the house, they will be able to count all of the caches they got as kids. This will be cool. The only problem with this, and my concern and thoughts about a team, is that I'm wondering if they should be able to log finds that we all find together. I mean, if one of us finds it then the others actually don't. We are with them, but they didn't find it. My younger daughter has been standing on one, with me seeing it, and not seen it until I pointed it out. Inexperience is all. But for her that would, if she were alone, have beena dnf. So, do others simply log them on each of their own accounts. If so, the owner will have multiple logs for the same day from the same group. It is all very confusing to me, I am a man of very little brain (Pooh).

 

For now we will log them on each account that a member owns. This way when I find one myself I can log it and they won't. It also means that I can use my daughters as testers for my own caches and they can log them. Of course I will not allow them to be ftfs on any of them. That wouldn't be fair.

 

Just my thoughts,

 

bs

[Neos2]

OK, I understand why you are asking now. My husband and I usually cache together.

 

All of our finds when we are together are logged as finds by both of us in our separate accounts. Sometimes we let the other one know that we've spotted the cache and wait for them to find it, too, and other times we just tell out "I got it!" and show them where it is---Depends on how cleverly the cache is hidden, mostly. Good container & clever hide means that I'll tell him I know where it is, and wait while he finds it.

 

As for those rare times when we discover the cache before anyone else, we consider it "our" FTF because we both contribute something to the hunt. However, in our log, we will usually say something like "N1 was the first to spot the cache" to credit the one who really did spot it first. But we both claim FTF as a team--we aren't competing against each other for FTF so much as cooperating with each other to find a cache.

 

As a cache owner, I want to read every cachers experience at the cache. They will be different, even on the same cache. I can see that in our cache history. My husband and I like different things and see the world through different points of view--for example he prefers a big container, I like a good hide--He might tell the story of finding the container, I might relate the tale of the things we saw on the way to the cache. He might tell a funny story about something I said when I saw the cache, and I might want to make sure the owner knows the log is getting full.

 

We might even difffer in our opinion of the cache rating: I'm short, he is tall--a cache that is easily in his reach might seem a daunting challenge to me. On the other hand, guess who always gets to go in after the ones that are low to the ground in the low hanging brambles? And then gets to tell about getting muddy and stuck by the thorns and having to bring it over to him because it's screwed on too tight for me to open? That's a great example of teamwork to get the cache, too. And you'll find lots of times when your crew will be able to finish the cache because of some skill or ability of one of the members.

 

In my opinion, hunting in groups is different than hunting alone. Everyone contributes in some way, even if it is only mentally. There is are many ways to add to the experience: seeing that special view, being tall enough to reach something, being low enough to the ground to get to something, being willing to carry the tool that will be needed, encouraging others, deciding when to stope for a break, knowing when to push the group to try one more thing, etc. Since they all play a part in the hunt, the group needs every member, and every member gets to log the caches the group finds.

 

Having separate accounts also works best if there is a chance that some of the group members will hunt for caches without the group. I've seen others that have one group account and whoever finds some cache somewhere logs it, which counts for the whole group--whether they are there or not. I don't care if they do that in the least, but that method doesn't interest me. The way my husband and I log caches separately makes it easier for me to entice him to go check out a cool caching area that I find on a trip. I don't care if he gets ahead of me, or if I get ahead of him in number of caches.

[+Super_Nate]

The teams that I am familiar with are husband/wife teams....when they are married they are as one! So if the wife finds the cache without the husband they are as one and the team logs the find. vice versa as well, and together! All logs as one instead of clogging up the system and making two logs.

[+kemp_family]

Granted, I have only been doing this for a hot second, but my take is that it would depend on your primary purpose. For my particular "team", which consists of my sister, my son, and myself, we have one name and all of our finds are logged as one person. I have seen good points made for why you may want more than one name in a particular household. The majority of the time, we will do our caching with all three of us; and we will always go on finds with at least two of us. I, too, hope my son will do this for a long time to come, but I do not want his motivation to be to up his numbers. Our primary purposes include (in order of importance) being together, enjoying the amazing things God and people have created that we are free to experience, and to get exercise. I know there are other benefits, especially for my son, learning to work together, not giving up, and using his powers of deduction. However, if this becomes primarily a goal of raising our numbers to the point we all have to have our own names, it would not be as fun to me anymore.

 

IMHO

[+sbell111]

I would kind of like to see some sort of team functionality.

 

What I envision is not a team profile where all the team's finds live. I see the team as just a way to link individual cachers together. If the caches were found as part of a team, you can log it under the team account and all the individuals on that team get credit. This cuts down on the 'me too' logs and allows for easy management by cache owners when the team name is signed in the book.

 

Cachers would be able to belong to multiple teams depending on whether they cache in different groups and also would be able to log caches individually, if they did not cache with the group.

Edited October 12, 2006 by sbell111

[+kemp_family]

How big are these teams with which you cache? I have inferred, from some of the posts that I have read, that these teams are large. (In number not girth. )

[+TeamHarrison]

We also have "Team" in our name. Our "Team" consists of my wife, our two kids, and myself. We have found a cache or two when the oldest kid was elsewhere and noted that the cache was found by "TeamHarrison minus one" in the online and physical cache log, just for the record.

 

I have to say I cringe a bit when I see a small log with half-a-dozen family members, some so young they basically just scribble, logging a find. I guess they're doing things within the spirit of the game, but I say simply log it under the unified name for the physical log and do whatever you must online for everyone to get their find count.

 

When my daughter grows up and if she wants to continue with her own count, she can start a new ID and go from there. If she REALLY wants that account to show all of her finds as a kid, she can go back to each cache and enter a brief "found it" log to that effect. We had to do that when I realized that having an account with JUST my name was offensive to the rest of the "Team"!!!

 

The only problem I see with the team concept for a website addition is that there would just about have to be a separate profile for said team to collect the find count. It would get ugly FAST if "Team" finds incremented the personal counts of members that have been plugged into the "Team" via some tool on the website. I could see it now, TeamX finds CacheX. CacherA gets credit even though they weren't with TeamX on that find. Log note reads, "Glad to get this find, even for CacherA who was with us in spirit!" Just what we need more of, transcendental cache finds.