Jump to content

This starting to annoy me

Sensei TSKC
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

sea2horses_uk

+sea2horses_uk

Posted
Posted

Whilst I understand the principle of 'each to their own.

I'm with Lester on this one, one GC number, one log.

This 'cache' has opened up a loophole in the system.

 

Well, that is not strictly true. It would appear that others have logged the same physical caches more than once. The loophole exists for all caches not just this virtual cache.

Link to comment
purple_pineapple

+purple_pineapple

Posted
Posted

Whilst I understand the principle of 'each to their own.

I'm with Lester on this one, one GC number, one log.

This 'cache' has opened up a loophole in the system.

 

i wouldn't say it's a loophole as such... it was set when moving caches were allowed, and has been allowed to carry on existing. I believe it is the only one in the UK, and that moving caches are now not allowed... <_<

 

I suppose, back in the olden days, cachers were inventing new and interesting ways to place a cache, as we still do... some are allowed, as there is no specific reason for disallowing them at the time. Subsequently, groundpeak has decided that moving caches are not to be allowed, and therefore this cache was partly responsible for closing the loophole. They've allowed the few existing ones to continue... :laughing:

 

Anyway, FWIW, I don't have a particular problem with multiple loggings of this cache - as many have said, you do have to actually put some effort in to find the 'cache'. I've only logged it once myself, purely because i want my GSAK founds to align with my GC.com founds!! Purely a personal 'thing' though! :laughing:

 

Anyway, in the big scheme of things, i'm sure it doesn't matter too much!

 

D

Link to comment
Mr'D

+Mr'D

Posted
Posted
i wouldn't say it's a loophole as such... it was set when moving caches were allowed, and has been allowed to carry on existing. I believe it is the only one in the UK, and that moving caches are now not allowed...

Agree. We should keep quiet about this or the PTB will decide this will be yet another virtual to go. :rolleyes:

 

Jon

Link to comment
The Gecko's

+The Gecko's

Posted
Posted

 

I just downloaded the .CSV file into MM and all these new 'caches' have appeared :rolleyes:

Mysteriously though... not the one I actually did log (Staple Hill, Chobham Common)?

 

Jon

 

Jon

 

The Staple Hill details were removed as you were actually supposed to be logging a trig point at this location. The trig point has gone "missing" and you and others actually logged the nearby surface block.

 

Staple Hill was replaced by Turf Hill which is about 6 miles away.

 

Dave - The Gecko's

Link to comment
Mr'D

+Mr'D

Posted
Posted
Jon

 

The Staple Hill details were removed as you were actually supposed to be logging a trig point at this location. The trig point has gone "missing" and you and others actually logged the nearby surface block.

 

Staple Hill was replaced by Turf Hill which is about 6 miles away.

 

Dave - The Gecko's

 

Awhhh.. so my total is total -1 then?

Link to comment
Pharisee

+Pharisee

Posted
Posted

Had a bad day at work... Half way through a bottle of Chianti and not eaten yet. Probably not a good time to jump into a controversial posting but hey... live dangerously :rolleyes:

 

I love YOSM, so there!. :unsure: to you Lester :P

 

I've logged it 15 times and will log it again whenever the opportunity arises. I've logged something over 120 trigs and some of them have been very hard work, much more so than yer average cache. If I can have the added bonus of logging it as a cache as well, then so be it. I'll take what ever is offered.

It surely isn't about getting my numbers up. As others have said, there are far, far easier ways to do that. It's about the feeling I get when I've achieved my objective... be that finding a 35mm film canister stuck to a road sign (not often, I hasten to add :) ) or finding a lump of concrete on top of a hill somewhere. The feeling is GOOD and I like it. I shall do it again, I think. Soon.

Link to comment
Deceangi

Deceangi

Posted
Posted
All current Moving caches still active have been Grandfathered in as they meet the Guidelines current when they were submitted.

Are all other virtuals grandfathered in?

 

Jon

 

Simple answer yes, the Guidelines were revised Wednesday, November 2, 2005 after which no new Virtual or webcam caches were accepted for publication

 

The Guidelines were again revised February 21, 2007, which meant that the Guidelines for Grandfathered Caches were revised as well

 

One thing that all Grandfathered cache owners should note

 

In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive the listing. Grandfathered caches may not be unarchived.
Link to comment
sea2horses_uk

+sea2horses_uk

Posted
Posted

<RANT Mode - ON>

 

I just find it to be a way to boost the numbers without actually 'caching'. I understand that they are different places and different monuments but ......

 

</RANT>

 

Although I am not a newbie; I am most definetly not a lurker or other. B)

 

I have visited other virtual caches where you need to i) answer a question; or ii) take a photo. This process is no different to when I have visited the various YOSM locations so far i.e. I either i) answer a question; or ii) take a photo. So when you say that I have not been actually caching - please point out the difference between visiting a YOSM virtual cache site and another virtual cache site.

 

Hmmm! So far no differences have been pointed out by Sensei TSKC between visiting a YOSM virtual cache site and another virtual cache site to explain the phrase without actually 'caching'. As others have said, the effort that you have to put into some of the YOSM caches is greater than the average physical cache. So, without the intention of annoying Sensei TSKC or anyone else, I will be visiting more YOSM sites in the near future and will continue to do so.

 

Other threads indicate that virtual and webcam caches that are not maintained by the owner are under threat of being archived. Thanks to outforthehunt, at least everyone has the opportunity to claim these virtual caches around the country; and hopefully the number of sites will continue to grow. Whether people take up that opportunity is up to that individual; each to their own.

Link to comment
Team Sieni

+Team Sieni

Posted
Posted

Pardon my ignorance, but how does this one work? Does the owner change the co-ords periodically so it identifies a different trig from time to time, and cachers watch out for a local trig becoming "it". Is that right? Or do you log any old trig against this cache?

 

I already log trigs on both trigpointing UK and also Waymarking, that's enough trig logging for me so I don't think I'll bother with a third place, or my post-walk logging session on the computer after getting home will become too confusing.

 

As to whether people should log multiple finds or not, I care not a fig. I can see why some ultra competitive people may get a bit exercised about it, but Team Sieni are such a slow coaches (50 finds in about 3 years) it doesn't interest me.

Link to comment
Jantaculum

Jantaculum

Posted
Posted

Maybe I could claim a smiley for YOSM as one of the very few (if not the only) person to have visited the published co-ordinates :P

 

Well as a very new cacher (a while back now) I didn't quite get the concept and it's only a few miles from home..................

 

The cache page now tells you NOT to visit the published co-ordinates, probably just as well as I nearly ended up in someone's back garden B)

Link to comment
Edgemaster

Edgemaster

Posted
Posted (edited)

Maybe I could claim a smiley for YOSM as one of the very few (if not the only) person to have visited the published co-ordinates :P

 

Well as a very new cacher (a while back now) I didn't quite get the concept and it's only a few miles from home..................

 

The cache page now tells you NOT to visit the published co-ordinates, probably just as well as I nearly ended up in someone's back garden B)

According to the OS map, the coords do now point to a trig, which one, I'm not sure.

 

It's now stuck in Essex, due to the distance movement limit B)

Edited by Edgemaster
Link to comment
John Stead

+John Stead

Posted
Posted

Pardon my ignorance, but how does this one work? Does the owner change the co-ords periodically so it identifies a different trig from time to time, and cachers watch out for a local trig becoming "it". Is that right? Or do you log any old trig against this cache?

 

I already log trigs on both trigpointing UK and also Waymarking, that's enough trig logging for me so I don't think I'll bother with a third place, or my post-walk logging session on the computer after getting home will become too confusing.

 

As to whether people should log multiple finds or not, I care not a fig. I can see why some ultra competitive people may get a bit exercised about it, but Team Sieni are such a slow coaches (50 finds in about 3 years) it doesn't interest me.

Yes the cache owner outforthehunt changes the coords every couple of weeks or so to a new trig (not necessarily a pillar but often a rivet or bolt so harder to find) but on the web site (GC45CC) there is a file of old locations which you can log validly. So if you have found a trig - it may also be a YOSM. If you do log it you should indicate in your log the name of the trig found and its coordinates as you read them.

Incidentally outforthehunt is a Canadian surveyor and he uses the Ordnance Survey database of passive GPS survey points to get the locations and if you access this site you can often find the original surveyors sketches and photos of the points which make finding rivets and bolts much easier as they are often concealed by vegitation.

Link to comment
2202

+2202

Posted
Posted

Whilst I understand the principle of 'each to their own.

I'm with Lester on this one, one GC number, one log.

This 'cache' has opened up a loophole in the system.

 

Another new principle then?

 

GCR2PR & GCQ0XZ

 

Well, thank you for pointing them out Rutson and very much a slip of the mouse I can assure you when loging additional TB activity.

Any others seeing you have been trawling through my finds?

Link to comment
keehotee

+keehotee

Posted
Posted

I've lurked on this thread since it opened, and a couple of things are confusing me.

(And by the way, I haven't logged this cache once yet, and only ever log trigs if they happen to be within spitting distance of a cache, so have no vested interest...)

 

1. I had a look at the rules as posted by GC - here they are in full

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

It must be my browser or something, but I can't see the one there that says you can't log a cache (any cache) more than once....

 

2. I also missed the bit where GC or COTM put up a cash prize for most finds. Are all of you lot who object so much to people logging this cache more than once SO HUNG UP on beating the neighbours and your own scores. Geez people, it's a game........

Link to comment
bones1

+bones1

Posted
Posted

i have read about gc45cc,i have been told what it is about it but still do not really understand it.not sure if its a cache or not,but have done some imaginative virtuals in the past,the only good thing i noticed was that the last two letters CC remind me of my Coral Corgi,patandjeff=bones1.

Link to comment
The Gecko's

+The Gecko's

Posted
Posted

I see outforthehunt posted a new location for this cache last night.

 

That now means there are 224 locations across the UK for us to choose from :anicute:

 

The YOSM web site has been updated with the new details and the league table has also been updated.

 

As I understand it this cache can be logged as many times as you want provided each log is for a different location and is one of the points specified by outforthehunt. It is not unique as there are a couple of other cahes that can move around the UK and even more in other countries.

 

This cache is not an easy option to ramp up your numbers. While you may to be able to log it a few times without too much effort by the time you reach 10+ finds it actually becomes very time consuming with a lot of miles travelled between the various points. Sometimes finding the actual point is also difficult, your average rivet is no larger than most nano's and can literally be in the middle of a field. You do however have the bonus of VERY accurate coordinates to work with :huh:

 

Deceangi has just updated the coords for the cache so the cache page is now correct for the first time in ages ;)

 

Long live GC45CC ;)

 

Dave - The Gecko's

Link to comment
SidAndBob

+SidAndBob

Posted
Posted

This is a joke, right? :D

I have 50-60 trigpoints visited with photos. So I can log 50-60 more cache finds? Someone's having a laugh. You need to visit TrigpointingUK.com if you want to record trigpoints and Geocaching.com if you want to log geocaches. Don't let's get them mixed up.

 

I'm thinking of creating a cache where you can log when you see a red car or maybe whenever you feel like it. Do you think some people would log that too? :)

Madness. :D

Link to comment
2202

+2202

Posted
Posted

This is a joke, right? :D

I have 50-60 trigpoints visited with photos. So I can log 50-60 more cache finds? Someone's having a laugh. You need to visit TrigpointingUK.com if you want to record trigpoints and Geocaching.com if you want to log geocaches. Don't let's get them mixed up.

 

I'm thinking of creating a cache where you can log when you see a red car or maybe whenever you feel like it. Do you think some people would log that too? :)

Madness. :D

 

Spot on, absolutely agree!

Link to comment
spannerman

+spannerman

Posted
Posted

I'm thinking of creating a cache where you can log when you see a red car or maybe whenever you feel like it.

Would I be able to log it twice if I saw two different red cars.

 

 

Do you think some people would log that too? :)

If it were an approved cache, yes, I would log it!

Link to comment
SidAndBob

+SidAndBob

Posted
Posted

I'm thinking of creating a cache where you can log when you see a red car or maybe whenever you feel like it.

Would I be able to log it twice if I saw two different red cars.

 

 

Do you think some people would log that too? :)

If it were an approved cache, yes, I would log it!

Oh dear. That's very sad. :D

Link to comment
Pengy&Tigger

+Pengy&Tigger

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is a joke, right? :D

I have 50-60 trigpoints visited with photos. So I can log 50-60 more cache finds?

 

Actually no, that's not the case. Less than 3% of the trigs in the Uk can be logged as the cache in question.

 

Oh and for those who are interested (or not), we found another of these again this morning. That's 18 times now. And just to think, I would never have checked for ones in the area we were going to, if it hadnt been for this thread reminding me. :)

Edited by Pengy&Tigger
Link to comment
Team Sieni

+Team Sieni

Posted
Posted

I'm thinking of creating a cache where you can log when you see a red car or maybe whenever you feel like it. Do you think some people would log that too?

:D I think you'd have to go and create a Waymarking category for that! And you'd be grilled about whether red cars have a wow factor :)

Link to comment
keehotee

+keehotee

Posted
Posted (edited)

Going to play devil's advocate now - although I don't disagree with this cache in principle, under the GC guidelines this one shouldn't be allowed if

Incidentally outforthehunt is a Canadian surveyor and he uses the Ordnance Survey database of passive GPS survey points to get the locations and if you access this site you can often find the original surveyors sketches and photos of the points which make finding rivets and bolts much easier as they are often concealed by vegitation.
is true.

 

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS

Does he fly across from Canada everytime the location is changed??

Edited by keehotee
Link to comment
Haggis Hunter

+Haggis Hunter

Posted
Posted

Going to play devil's advocate now - although I don't disagree with this cache in principle, under the GC guidelines this one shouldn't be allowed if

Incidentally outforthehunt is a Canadian surveyor and he uses the Ordnance Survey database of passive GPS survey points to get the locations and if you access this site you can often find the original surveyors sketches and photos of the points which make finding rivets and bolts much easier as they are often concealed by vegitation.
is true.

 

Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types

 

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS

Does he fly across from Canada everytime the location is changed??

It's a fairly old cache, in fact 5 years old this month. I would hazard a guess that it is very much grandfathered, and was originally approved before the stricter guidelines came into force.

Link to comment
jerryo

+jerryo

Posted
Posted

It's a fairly old cache, in fact 5 years old this month. I would hazard a guess that it is very much grandfathered, and was originally approved before the stricter guidelines came into force.

Well I logged it. I was caching with a friend a few weeks ago and he told me where there was one. "Great," I thought, not really interested but then I thought I may as well log it once and it was the nearest one to me so no harm done.

 

But now I've found another one even closer. I think I'll log it again. This cache existed many years before the people who are criticising it joined. People might not like it but they shouldn’t try to change the rules: that’d be like becoming the chief cook and bottle washer of FIFA (whatever that is) and then trying to change the offside rule (whatever that is) :ph34r:

Link to comment
Deceangi

Deceangi

Posted
Posted

Just to clarify a few issues over this cache.

 

When it was submitted it meet the Guidelines that were current at the time, and so has been Grandfathered in.

 

At the time of listing, there was not a requirement in the guidelines for the owner to visit the location and obtain the coordinates using a GPS [in fact as he uses data from the OS site, the coordinates will be more accurate than if he visited each site to obtain them. Somebody can correct me but I believe accuracy is + 10cm]

 

There is no rule in the guidelines about one find to a cache, it is down to each cache owner to set their own rules regarding multiple logging to their cache. And the owners of the site have indicated that they will not apply a system block on multiple logging of a cache [and in fact only act in cases were the owners allowing of Multiple logging is considered to be an abuse of the system], even though they have the ability to do so. The owner of the cache will allow multiple logging, but only one log per location.

 

The current guidelines for the maintenance of Virtual caches [which applies even though they were Grandfathered in] requires the owner to log in once a month, something which OFTH complies with.

 

Just recently there was a lot of activity regarding several UK Virtual caches that were at risk of being Archived, as the owners were not logging in as required by the guidelines. Yet here you have 260 Virtual caches, and the only Virtual cache to still have a new location, in affect creating a new Virtual cache.

 

My personal suggestion is to ignore the fact that the logs to each one are made under the same GC No, and treat each one as a Virtual cache in it's own right. If you are not happy about the owner allowing a log to be made for each location and you are a Premium Member, put it onto your ignore list.

Link to comment
davy boy

+davy boy

Posted
Posted

Just to clarify a few issues over this cache.

 

When it was submitted it meet the Guidelines that were current at the time, and so has been Grandfathered in.

 

At the time of listing, there was not a requirement in the guidelines for the owner to visit the location and obtain the coordinates using a GPS [in fact as he uses data from the OS site, the coordinates will be more accurate than if he visited each site to obtain them. Somebody can correct me but I believe accuracy is + 10cm]

 

There is no rule in the guidelines about one find to a cache, it is down to each cache owner to set their own rules regarding multiple logging to their cache. And the owners of the site have indicated that they will not apply a system block on multiple logging of a cache [and in fact only act in cases were the owners allowing of Multiple logging is considered to be an abuse of the system], even though they have the ability to do so. The owner of the cache will allow multiple logging, but only one log per location.

 

The current guidelines for the maintenance of Virtual caches [which applies even though they were Grandfathered in] requires the owner to log in once a month, something which OFTH complies with.

 

Just recently there was a lot of activity regarding several UK Virtual caches that were at risk of being Archived, as the owners were not logging in as required by the guidelines. Yet here you have 260 Virtual caches, and the only Virtual cache to still have a new location, in affect creating a new Virtual cache.

 

My personal suggestion is to ignore the fact that the logs to each one are made under the same GC No, and treat each one as a Virtual cache in it's own right. If you are not happy about the owner allowing a log to be made for each location and you are a Premium Member, put it onto your ignore list.

 

:ph34r: Well that answers that question,can't see what all the fuss was about in the first place!!!

Just to put a spanner in the works there are people still logging their own caches out there but thats a different subject!!! :ph34r::(:(

Link to comment
Team Sieni

+Team Sieni

Posted
Posted

Behind all of this arguing and sniping is - I think - the reason why Waymarking came into existence. I wasn't paying much attention at the time but I think there was something of a battle for the soul of Geocaching, with the new rule being that caches should be physical things with log books in them - not virtuals, earth caches, reverse caches, webcams etc, all of which should/could/may now be considered as Waymarking categories.

 

I quite like Waymarking and use it for logging disused railway tunnels, trigpoints and meridian markers. I even have plans for adding my own Waymarking category one day - but there's quite a process to go through there ...

 

In the meantime the cache that is the subject of this thread is something of a glorious anachronism/ outrageous loophole depending on your point of view.

 

PS Who on earth came up with the term "Grandfathered-in"???

Link to comment
Alibags

+Alibags

Posted
Posted

....with the new rule being that caches should be physical things with log books in them - not virtuals, earth caches, reverse caches, webcams etc, all of which should/could/may now be considered as Waymarking categories.

 

That's all very well, but how come they still allowed USA benchmarks then? I may have swallowed the very plausible explanation for dumping virtuals and creating Waymarking, were it not for that.

Link to comment
Dorsetgal & GeoDog

+Dorsetgal & GeoDog

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

PS Who on earth came up with the term "Grandfathered-in"???

 

This term is in common English usage. :ph34r:

 

A full definition may be found here..

 

But in a nutshell; the Grandfather clause:

 

"A provision in a statute that exempts those already involved in a regulated activity or business from the new regulations established by the statute".

Edited by Dorsetgal & GeoDog
Link to comment
Team Sieni

+Team Sieni

Posted
Posted

That's all very well, but how come they still allowed USA benchmarks then? I may have swallowed the very plausible explanation for dumping virtuals and creating Waymarking, were it not for that.

 

I just had a peek on Waymarking and I see the US Benchmarks category is very active, with 2000 waymarks. But yes GC.com still has a separate section (distinct from "Search for caches...") as well, and seems to be doing more business than its Waymarking equivalent.

 

Must be another jolly old anachronism I suppose. Maybe benchmark hunters can log them in both places, just as I do with trigs (on Waymarking and Trigpointing).

 

By the way I have no wish (or indeed ability) to get into an argument about this - I have no strong opinions and am not very well informed about it either. Nor am I particularly interested in US benchmarks - just an interested bystander really.

 

I'm interested to see how/if Waymarking takes off.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 2
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...