Jump to content

Pocket Caches are Back?


Criminal

Recommended Posts

I'm going to be blunt. Claiming a find and then claiming another find for other people that were with you is just plain dishonest. If you can't see that, then we are going to just have to agree to disagree.

 

*EDIT* My post edit was 12:43, your post was 12:51. Please do a little research before making assumptions

 

Heres a take on this, taken from my fondest memories of my Grandpa:

BoooHooo! Not everybody is equal, Life isnt fair so the sooner you Get Over It & move on the better off you'll be.

Link to comment

*EDIT* My post edit was 12:43, your post was 12:51. Please do a little research before making assumptions

... Actually I hit reply and then had to go see what you were talking about, so you posted your little zinger while I was researching and responding (since accuracy seems so important to you).

 

Heres my take on this, loosely paraphrasing Pto' grandpa - BoooHooo! Get Over Yourself

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

But what if a few of us decided that we didn't like Travel Bugs and kept suggesting that they be removed from the site?

 

Do you really not see the difference? A TB doesn't get you a smiley when you log it and a coin doesn't get you a smiley when you log it. If they did, I'd have a problem with it.

Did you really not see the obvious point I was trying to make? I never said TBs gave you smileys, but they do give some folks some enjoyment. How would those folks that collect TB icons by trading numbers, "discovering" TBs, etc. (but moving very few bugs), feel if a few of us started demanding the removal of TBs from the site?

 

Picking up a TB from a cache, recording the number, and putting it back in the same cache is cheating, right? The bug never traveled. These people are artificially boosting their bug numbers and getting the much coveted recognition of having a lot of icons at events. They're getting the praise and respect that those of us with very few honest bug trades want.

Edited by Mushtang
Link to comment

I guess how much something is a "reward" goes to how much value an individual places on the positive reinforcement given.

It's funny how often the people who most frequently say that the numbers don't matter also complain about other people's numbers being "wrong".

 

They don't care if other people have more finds... unless the finds aren't approved by them? That's just silly.

Link to comment

This topic is now into 6 pages. Everything that can be said, has been said.

 

I declare the argument over and the side that agrees with me is the winner.

 

Move along now.

But I'm waiting for all the people who said I was hurling insults to say they're sorry! So far, nobody has stepped up to rebut this, and since they can't, they owe me an apology.

Again, it's not name calling. If you lie, you're a liar. I never used the word cheat or cheater.

Unless of course, the person is not lying. If they are not lying, your constant, repetitive bashing is nothing more than hurling insults.

 

For a statement to be a lie, there must be knowledge that it is untrue. If the person making the statement believes what he says, he is not lying, regardless of what the reality turns out to be. Without the intent to deceive, there can be no lie.

That’s your argument? You cannot possibly be serious! So you are suggesting that all those people believe they attended one event several times? Was it a geocache event or a multiple personality disorder luncheon?

 

I’ll give them much more credit than you do.

They all knew they only attended the event once.

They also wanted a smiley for each of the temporary/pocket caches there.

Geocaching, however, does not allow you to log caches that they haven’t approved.

They really wanted a smiley for each of the temporary/pocket caches there.

What to do…what to do….

They have to find a way around the Groundspeak policy.

So they log the event as ‘attended’ numerous times.

They had knowledge that they attended only once

They logged it as attended many times.

Their second and subsequent ‘attended’ logs are lies.

 

You can’t blow smoke and call it anything else. No, it’s not pretty and it’s not nice, but it is still a lie.

 

You wrote:

For a statement to be a lie, there must be knowledge that it is untrue.

So we agree on that point, therefore, we agree they did lie.

Link to comment

 

Baseball players are paid millions. They get to enter the Hall Of Fame if they play a lot better than other players in ways that are considered "honest". They can win or lose games based on how well they play.

 

It DOES make a difference if a baseball player cheats, or takes an unfair advantage over other players even though it's not against the rules.

 

Geocachers are not paid to cache (sneaking off to cache during work hours doesn't count). There is no Geocaching Hall Of Fame that we can get into if we find a lot more caches than everyone else. We can't win or lose caching by changing how we play.

 

It DOESN'T make a difference if a geocacher "cheats", or claims extra finds on an event, even though it's not against the rules... unless you let it bother you.

 

so unless there is money involved there are no ethics? interesting perspective.

Money was just one of the three differences I listed. But you only pointed out one example to try and make it look bad.

 

Interesting strategy.

 

I can't make it look bad if it isn't.

Link to comment

But I'm waiting for all the people who said I was hurling insults to say they're sorry! So far, nobody has stepped up to rebut this, and since they can't, they owe me an apology.

 

Now that, is Funny. . .: :D:D

 

I think you insulted WI cachers more than once- Myself included. I dont need an aopolgy tho- and dont expect one from me-

Link to comment

I have to admit, the only reason I would like to see TPTB step in and stop the practice would be to hear the collective gasp of horror when folks log in to the site one day and see their find counts have dropped significantly! :D

 

However, since Jeremy has made it very clear that he doesn't intend to make the change...then this debate doesn't really serve any purpost other than for entertainment value...

 

Oh, I'm so on Cornerstone4's side on this one...just to see the havoc in the forums caused by one little programming change could be WAY too entertaining :D

 

Oh, and I don't think Jeremy has ever stated he will "never" make this change. Every post I've seen of his states that he does reserve that right to make that change.

 

So that is a question for everyone who thinks these logs are valid: what happens when/if Jeremy ever does get fed up with this monthly argument and just makes the change to one log counts per GC number?

 

Celticwulf

 

Some will be happy,

Some will be angry,

Some won't give a rat's a**,

And the rest will just find another way to pad their numbers.

Link to comment
I guess how much something is a "reward" goes to how much value an individual places on the positive reinforcement given.
It's funny how often the people who most frequently say that the numbers don't matter also complain about other people's numbers being "wrong".

 

They don't care if other people have more finds... unless the finds aren't approved by them? That's just silly.

Nope, not silly - that's my perogative as a cache owner. The point I didn't make in my post is that I as a cache owner get enjoyment out of people logging my cache and telling me about their experience. I have every right to delete non-legitimate finds. I don't have the right as a cache owner to delete non-legitimate finds on other caches though.

 

If someone decides to publically - ummmm - relieve himself on a house in North Dakota, I'm not going to try to either impose my rules on North Dakotans, nor try to mandate legislation that people cannot perform this function on all lawns in the U.S. But watch how fast I call a constable when they try to do it on my lawn.

 

It's funny how often the people who most frequently say that the numbers don't matter also complain about other people's numbers being "wrong".
I suggest you re-read my post. I never complained about other people's numbers being "wrong". I don't give a hooty-hoot if someone goes through and logs every cache in the U.S. with a "Found It. TFTC." But as a cache owner, I have every right to delete those kinds of logs on the cache page. It's even phrased as a "mandate" in the listing guidelines:
The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.
So - log away, on someone else's cache. No skin off my nose. And if that makes your numbers "wrong" - so what? At this point in my life, I don't care whether someone else's numbers are right or wrong or left or upside-down. Edited by Markwell
Link to comment

But I'm waiting for all the people who said I was hurling insults to say they're sorry! So far, nobody has stepped up to rebut this, and since they can't, they owe me an apology.

 

Now that, is Funny. . .: :D:D

 

I think you insulted WI cachers more than once- Myself included. I dont need an aopolgy tho- and dont expect one from me-

I think I finally understand your point. It’s OK to lie; it’s just not OK to expose it.

 

Glad we cleared that up.

 

Yes, it's so silly it's downright funny. :D:D

Link to comment
It's funny how often the people who most frequently say that the numbers don't matter also complain about other people's numbers being "wrong".
I suggest you re-read my post. I never complained about other people's numbers being "wrong". I don't give a hooty-hoot if someone goes through and logs every cache in the U.S. with a "Found It. TFTC." But as a cache owner, I have every right to delete those kinds of logs on the cache page. It's even phrased as a "mandate" in the listing guidelines:

Dude, my bad. I wasn't arguing with you, or trying to suggest that you were one of the folks I was referring to. I was agreeing with your post, and adding my own comment!

 

I could have made that more clear. Oops.

Link to comment

I once read that 94.7% of all statistics found on the internet are made up on the spot. :D

 

This is not made up-the top 10 posters to this thread represent 47.3% of the total discussion. Have you accomplished anything productive yet, or have you just used up some of that precious server space that some of you claim is being wasted by the 'false logging practices' of another very small majority of the geocaching community?? :D

 

Think about it.

Link to comment

But as a cache owner, I have every right to delete those kinds of logs on the cache page. It's even phrased as a "mandate" in the listing guidelines:

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.
So - log away, on someone else's cache. No skin off my nose. And if that makes your numbers "wrong" - so what? At this point in my life, I don't care whether someone else's numbers are right or wrong or left or upside-down.

So, does that mean that the cacher who lists the event should be deleting these logs?

Link to comment

I once read that 94.7% of all statistics found on the internet are made up on the spot. :D

 

This is not made up-the top 10 posters to this thread represent 47.3% of the total discussion. Have you accomplished anything productive yet, or have you just used up some of that precious server space that some of you claim is being wasted by the 'false logging practices' of another very small majority of the geocaching community?? :D

 

Think about it.

 

hmmmm.

 

Okay I've thought about it and I still think, that is, my opinion, is that people shouldn't be logging caches that aren't listed on this site.

 

If ya'll want to take offense to that I guess I can't stop you. I would like a better argument to debate than that I post a lot. (Kind of hard to argue that one). I guess I'm not clear what the post count has to do with the topic. Subterfuge I guess.

 

Edit:

 

By the way I do like how we've gone to the "vocal minority" attacking the the "small majority".

 

Personally I thought we were just discussing things, as usual.

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment

I once read that 94.7% of all statistics found on the internet are made up on the spot. :D

 

This is not made up-the top 10 posters to this thread represent 47.3% of the total discussion. Have you accomplished anything productive yet, or have you just used up some of that precious server space that some of you claim is being wasted by the 'false logging practices' of another very small majority of the geocaching community?? :D

 

Think about it.

 

I did. The purpose of this server space is for "general geocaching discussions", so posting here once, or thousands of times is totally appropriate. If I started discussing model airplane building here, that would be inappropriate and I would rightly be chastised by the mods. I can post about model airplane building. The software won't stop me. It doesn't mean that I should. In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

 

Likewise, if poeple continue to abuse the logging features of this site, sooner or later TPTB will change things so they can't.

Link to comment

But as a cache owner, I have every right to delete those kinds of logs on the cache page. It's even phrased as a "mandate" in the listing guidelines:

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.
So - log away, on someone else's cache. No skin off my nose. And if that makes your numbers "wrong" - so what? At this point in my life, I don't care whether someone else's numbers are right or wrong or left or upside-down.

So, does that mean that the cacher who lists the event should be deleting these logs?

No. I means that he could delete the logs - if he objected to multiple finds on his event.

 

If the owner of the event cache objects, then people shouldn't log multiple times. If the owner either doesn't care or actually promotes it, then people that find extra caches probably will. It's how some people play this game.

Link to comment

In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

Wow. So much for that myth about being born as a result of my parents' love. I've just torn up my copy of "A Purpose Driven Life."

 

I haven't felt quite like this since the day Hydee told me that Signal the Frog wasn't real.

 

Thanks for opening my eyes, briansnat.

Link to comment

In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

Wow. So much for that myth about being born as a result of my parents' love. I've just torn up my copy of "A Purpose Driven Life."

 

I haven't felt quite like this since the day Hydee told me that Signal the Frog wasn't real.

 

Thanks for opening my eyes, briansnat.

Does this mean that your father is... Angst? :D

Link to comment

In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

Wow. So much for that myth about being born as a result of my parents' love. I've just torn up my copy of "A Purpose Driven Life."

 

I haven't felt quite like this since the day Hydee told me that Signal the Frog wasn't real.

 

Thanks for opening my eyes, briansnat.

Does this mean that your father is... Angst? :D

I'm suddenly very confused, and I cannot answer your question.

 

I was born to regulate debates about temporary scrolls of paper stuffed into jeans pockets? Wow.

 

Maybe if I go log 1000 finds on my test cache, my life will make sense again.

Link to comment

In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

Wow. So much for that myth about being born as a result of my parents' love. I've just torn up my copy of "A Purpose Driven Life."

 

I haven't felt quite like this since the day Hydee told me that Signal the Frog wasn't real.

 

Thanks for opening my eyes, briansnat.

Does this mean that your father is... Angst? :D

I'm suddenly very confused, and I cannot answer your question.

 

I was born to regulate debates about temporary scrolls of paper stuffed into jeans pockets? Wow.

 

Maybe if I go log 1000 finds on my test cache, my life will make sense again.

 

Hehe :D

Link to comment

In fact at one time we could post about nearly anything and because some people abused that privledge, the moderators were born.

Wow. So much for that myth about being born as a result of my parents' love. I've just torn up my copy of "A Purpose Driven Life."

 

I haven't felt quite like this since the day Hydee told me that Signal the Frog wasn't real.

 

Thanks for opening my eyes, briansnat.

Does this mean that your father is... Angst? :D

I'm suddenly very confused, and I cannot answer your question.

 

I was born to regulate debates about temporary scrolls of paper stuffed into jeans pockets? Wow.

 

Maybe if I go log 1000 finds on my test cache, my life will make sense again.

 

It still might not make sense, but at least you will have more fun.

Link to comment

*EDIT* My post edit was 12:43, your post was 12:51. Please do a little research before making assumptions

... Actually I hit reply and then had to go see what you were talking about, so you posted your little zinger while I was researching and responding (since accuracy seems so important to you).

 

Heres my take on this, loosely paraphrasing Pto' grandpa - BoooHooo! Get Over Yourself

 

Just for the record, you never explained why you are logging other people's finds under your GC.com account. Sounds like you are getting a little defensive.

Link to comment

I'm going to be blunt. Claiming a find and then claiming another find for other people that were with you is just plain dishonest. If you can't see that, then we are going to just have to agree to disagree.

 

*EDIT* My post edit was 12:43, your post was 12:51. Please do a little research before making assumptions

 

Heres a take on this, taken from my fondest memories of my Grandpa:

BoooHooo! Not everybody is equal, Life isnt fair so the sooner you Get Over It & move on the better off you'll be.

 

If you want to believe that "Everything Goes", then good luck with that. There's not much more to say.

Link to comment
I dont care what other people do to enjoy themselves

 

Personally it does not effect me as a cacher at all, and really can’t see how it could effect anyone else not attending that event.

 

I still dont understand why it bothers you soooooo much that you spend your time worrying/posting/observing about it ? "Its Wrong" "its cheating" "Its lying" ... Oh the Agony!~!

 

All I'm saying is it doesn't really hurt anyone if they log multiple times.

 

I dont care what other people do to enjoy themselves

 

How has an individual logging an event mutliple times detract from anyone else's enjoyment from caching?

 

Tell me again how the grade school kids logging finds of temp caches at events is hurting your excellence in geocaching?

 

While I don't condone this practice, I won't let it bother me because it has absolutely no effect on why I cache.

 

Right now. the following topics are being discussed on Page 1:

Geocaching pilots

Soduko Puzzles

Earth Magnets

Abandoned railroads

Poison Ivy blocks

Signal versus some other frog

 

You get the idea.

 

Now let's take Signal versus the other frog. I could respond by saying, " I believe that Signal is a very athletic frog, and certainly has a more charismatic smile than the skinny weird frog, but this frog discussion has no effect on how I geocache, so I don't care.

 

Honestly, I could respond I don't care 'cause it doesn't affect me on just about EVERY topic. But I don't, because that would be counter-productive to the whole idea of forums in the first place- to discuss. So I make a mental list of why I love Signal over other frogs, just because that's the discussion at hand.

 

These are forums that revolve around the discussion about issues pertaining to a GAME! Of course it doesn't affect you. Or make you lose sleep. Or gnash your teeth. We understand.

 

But what is your opinion? Let's take it for granted that it doesn't affect you. If we were just discussing the issue itself, what is your answers to these questions:

 

1.) Do you participate in extra/alternative/unlisted logging practices like pocket caches, temp caches, multiple event logging, etc?

 

2.) If so, why?

 

3.) If not, why not?

 

 

Bottom line, posting bogus finds on regular caches and events can and does affect others if they choose to let it affect them.

 

Snoogans, I agree with you here, and said the same in your "Tree of Angst" thread. Most the folks that are saying they don't do alternative logging, except for maybe Criminal and a couple of others, do not seem to be stressing out about the situation. In fact, after rereading the thread, it seems many more of the folks that are against the OP are way more emotionally invested in their beliefs.

 

A lot of us just don't get these logging practices and find it funny. But I assure you, as far as true, real concern about the issue, it's about the same as the discussion about frogs.

 

 

BTW...

 

GO SIGNAL!!!

:D:D:D

Edited by Googling Hrpty Hrrs
Link to comment

Now, as to the Pocket Cache itself:

 

First let me say that Pocket Caches are a choice - no event host has to allow them, no attendee has to hunt them, completely up to you whether you log them or don't.

 

I can only tell you where the fun is for me - it's the same as logging any other cache.

 

Pocket Caches are much maligned and rarely represented honestly, and rarely defended in these forums as the folks that log them don't want to take the heat from the few who object so vocally here. Sad that so many won't post here because they don't want to be jumped on, but that's another thread.

 

In fact Pocket Caches are more popular than folks here would have you believe - despite my friend Drat19's statements earlier in this thread, for example, that they are not done in MS, I have found them at three events in MS, and in fact have found them at almost every event I have attended (30+) in every state where I have attended events (~10) from Massachusetts south to Louisiana and Florida west to Texas.

 

Most Pocket Caches are caches like any other - they just are not listed on geocaching.com.

 

Saying that a Pocket Cache is not a 'real' cache is like saying that those caches listed on other sites aren't 'real'.

 

Pocket Caches are actual containers with logs, hidden at events; attendees are given the coordinates (except for the socialization-intended Pocket Caches which are indeed in someone's pocket), they find (or don't find) the cache, just like any other.

 

If 10 Pocket Caches are hidden at an event and you find eight, you log eight, just like any other cache.

 

Pocket Caches are used for a variety of reasons; they started out and are still commonly used as socialization techniques, ice-breakers to get folks at events to interact and get each other to meet and talk.

 

These are usually something like a bison tube or film can with a log, given at random to attendees to put in their pocket. Attendees approach each other and ask "Is that a cache in your pocket or are you happy to see me", an old Mae West line. If the person asked indeed has the cache he reveals it covertly, the finder signs the log and puts the cache in his own pocket, this to be repeated when he is asked for the cache. In this manner every attendee who chooses to gets to meet and talk to every other attendee. Good stuff!

 

So, a real cache container with a log, you hunt it and sign it, like any other cache. The difference is you can't log it, since it's not listed.

 

Ergo, you log the event once for attending and once for every Pocket Cache you found.

 

One found cache, one log... and almost always more fun than finding a micro in a lamp-post!

 

Folks extended that basic idea to caches hidden just for the event. Groundspeak does not list temporary event caches, so if you want to have an event in restaurant or an area with few caches, Pocket Caches allow you to place them in and about the area just for that event.

 

In all aspects they are 'real' caches, just not listed. The host either allows them or not at his discretion.

 

I use them frequently as a teaching tool. When I give a 'What is Geocaching' presentation I hide caches nearby, teach folks what GPS is, how to enter coords, and how to find a cache. They find it, sign the log, just like any other cache - but it's not listed, so they can't log it. So, log the event.

 

I like to give away stocked ammo box caches, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that's what I like to find. So I give away anywhere from 2 to 10 caches at events. I think door-prize drawings have been done to death, so I hide them and give the attendees the coords. They race or play a game to find them and get to keep the cache to hide themselves. I love it and attendees love it... the proverbial win-win.

 

They found the cache, they should get to log it. It's not listed, so log the event!

 

I like games and prizes at events, and attendees apparently do too, judging by their acceptance and popularity. Folks come from multiple states to attend my events, not because I am worth traveling for but because my events are!

 

One of my favorite alternatives to door-prize drawings (did I mention they're boring and have been done to death? ohmy.gif ) is a Poker run. When having an event in a park hide seven caches with playing cards in opaque envelopes. Give out the coords for these and send attendees off to hunt them. Finders take a card from each cache and return to the event at a time certain. If they found all seven caches they now have seven cards. Open them at once and make the best poker hand you can out of five cards. Prizes are awarded based on the strength of hands. Again, I use ammo box hides and have the last persn on the run collect them, then give them away as the prizes.

 

So, attendees set out with coords, found caches - that's geocaching! Why shouldn't they be allowed to log them, it's a legitimate find.

 

These are just a few of the ways and reasons that Pocket Caches are fun and valuable.

 

I fully understand why finding a Pocket Cache would be fun and agree with your review of the positive values with them. I just don't understand why you have to log it as a found cache/attended event.

 

At my events, there's a lot of caching, games, prizes, eating, etc. My last event had 15 caches to find, and many folks found most or all of them, and I believe had a good time in doing them.

 

And then they logged 1 time for attendance to the event.

 

The logging wasn't fun. It was the caches, and the folks, and the great outdoors that was fun.

 

Pocket caches are fun. The logging of them is cheesy. (IMHO)

 

Think of the one single attended log like a Found It log on a multi-cache. You wouldn't log a smiley for every stage of the multi cache, would you? I view all the fun things that happen at an event like stages of one big multi cache.

Edited by Googling Hrpty Hrrs
Link to comment

But what is your opinion? Let's take it for granted that it doesn't affect you. If we were just discussing the issue itself, what is your answers to these questions:

 

1.) Do you participate in extra/alternative/unlisted logging practices like pocket caches, temp caches, multiple event logging, etc?

 

2.) If so, why?

 

3.) If not, why not?

 

1.) No -- although I used to.

 

2.) I used to do as a way to give kudos to temporary hides that were on par with permanent hides (couldn't be permanent due to an arrangement with the park managers that caches hidden for the event exist only for the event).

 

3.) It got to be a pain in the caboose (I DID NOT enjoy the logging, but still loved the finding). In fact, I have since gone back and changed all those finds into notes. I think I still have a few left to remove, but haven't gotten around to it yet. I did change somewhere around 150 finds/attendeds to notes though.

 

But, as I stated before, this is what I do. I will not judge another person for his or her actions. But I'm also probably a lot more laid back than Criminal :P (and I like him too!)

 

Bec

Link to comment

I look at the practice of logging temporary and pocket caches on the GC.com site from two different angles.

 

First is that they are NOT listed, approved, legitmate,, whatever you want to call it, caches on GC.com. I'm not sure why anyone would want to log finds on them on the site. I've found many temporary caches at events but i've never ever thought about wanting to or trying to log them as finds. I've never ran across a pocket cache but i imagine that they are alot of fun at events. Still, i would never have the inclination to log a find on one of them.

 

Second, and this is more important to me. If you are going through the trouble of logging your finds, wouldn't you want the count to be correct? I sure wouldn't want to look over my stats and see that they show that i attended 280 events when i knew full well that i attended alot less. A person that does this can't just look at the number displayed now since it is totally wrong. I guess maybe i'm naive but i would sure think that most cachers would want their stats to be correct.

 

It's becoming very evident that high find count, no matter how it's obtained, is the important factor for some out there. :P

Link to comment

Using this logic, I should log 5 finds on that 5 waypoint Multi that I did!

 

Wow... my find count is going to SKYROCKET! :P

 

Now you can include a find for everyone that was with you too! Here is a list of cool geocaching variations to help increase your find count:

 

1) Post a find for everyone in your group. Heck, even the dog counts!

2) Post a find for each level of difficulty. Will get those numbers hounds away from the lampposts and onto some of the more difficult caches

3) Post a find for each muggle you run across during the cache hunt

4) Post an extra find for each additional trade item you leave in the cache. You should be rewarded for putting in more items than you take out

5) As mentioned, a find for each leg of a multi-step.

6) Post an extra find if you had a gosh-golly fun time! Because that's what's important <wink>

 

That puts me at around 12,000 finds by my calculations. Watch out EMC! Here I come!

Edited by ReadyOrNot
Link to comment

I was researching and responding (since accuracy seems so important to you).

 

Heres my take on this, loosely paraphrasing Pto' grandpa - BoooHooo! Get Over Yourself

 

You wrote above "since accuracy seems so important to you"... It's not accuracy, it's honesty. You claimed that I changed my post on purpose after reading your post as a "zinger". That was "Dishonest" (also not accurate, if that wording makes you feel better). I did change my post, but it was before your reply was posted.

 

As far as the Booohooo! comments, I am "thoroughly" enjoying myself. This is "FUN" for me debating these topics. I have to assume that this is "FUN" for you also, or you wouldn't be in here posting. You aren't trying to boost your forum post counts are you?? :P

Link to comment

You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

Link to comment

You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

It matters not to me. As I have said before, as long as it is allowed and accepted as normal in my caching community I may choose to log them, if it's ever prohibited I am not out anything!

Link to comment

You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

 

I think this would work alright but it still would not alleviate the false logging of caches. I agree with Criminal on this in saying that i hate to see more rules but, it looks to me like programming the system to only accept one "find log" per cache or event would be the better way to go. Numbers hungry cachers would still find another way to get those false numbers but this would definitely slow the practice down by a bunch!

Edited by Mudfrog
Link to comment
You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

I think this would work alright but it still would not alleviate the false logging of caches. I'm agree with Criminal on this in saying that i hate to see more rules but, it looks to me like programming the system to only accept one "find log" per cache or event would be the better way to go. Numbers hungry cachers would still find another way to get those false numbers but this would definitely slow the practice down by a bunch!
My thinking is that people would be somewhat unlikely to log these fake caches to event pages if it did not change their find counts. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

Sounds good to me. :P

 

I love Benchmarking and Event caches. If they didn't count toward my total finds, they would still be fun. I don't think it would solve much though. People would still look at the totals on the 'Geocaches' tab on the profile page and see the numbers; therefore some people would still inflate their numbers by any means possible. <_<

 

But I still think it's a good idea. :unsure:

Link to comment
You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

I think this would work alright but it still would not alleviate the false logging of caches. I'm agree with Criminal on this in saying that i hate to see more rules but, it looks to me like programming the system to only accept one "find log" per cache or event would be the better way to go. Numbers hungry cachers would still find another way to get those false numbers but this would definitely slow the practice down by a bunch!
My thinking is that people would be somewhat unlikely to log these fake caches to event pages if it did not change their find counts.

 

Certain events holders do place temp caches but do not allow multiple logging on the event page. People simply offer up their closest cache and allow multiple finds. Of course these stats go under caches found not events attended.

Link to comment

Since it is a boring and rainy day today I thought I would sit and read 6 pages of the same arguments again about the logging practices of others. Now first off I would like to state that I agree with Criminal and others that logging an event multiple times is wrong. Secondly I would like to state that I agree with the other side that how people log their caches should be up to them. What I think we miss through all of this argument because we get caught up in the whole numbers aspect or the liars aspect is who sets the standards by which we play the game.

 

If you all would indulge me for a minute here I would like to make my observation on this. I believe there are 2 conflicting chains of thought at work. Criminal's and other's view I believe is that there is a Global Community Standard of how the game should be played. In that view everyone should follow the same standard as established by the Geocaching community as a whole. Finds should be 1 event 1 log, 1 cache 1 log ect. In this view things are quite cut and dried. ( Criminal if that is not your opinion I apologize.) On the other hand this is my opinion there is a Local Community Standard evolving in the sport. The sport is becoming a decentralized community. In this Standard each local community establishes the standards by which they play the game, for example pocket caches maybe acceptable here but not in other places, logging events multiple times maybe acceptable there but not here. The essence of this system is that when people compare themselves to others they understand the values and norms of that community and can judge accordingly. Under this Standard we still follow the basic tenets of caching but the periphery of how the game is played is varied to meet the needs of the local community.

 

I think at one time the Global Community Standard was the norm of Geocaching and was wholly acceptable as a standard but with the evolution of the game it is simply not feasible for the Caching community to try and hold to that standard any longer. As each community takes on it's own unique styles of caches and preferences the game will morph to that paticular communities standards and needs. I don't believe that we can judge others and how they play the game using a Global Standard any longer because the game has evolved beyond that point. When we try to continue using that standard many cachers will come up short simply because we don't see that standard as being relevant any longer. As each community has grown to meet the needs of their local community by hiding the types of caches that community prefers so should the other standards of game be based upon the desires of the local community. I think if we all could move to this decentralized view of the game we don't lessen the game itself we merely come to understand that each community sets it own norms. GC.Com continues as a listing service and the game is defined at the local level thereby meeting what each of us needs to be an active supportive member of the game.

Link to comment
Certain events holders do place temp caches but do not allow multiple logging on the event page. People simply offer up their closest cache and allow multiple finds. Of course these stats go under caches found not events attended.
That sounds more like what happened at GW. Perhaps TPTB would step in and lock those caches if they were identified. This would certainly curb that activity in the future.
Link to comment
You know, everything would be much simpler if events did not count toward the find totals. We could still keep track of events attended, just like benchmarks. They just wouldn't add to the count of total caches found.

 

Does anyone have a good reason not to support this change?

I think this would work alright but it still would not alleviate the false logging of caches. I'm agree with Criminal on this in saying that i hate to see more rules but, it looks to me like programming the system to only accept one "find log" per cache or event would be the better way to go. Numbers hungry cachers would still find another way to get those false numbers but this would definitely slow the practice down by a bunch!
My thinking is that people would be somewhat unlikely to log these fake caches to event pages if it did not change their find counts.

 

As things stand now, i would whole heartedly agree with you since most of the logging abuse is with event caches. But, my thinking is that these cachers would begin logging other caches multiple times if event counts were taken away. Barney Fife has it right, let's just make this easy and "nip it in the bud". :P

Link to comment
As things stand now, i would whole heartedly agree with you since most of the logging abuse is with event caches. But, my thinking is that these cachers would begin logging other caches multiple times if event counts were taken away. Barney Fife has it right, let's just make this easy and "nip it in the bud". :P
Are there any moving caches still around that this would effect?
Link to comment

Don’t see any need for a change in the way events are logged, folks are having fun muli-logging them and folks are having fun complaining about it. If it were not this topic it would be something else.

 

I liked Virtual caches, liked them a lot, and don’t want to see anything else happen to spoil the fun for others. Just by watching these forums some folks would like to do away with micros too, that also would take the fun out for a lot of folks.

 

If it ain’t hurting you leave it alone, just because someone else does not play the game the way you think it should be done, and what does make all the whiners think they know best anyway, if you truly want a change move to the area and work one on one with the person or organizations who you think is spoiling the game for you other wise stay in da truck

 

You can call be a liar, a cheater, a horse beater, but am still having fun playing the game my way not yours and ya’ll should not be trying to change that for everyone

 

Last post in this senseless thread for me

 

Joe

Link to comment

Since it is a boring and rainy day today I thought I would sit and read 6 pages of the same arguments again about the logging practices of others. Now first off I would like to state that I agree with Criminal and others that logging an event multiple times is wrong. Secondly I would like to state that I agree with the other side that how people log their caches should be up to them. What I think we miss through all of this argument because we get caught up in the whole numbers aspect or the liars aspect is who sets the standards by which we play the game.

 

If you all would indulge me for a minute here I would like to make my observation on this. I believe there are 2 conflicting chains of thought at work. Criminal's and other's view I believe is that there is a Global Community Standard of how the game should be played. In that view everyone should follow the same standard as established by the Geocaching community as a whole. Finds should be 1 event 1 log, 1 cache 1 log ect. In this view things are quite cut and dried. ( Criminal if that is not your opinion I apologize.) On the other hand this is my opinion there is a Local Community Standard evolving in the sport. The sport is becoming a decentralized community. In this Standard each local community establishes the standards by which they play the game, for example pocket caches maybe acceptable here but not in other places, logging events multiple times maybe acceptable there but not here. The essence of this system is that when people compare themselves to others they understand the values and norms of that community and can judge accordingly. Under this Standard we still follow the basic tenets of caching but the periphery of how the game is played is varied to meet the needs of the local community.

 

I think at one time the Global Community Standard was the norm of Geocaching and was wholly acceptable as a standard but with the evolution of the game it is simply not feasible for the Caching community to try and hold to that standard any longer. As each community takes on it's own unique styles of caches and preferences the game will morph to that paticular communities standards and needs. I don't believe that we can judge others and how they play the game using a Global Standard any longer because the game has evolved beyond that point. When we try to continue using that standard many cachers will come up short simply because we don't see that standard as being relevant any longer. As each community has grown to meet the needs of their local community by hiding the types of caches that community prefers so should the other standards of game be based upon the desires of the local community. I think if we all could move to this decentralized view of the game we don't lessen the game itself we merely come to understand that each community sets it own norms. GC.Com continues as a listing service and the game is defined at the local level thereby meeting what each of us needs to be an active supportive member of the game.

 

Yes, I can see that being allowed to log caches not listed on gc.com would seem like it's supporting the community, but I don't see how removing or limiting the ability hurts it.

Link to comment

Since it is a boring and rainy day today I thought I would sit and read 6 pages of the same arguments again about the logging practices of others.

 

<snipped for space>

 

GC.Com continues as a listing service and the game is defined at the local level thereby meeting what each of us needs to be an active supportive member of the game.

How about folks that move from area to area? Are we expected to learn and apply a new standard in each area?

Who is going to keep track of these 'local' rules? Do I need to apply for a rulebook when I visit a new region? If so maybe we all need to register with the local 'authorties' so they will know that we will be "playing the game 'their' way." :P

 

No, the answer is: One game/sport. One set of guidelines.

Edited by Totem Clan
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...