Waiting period until newbies could place 1st cache

[+WeatherednBoston]

I wish I could unsubscribe from tracking this topic...this topic just goes on...and on....and on....gee hasn't this been chewed on enough. Honestly it's giving me a headache at this point lol

 

Very frustrating when you cant stop the emails from coming in!

[+TrailGators]

I wish I could unsubscribe from tracking this topic...this topic just goes on...and on....and on....gee hasn't this been chewed on enough. Honestly it's giving me a headache at this point lol

 

Very frustrating when you cant stop the emails from coming in!

1) Click on "My Controls" (top)

2) Click on "View Topics" (left)

3) Find this topic and check the box to the right of it.

4) Go to the bottom and click on "Unsubscribe to checked items."

 

When you subscribe to future topics, select the "No email" option.....

Edited February 9, 2007 by TrailGators

[+gh patriot]

What would you all think if Groundspeak required a 3-6 month waiting period from the date of sign-up until a newbie cacher could place his/her 1st cache?

 

Pros:

1) It would reduce embarrassing incidents like bomb/terror threats. IMHO, the people that are causing these incidents are "typically" inexperienced cachers. As the game grows there is a much larger (and more difficult to manage) population of newbies placing caches. So if Groundspeak stopped inexperienced cachers from placing caches until they gained experience and a clear understanding of the guidelines; it would help this issue.

2) It would increase cache quality. Cachers could gain experience and see a lot of different types of caches before designing and placing their first cache.

3) It would result in less abandoned caches. If a new cacher hides a cache in his 1st week and then loses interest the cache is abandoned. A waiting period would show some commitment that people are going to stick around and maintain their caches.

4) The reviewers would have less cache issues caused by inexperience.

5) ??

 

Cons:

1) New cachers would have to wait 3-6 months.

2) ??

 

 

 

Edit: Clarified point #1.

 

 

 

I have over 300 finds in less than 2 months. Do I have to wait till I have 500 before I can hide a cache??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Edited February 9, 2007 by gh patriot

[+gh patriot]

Seriously, at 6 months I'll probably have in the neighborhood of 500 finds which is more than alot of people that have been hunting for years.

[+TrailGators]

Seriously, at 6 months I'll probably have in the neighborhood of 500 finds which is more than alot of people that have been hunting for years.

I basically scrapped the original idea and agreed that it would make sense to just recommend to new cachers not to place a cache until they have gained enough experience to clearly understand the guidelines. Voluntary waiting would also allow them to understand what kind of caches that they really enjoy the most. So when they hide their first cache they can try emulate the kinds of caches that they enjoyed "the most."

[+sbell111]

If we understand the rationale and concepts behind the guidelines we can reduce the chance that a cache will become a problem.

I think most of us do. The problem caches are caused by a minority. What a lot of people don't realize is that they are liable for their caches. If these scares continue to get more frequent, then the hammer is going to come down on the violator(s) to send out a clear message. I'm not sure what the penalty will be, but I'm sure that it's not worth it.

I wonder if the opposite is not true. As the game goes more and more mainstream, perhaps law enforcement and Joe Public will become more aware of it. This awareness will tend to reduce the 'scares'.

 

Regarding 'the hammer coming down', I don't really see it happening. While it is true that the owner of just about any cache sould be cited for a misdemeaner such as littering, it is likely that serious allegations (such as the 'hoax' in Boston) could be defended against successfully.

[Jeremy]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

[+Glenn]

After seven seconds of seriously grueling googleing I came up with the only 5 question that need be asked:

1. What is your name?
   
2. What is your quest?
   
3. What is your favorite color?
   
4. What is the capital of Assyria?
   
5. What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
   

 

But seriously I like the idea too and I'm gunna have to put some thought in to this one.

Edited February 10, 2007 by Glenn

[+gof1]

I also like the idea.

Just wondering if this plan is for all cachers, or just for the new ones.

I wouldn't be opposed to a quiz for each new placement. It would keep us all on our toes.

As for the questions, I'll have to think on it also. Seems to me they should concentrate most heavily on placement location and permission issues, with lighter coverage of things like contents and saturation.

Perhaps we should start a new thread to discuss the questions? Just to give the quiz idea a fresh start all its own.

[+GrizzlyJohn]

Well if you are going to force hiders to answer questions before hiding then maybe you should force seekers down the same road.

 

If in fact one of the real concerns is with the damage this hobby does to its surroundings as well as how it is seen through the eyes of those how don't know or care about geocaching then both sides of the activity can cause problems. And if hiders are made to answer a set of questions each time before they place a cache then each time before an entry can be created they should have to answer questions as well. I think that should start to annoy people real fast.

 

Look if people are going to want to do stupid things they will do them. I just seeing adding another set of hoops to jump through as just that and will do nothing to correct any of the problems people think may exist. We are all well aware of the various traffic laws and are even reminded of things like speed limits pretty regularly but that does not make many of us to even have a second thought about breaking some of those laws.

 

You can't fix stupid!

[fun2seek]

Hi, I'm a newby, coming up to one month as a member and a couple of weeks of "intro" going out with my son. I don't believe that a waiting period will achieve a great deal, apart from puting people off geocaching.

 

A lot depends on the individual, some people will not ever perform well even if they were on probation for years. Others will be top performers from day one.

 

I am in the process of setting up a first cache, it will be a simple straight forward cache in terms of difficulty and terain, but I have the objective of taking people, who may not be from our area, to a spot that is worth the visit and is plesant to go to. A couple of sites have been looked at and rejected, I think I now have the one that fits my criteria.

 

This cache will be close to home, easily maintainable and it will be maintained.

 

One question I have however is what suggestions woiuld you give me to use as the FTF prize?

[+sbell111]

... One question I have however is what suggestions woiuld you give me to use as the FTF prize?

I don't add FTF prizes to my caches, but some people do. Here's a thread that discusses this subject.

[+TrailGators]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

Let me think about it Jeremy. I think there are some gray areas that many cachers are not clear on. So some good questions could really help clarify and reinforce the fundamental concepts behind the guidelines and help reduce these embarrassing incidents.

[+gof1]

Well if you are going to force hiders to answer questions before hiding then maybe you should force seekers down the same road.

 

If in fact one of the real concerns is with the damage this hobby does to its surroundings as well as how it is seen through the eyes of those how don't know or care about geocaching then both sides of the activity can cause problems. And if hiders are made to answer a set of questions each time before they place a cache then each time before an entry can be created they should have to answer questions as well. I think that should start to annoy people real fast.

 

Look if people are going to want to do stupid things they will do them. I just seeing adding another set of hoops to jump through as just that and will do nothing to correct any of the problems people think may exist. We are all well aware of the various traffic laws and are even reminded of things like speed limits pretty regularly but that does not make many of us to even have a second thought about breaking some of those laws.

 

You can't fix stupid!

 

First, this thread is about hides.

 

Second,this is the same reason I think that drivers should be re tested when they renew their drivers license. It is not so much about those who intentionally break the rules but improving the overall understanding of those rules.

 

"You can't fix stupid" I thought that was what education was for. No need to fear a little bit of learning.

[+Renegade Knight]

Well if you are going to force hiders to answer questions before hiding then maybe you should force seekers down the same road. ...

 

That's fair. I didn't tear up the area when I placed the one short lived cache cache, but I archived it soon enough due at least one seeker being a moron. At least if they had the question " should you tear up the area looking for the cache" then they would have been exposed to the right answer even if they go and do it anyway.

 

To answer Jeremy:

Since a lot of gray exists in trying to test about the real world, the test should be right out of the guidelines for this site. Something someone could read and regurgitate. Then there is no gray.

[+trainlove]

I know of a cacher who planted his first cache within a few days of joining geocaching.com, not sure how many he had found at that point.

He then preceded to plant 20 or so caches over the next few months. Most were good, only a few lame ones that are not really lame. But ALL where planted without him knowing how to get DD MM.mmm on his GPSr. according to his porfile page he only had DD Mm.mm and that is a heck of a lot of distance out in the field.

 

Way to many cachers decided not to do any of his caches, while others had posted corrected coords in their logs. I think that the original coords are STILL on all the cache pages.

 

I am not criticizing that cacher, but I think that a lot of prospective new cachers were turned off to this sport while trying to find his un-findable caches. I know that if I had dozens of DNF's in the first several weeks of my caching career while trying the caches in my area I might have not gotten hooked. Good thing that my zone was not that close to his zone when I started out.

[+StarBrand]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

1. Minimum Distance to another existing cache

2. If new virtuals are still allowed

3. if cache A is allowed doesn't that automatically mean similar cache b is ok?

4. Is it ok to plant a cache on NWs lands?

5. An ammo can is what size of cache?

 

there is 5 - anybody else got some?

[+TrailGators]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

1. Minimum Distance to another existing cache

2. If new virtuals are still allowed

3. if cache A is allowed doesn't that automatically mean similar cache b is ok?

4. Is it ok to plant a cache on NWs lands?

5. An ammo can is what size of cache?

 

there is 5 - anybody else got some?

I was thinking we would have questions that target problem areas that many cachers need some better understanding.

 

For example: Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Then you could have explanations for each of the wrong answers as Jeremy mentioned.

[+txoilgas]

1. Minimum Distance to another existing cache

2. If new virtuals are still allowed

3. if cache A is allowed doesn't that automatically mean similar cache b is ok?

4. Is it ok to plant a cache on NWs lands?

5. An ammo can is what size of cache?

6. What is the name of the experienced cacher that helped you place this cache.

(I would like to see a newbie hook up with an experienced cacher, one with over 250 finds, for

at least his first 2 caches)

[fun2seek]

1. Minimum Distance to another existing cache

2. If new virtuals are still allowed

3. if cache A is allowed doesn't that automatically mean similar cache b is ok?

4. Is it ok to plant a cache on NWs lands?

5. An ammo can is what size of cache?

6. What is the name of the experienced cacher that helped you place this cache.

(I would like to see a newbie hook up with an experienced cacher, one with over 250 finds, for

at least his first 2 caches)

WOW -- is question 6. aimed at putting and end to geocaching or what ???? Do we now need to be part of some exclusive club to play the game ???

 

I know nobody except my son who introduced us to geocaching let alone somebody with 250 finds. How do you propose I, or anyone in my situation "hook up" with them. The practicalities of something like this are just not not workable.

 

We have our respective goverments that try control all aspects of our lives - why try bring this attitude into a what I have found to be a fun, pleasant and relaxing pastime ??? BIG BROTHER is watching you doesn't sit well with me!!

 

A questionaire (possibly) to weed out the idiots (and there will be those) - but I would pick that the vast majority of geocachers are mature, sensible, nature loving people that need minimal policing.

[+Jhwk]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

1. Minimum Distance to another existing cache

2. If new virtuals are still allowed

3. if cache A is allowed doesn't that automatically mean similar cache b is ok?

4. Is it ok to plant a cache on NWs lands?

5. An ammo can is what size of cache?

 

there is 5 - anybody else got some?

I was thinking we would have questions that target problem areas that many cachers need some better understanding.

 

For example: Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Then you could have explanations for each of the wrong answers as Jeremy mentioned.

7. It it OK to dig a hole to bury your cache?

8. Should you make your cache look like a pipe bomb or a cartoon character flipping the bird? (j/k)

[+tsunrisebey]

Sounds like another definition of "micromanagement"...no pun intended.

 

A hobby that requires you to take a quiz or have a mentor? No thanks.

Edited February 14, 2007 by tsunrisebey

[+TrailGators]

Sounds like another definition of "micromanagement"...no pun intended.

 

A hobby that requires you to take a quiz or have a mentor? No thanks.

Is trying to reduce the number of bomb scares micromanagement? Sounds more like good proactive management to me.

[+StarBrand]

 

I was thinking we would have questions that target problem areas that many cachers need some better understanding.

 

For example: Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Then you could have explanations for each of the wrong answers as Jeremy mentioned.

I like your question fomat - do you some more?

Edited February 14, 2007 by StarBrand

[+ibycus]

***reallized there was another page to topic, and edited my post to oblivion***

Edited February 14, 2007 by ibycus

[+ibycus]

 

I was thinking we would have questions that target problem areas that many cachers need some better understanding.

 

For example: Which cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed under a highway bridge.

b.) A cache placed under a busy city bridge.

c) A cache placed under a walking bridge in a public park.

d) A cache placed on elementary school property.

e) A cache placed in the bushes of a Federal courthouse.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

g) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

 

Then you could have explanations for each of the wrong answers as Jeremy mentioned.

I like your question fomat - do you some more?

 

I like this format too.

I think the questions should be something that anyone who has read the guidelines, or had some experience in the forums would know.

 

The stuff we'd all smack our heads against the walls and go "You idiot how could you *not* know that.

 

Question 10:

Geocaching.com makes you answer these silly questions because:

a) We're trying to be micromanage everyone entering the game.

We really like rules. More rules the better.

c) We want to make sure you actually *read* the guidelines, and don't just hit yes I agree (come on we know you do it)

d) There have been multiple cases where caches have been placed that have resulted in bomb scares, highway closures etc.

 

Maybe have a new version of the quiz when some 'significant' rule change is made.

[+TrailGators]

I like your question fomat - do you some more?

OK, here are a few more:

 

Which of these cache(s) do not comply with the guidelines?

a) A cache placed near a military installation.

b.) A cache placed on an archaeological site

c) A cache placed placed on a historical site

d) A cache placed 20 feet from an active railroad track.

e) A cache placed on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service.

 

Answers:

a) All the above caches meet the guidelines

b.) a, b, d and e

c) b, c and d

d) c and d

e) c

f) None of those caches meet the guidelines.

Edited February 14, 2007 by TrailGators

[+TrailGators]

When placing a cache in a park area, as long as the cache is not placed on land that is not maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges), it should be OK to place a cache?

a) True

b.) False

[+TrailGators]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

[+sbell111]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

[+TrailGators]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

It was only a suggestion.... How about a contribution from you?

[+sbell111]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

It was only a suggestion.... How about a contribution from you?

Wasn't my comment a contribution? I think so.

 

Are you having a bitter day?

[+TrailGators]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

It was only a suggestion.... How about a contribution from you?

Wasn't my comment a contribution? I think so. Are you having a bitter day?

I meant a contribution as in a question you think we should ask...

[+sbell111]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

It was only a suggestion.... How about a contribution from you?

Wasn't my comment a contribution? I think so. Are you having a bitter day?

I meant a contribution as in a question you think we should ask...

Why do you attack everyone that doesn't immediately agree with you? It's OK if we don't all agree on everything dontchaknow.

[+TrailGators]

A cache is placed 100 feet into the woods. The woods are adjacent to the trailhead parking lot of a local park. There is no curb surrounding the parking lot and the ground in the entire area is flat. There are a few deadfalls you have to step over to get to the cache location. Should the terrain rating be:

a) 1

b.)1.5

c) 2

d) None of the above

I think that there shouldn't be difficulty/terrain ratings questions. These are often computed using clayjar's thingamabob. There's no point in giving additional testing on them.

It was only a suggestion.... How about a contribution from you?

Wasn't my comment a contribution? I think so. Are you having a bitter day?

I meant a contribution as in a question you think we should ask...

Why do you attack everyone that doesn't immediately agree with you? It's OK if we don't all agree on everything dontchaknow.

I wasn't attacking! Jeremy asked us for 10 questions so I figured everyone could just throw out some ideas. Let's keep it open and free from criticism while we brainstorm! There are ideas that I may not agree with but it's not up to me it's up to DA MAN! So how about helping us with some more ideas? Edited February 15, 2007 by TrailGators

[+tsunrisebey]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

 

While I respectfully disagree with anyone having to take a "quiz" prior to placing a cache, if you are going to insist that this be done (I'm keeping my personal thoughts to myself here), then it should be something that "pops" up for eveyone regardless of how long they have been a member here. When you get ready to submit a cache, a "pop quiz" comes up, you answer it, then your cache is forwarded to the reviewer for approval. This way everyone has to keep current.

 

I've seen a number of caches placed by members with well over several hundred finds/hides, that were clearly in violation of guidelines posted here. I've even emailed a couple only to receive no response.

 

I may be one of the few geeks here who bought a geocaching book, read the rules here, got familiar with my GPS before I even went to find my first cache. Although I am considered a newbie by geocaching standards, I have good common sense, I'm an adult and I don't like being treated like a child who needs their hand held.

 

Another thought to keep in mind, if you start quizzing new people (and I do understand the intent behind this), what responsibility does Groundspeak/GC.com plan to take on? A cacher in the post-9/11 world places an inappropriate cache, gets in trouble with LE, and says, "I took a quiz before I placed the cache." It seems to me there is a very fine line once we are required to "pass" something, that you are taking some sort of responsibilty for our actions. I'm just giving a scenario...............something to think about.

 

Ok, now that I have got this off my chest, so to speak, I will go about my business.

Edited February 15, 2007 by tsunrisebey

[+TrailGators]

I like the idea of having someone complete a simple 10 question test in order to place a cache.

 

If there are any wrong answers, the page comes back and gives you an explanation as to why the answer was wrong, but makes you choose another answer before letting you continue.

 

For those you answer correctly it tells you why you answered it correctly, explaining why the other ones are false. This further reinforces the right answer in case the user just picked one by random and got it right.

 

Once all the answers are marked as correct you can go to the new cache page. At that point it will mark that you answered all the questions correctly, so you have no excuse in not knowing the top ten issues around cache placement.

 

Now there were already links to existing questions, but it would behoove us to work on what those actual 10 questions should be.

 

While I respectfully disagree with anyone having to take a "quiz" prior to placing a cache, if you are going to insist that this be done (I'm keeping my personal thoughts to myself here), then it should be something that "pops" up for eveyone regardless of how long they have been a member here. When you get ready to submit a cache, a "pop quiz" comes up, you answer it, then your cache is forwarded to the reviewer for approval. This way everyone has to keep current.

 

I've seen a number of caches placed by members with well over several hundred finds/hides, that were clearly in violation of guidelines posted here. I've even emailed a couple only to receive no response.

 

I may be one of the few geeks here who bought a geocaching book, read the rules here, got familiar with my GPS before I even went to find my first cache. Although I am considered a newbie by geocaching standards, I have good common sense, I'm an adult and I don't like being treated like a child who needs their hand held.

 

Another thought to keep in mind, if you start quizzing new people (and I do understand the intent behind this), what responsibility does Groundspeak/GC.com plan to take on? A cacher in the post-9/11 world places an inappropriate cache, gets in trouble with LE, and says, "I took a quiz before I placed the cache." It seems to me there is a very fine line once we are required to "pass" something, that you are taking some sort of responsibilty for our actions. I'm just giving a scenario...............something to think about.

 

Ok, now that I have got this off my chest, so to speak, I will go about my business.

Groundspeak doesn't bear any responsibility because they have already done due diligence by posting guidelines and also having reviewers review all caches based on the info given to them by the hider. If the info it is false or incomplete it is the hider's fault. Groundspeak provides these forums to help answer questions as well. If they added a quiz it would simply be another added assurance. The bottom-line is that the hider is fully responsible for the placement of his/her cache. Groundspeak is a listing site and that is it. They don't place any caches so they never break any laws. Edited February 15, 2007 by TrailGators

[+tsunrisebey]

That is prior to making people pass a test. I'm not talking breaking laws, I'm talking liability. Require a test, that could change interpretation/liability. Ask any good attorney, it's all about interpretation. I'm not here to argue. I've said what I wanted to say, so I'm done commenting.

 

Adios...

[+TexasGringo]

Why a time limit? Suppose they did nothing in that time to learn anything?

 

A cache total might make more sense....say after 50 finds....so one can see caches and learn where to place them without scaring the public.

[+TrailGators]

That is prior to making people pass a test. I'm not talking breaking laws, I'm talking liability. Require a test, that could change interpretation/liability. Ask any good attorney, it's all about interpretation. I'm not here to argue. I've said what I wanted to say, so I'm done commenting.

 

Adios...

If the test simply reiterates and reinforces what is already written in the guidelines then there is no issue at all. Like I already stated Groundspeak does not hide any caches. They are a listing site. People have acknowledged that they have followed the guidelines when they submit their cache. Ask a good lawyer about that.

 

If we want to stop the bad apples from spoiling our fun, then I am all for getting everyone to better understand the guidelines. The other choice is to sit here; do nothing and to let the bad apples eventually spoil things for the rest of us.

Edited February 15, 2007 by TrailGators

[+TexasGringo]

For the First new cache...have a local "High Cache Finder Mentor" go out with the new person and check out the placment and offer tips or suggestions...to make it a better cache.

[+TrailGators]

For the First new cache...have a local "High Cache Finder Mentor" go out with the new person and check out the placment and offer tips or suggestions...to make it a better cache.

There is another thread that discussing that.

[+Chuy!]

Interesting reading in the prior pages, especially the dialogs between Trailgators and sbell111; you guys need to ramshambo .

 

I think the initial idea of controlling caches placement by new members helps more than it does not. Enough more that it warrants the suggested actions. Sure it's not going to weed out all the bad future placements, but it will significantly cut down on them.

 

The "pop-up" quiz will get annoying really quick if we have to answer the questions every time we submit a new cache. How about programming it so it pops up only on, say, the first three hides? And it should pop up on the next three hides for every exising account so that current cachers don't get left out of the fun .

And how about setting up a random program with 10 out of, say, 20 questions so you don't always get the same ten?

[+TrailGators]

Interesting reading in the prior pages, especially the dialogs between Trailgators and sbell111; you guys need to ramshambo .

 

I think the initial idea of controlling caches placement by new members helps more than it does not. Enough more that it warrants the suggested actions. Sure it's not going to weed out all the bad future placements, but it will significantly cut down on them.

 

The "pop-up" quiz will get annoying really quick if we have to answer the questions every time we submit a new cache. How about programming it so it pops up only on, say, the first three hides? And it should pop up on the next three hides for every exising account so that current cachers don't get left out of the fun .

And how about setting up a random program with 10 out of, say, 20 questions so you don't always get the same ten?

Funny! I've told Sbell to quit nitpicking so much. It gets old. Anyhow, thanks for the comments Chuy and I agree with you. I was even thinking that maybe whenever the reviewers get a cache submittal that is in violation of the guidelines that they could forward the quiz along with their comments back to the submitter. I think doing the quiz for the first 3 hides is a good idea. Also retaking it once a year would be prudent since we do seem to have some issues with some experienced cachers goofing up.

[+sbell111]

Interesting reading in the prior pages, especially the dialogs between Trailgators and sbell111; you guys need to ramshambo .

 

I think the initial idea of controlling caches placement by new members helps more than it does not. Enough more that it warrants the suggested actions. Sure it's not going to weed out all the bad future placements, but it will significantly cut down on them.

 

The "pop-up" quiz will get annoying really quick if we have to answer the questions every time we submit a new cache. How about programming it so it pops up only on, say, the first three hides? And it should pop up on the next three hides for every exising account so that current cachers don't get left out of the fun .

And how about setting up a random program with 10 out of, say, 20 questions so you don't always get the same ten?

Funny! I've told Sbell to quit nitpicking so much. It gets old. Anyhow, thanks for the comments Chuy and I agree with you. I was even thinking that maybe whenever the reviewers get a cache submittal that is in violation of the guidelines that they could forward the quiz along with their comments back to the submitter. I think doing the quiz for the first 3 hides is a good idea. Also retaking it once a year would be prudent since we do seem to have some issues with some experienced cachers goofing up.

I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were so sensitive. Unfortunately, the devil is in the details, so sometimes it is important to work out these small issues. Also, the idea was just plain bad (in my opinion). Certainly, I gave you a chance to sell it after I suggested that you start a thread about it, but it wasn't a strong idea. Again, I'm sorry if your feelings got bruised.

[+TrailGators]

Can we *please* get back to some more ideas for questions?

[+sbell111]

Can we *please* get back to some more ideas for questions?

The angst in that post is pretty ironic, considering you participated in the off-topicness (and because the topic that you wish to drive the conversation back to is not the topic of this thread). Edited February 15, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

Can we *please* get back to some more ideas for questions?

The angst in that post is pretty ironic, considering you participated in the off-topicness (and because the topic that you wish to drive the conversation back to is not the topic of this thread).

If I could somehow move Jeremy's post and the subsequent ideas to a new thread I would. Because I can't I figured we could continue with the subject here. Is there some problem with doing that?

 

Again....Can we please end this BS and get back submitting ideas for questions?

Edited February 15, 2007 by TrailGators

[The Vargman]

Based on my experience this past weekend I offer the following suggestion: Something that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache. Not sure how this would be worded, but I like the multiple choice format used earlier in the thread. Sorry If I missed this suggestion earlier in the thread.

[+TrailGators]

Based on my experience this past weekend I offer the following suggestion: Something that clarifies "What is vandalism?" in placing a cache. Not sure how this would be worded, but I like the multiple choice format used earlier in the thread. Sorry If I missed this suggestion earlier in the thread.

Good point. I was thinking the same thing and how to phrase that into a multiple choice type question. I'm thinking that maybe we could have some photos to show examples.