No Numbers Option for Premium Membership

[+Planet]

Hey, if you don't want to rack up the numbers, don't log them online. Or stick a piece of masking tape on your monitor where the numbers show up, and you won't see them. Me, I like them. I don't care how many I have, or I'd be caught up in logging, but it's a fun number when people ask you how many have you found. I always tell them "That doesn't includes how many I've been to that I haven't found!" Sounds even better.

[+TrailGators]

A work around, albeit one that takes some work/effort: If you want to use the name you are known by at events and in forums, but want to generally keep your caching activities more private and away from prying eyes through the profile and search pages, make a different/new account for logging caches. Use your old one for events and forums, and maybe log an occasional cache with it for your favorite stats like adding new states, or so that people won't think you totally quit or something. Nobody will really know who the other account is. It will just be one of those cachers that nobody knows. Just a random idea....

That's a good suggestion. I've met some people that logged up to 999 and then got a new account. I also know others that don't log at all. Like I said before it's not a big deal to me, but I do think that people should have the freedom to hide their numbers from others if that's what they want to do.

[+TrailGators]

Or stick a piece of masking tape on your monitor where the numbers show up, and you won't see them.

[+flask]

i never said that i don't care about numbers. i LOVE my numbers. i love them, i love them!

i just don't want you to see them.

Just for clarification: if the find count against your log was suppressed, would you also want your profile to be suppressed? Otherwise, the find count is still available to me by viewing your profile: just a little more awkward to see (that would be a slight PIA when I was assessing your DNF or your new cache, but no more).

 

And if the summary of caches found (on your profile) was hidden from "prying eyes": should the list of caches found by your username, also be hidden to protect from anyone counting your found caches?

 

It's all a bit hard to understand - perhaps the only reasonable solution for those who want to "opt out of the numbers game" is that they tick a box which allows them to see geocache descriptions, their own logs and maintenance-type entries, but nothing else (as if they are the only people logging caches). Everyone else would see their stats, profile etc but be unable to contact them except indirectly via a moderator.

 

HH

 

good question, and one to which i have given some thought. yes, i would prefer to have my numbers removed from my profile, but i guess if you're desperate to know my find count, i have no problem with you counting them all in my caches found list.

 

i don't want to make my logs or my gallery private, just my stats. if you care enogh to reconstruct my stats from all that, i would think you were weird, but i wouldn't try to stop you.

 

i don't believe that hiding my numbers should cut me off from everything else on the page. i love to read other people's logs, see their pictures and such. i'm happy to send and answer messages. i'm not sure if what you are proposing is meant to be punitive or not.

 

often when i see something like that proposed, it seems like the poster wants to make sure that if we hide our numbers that we get no view of anything else. i actually look at other people's numbers sometimes. i have friends who DO care about their numbers and their milestones at every hundred, and sometimes i like to know when it happens so i can send them a little note or even just mention it next time we meet.

 

shadowy, nefarious stuff.

 

If I were logging multi-attended logs for events or changing my DNFs to finds because the owner said I could, I would want to hide my numbers so that the people who care so much about my numbers couldn't see them. And if I never did this, I would show my numbers because there would be nothing to be ashamed of. But what I am seeing in this thread are puritans saying they would hide their numbers and people who have defended questionable logging practices as harmless fun insisting that the puritan's numbers are important to them and the ability to hiding one's find count would some how reduce their enjoyment of the game. Perhaps the puritans are right and people engage in questionable practice to get their numbers up higher than other peoples so they can feel good about having a higher number. If people are hiding their numbers then you couldn't compare find counts and that's what's fun about geocaching. The puritans however think that the fun is in finding geocaches and the numbers don't matter.

 

I'm sure there are puritans who think the find counts should show and anti-puritans who would like be able to hide their counts. I'm just remarking about a few names that have shown up in this thread who were also active in the other thread.

I don't think the labels apply. Some people are making a simple request to hide their numbers.

 

i resent the term "puritan" as i see it more and more. it appears to be at the very least an incorrect labeling, and maybe, if an analogy is being made, pejoritive and insulting. i also think it is an unfair characterization to lump together all people wiith one opinion on one thing as being the same people who have another seemingly contradictory opinion.

 

some of those people are simply civil libertarians, who have opinions that seem contradictory, but usually pan out to being in favor of maximum privacy and maximum freedom to do as one chooses. this can mean less display of stats and fewer rules. you can agree with them or not on the merits of the argument, but it's unfair to categorically accuse them of poor reasoning or failure of integrity.

 

additionally, people are unpredictable and we often hold opinions on different issues that do not seem to coexist peacefully. when you inrtoduce something like "i just think it's interesting that the people who (insert belief here) are the same ones who.." into the argument, you are attempting to form otherwise noexistent groupings and you are failing to address the actual debate.

 

i never said that i don't care about numbers. i LOVE my numbers. i love them, i love them!

 

i just don't want you to see them.

 

as for hidden numbers contributing to dishonesty, where's the benefit in claiming to find a cache you haven't found if you have no find count to inflate? sure, you can claim to have found it, but who would notice except you? people who cheat for the find count have nothing to gain.

Bingo!

 

In the other thread the discussion was how could people who say the numbers don't matter also be the ones who say that you shouldn't use the found it log when you didn't find a cache or to get bonus find. I don't find any inconsistency in this stand. The puritans (and the purist/literalist) believe that geocaching is about finding geocaches. There is no "score" so the only proper way to use the found it log is to record finds. Howeve the puritans go further and believe that anyone who uses the find it log a different way must be doing so because they believe there is a "score" and they are cheating to get a higher score. The response from the side that supports allowing using the found it log to record temporary event caches or "good enough" attempts to find a possibly missing cache is that the "score" doesn't matter to them either but that they wish to use found it to record what they are personally comfortable as claiming a find on.

 

In this thread I have seen puritans wanting to be able to hide their find counts. But if there is no score what benefit would they get in hiding their find count? They are comfortable that there logs accurately reflect what they have found. The number is just a number of how many cache they have found.

 

On the other hand, some of those that are most vocally opposed to allowing someone to hide their numbers are the same ones who contend that people should be allowed to use the found it log as they and the cache owner see fit. If they believe that it is OK to use a found it log in ways that other people believe is dishonest how can the numbers be used in any meaningful way? I don't see what advantage they get by not allowing people to hide number except for the argument that it allows them to judge a DNF log.

 

I think perhaps that instead of the count of finds next to a cacher's name in the log, there should just be a count of logs (found logs, attended logs, did not find, will attend, notes, needs maintainance, needs archive) one could then look and see how experienced a cacher is and judge their DNF whithout having to debate if the find count is right. It becomes just a count of logs. To me it currently is just a count of found it logs and doesn't signify anything about how many caches someone has found. But perhaps since found it logs are signaled out as special, some are motivated to log extra ones that they wouldn't otherwise log.

 

would it be such a bad thing for me to keep my find count private? what exquisite pleasure does this deprive anyone of? you keep your numbers and make charts public. i don't believe anyone misses out on anything if i'm the only one who sees my numbers.

 

i don't want people to judge me by my find count. if people are going to judge me, i'd prefer to be judged by my photographs. or my logs. or the stuff i left in the cache.

 

i also don't want to compete with other people over my find count. the problem is that people will compete with me whether i want it or not. it's my own baggage, but i know that when people make it a contest, i respond in kind. and i'm not friendly about it. invariably i want to drive whoever it is into the ground so hard that they will wonder what hit them. and then i will pursue this goal to the detriment of my job and my health.

 

that's why i want my numers visible only to me.

 

it's not because i'm all happy and sunshiny. numbers do matter to me. i really like to compare my find count to the number of days i've been caching. i like putting in a big leap. i like to see my progress. so making my numbers private (and, if we remember the OP, only for premium members!) seems like a reasonable request.

 

someone much higher up the thread said something about how few those of us who want to hide them are; if we are truly an insignificant number, there shouldn't even be a debate. honestly, would you miss a half dozen sets of stats out of all the cachers out there?

 

actaully, i'm puzzled that there are so many people opposed. nobody here has suggested that all numbers be taken away; just the option for premium members who so wish to hide their stats. for those of you who love to analyze and chart the numbers, you lose NOTHING.

 

 

A work around, albeit one that takes some work/effort: If you want to use the name you are known by at events and in forums, but want to generally keep your caching activities more private and away from prying eyes through the profile and search pages, make a different/new account for logging caches. Use your old one for events and forums, and maybe log an occasional cache with it for your favorite stats like adding new states, or so that people won't think you totally quit or something. Nobody will really know who the other account is. It will just be one of those cachers that nobody knows. Just a random idea....

 

i've tried this. if you're known at all, people always find out who you are. then it's all awkward and stuff.

[+TopShelfRob]

I kind of confused... (and I'm new to all of this, and I've tried to digest the four pages of posts, but please bear with me...)

 

And as a newbie, I'm unsure exactly how I feel about "numbers", I'm just trying to understand the question correctly so I'm able to form an "informed" opinion.

 

You guys would like a benefit of Premium Membership to allow a user to decide to opt out of having their numbers displayed, and its desirable to have a solution that would be agreeable for people of both sides of the issue [1. people who want to be able to hide their numbers, and 2. people who like to use the numbers as a gauge of where they stand in a particular community (geographic or among people who have found a particular cache or DNF'd on a particular cache or whatever) or for the purposes of a cache-owner being able to use the experience of cacher to judge the validity of a DNF entry.. ]

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. Example, If someone is a "numbers freak" type of guy, and if there are let's say 268 cachers in a county, and he wants to know where he stands among finders in that county, he wants to know that he is for example, "113th out of 268 cachers" not "92nd out of the 212 cachers in the county that consent to having their numbers used for purposes of your little contest." Maybe he wants to celebrate when he reaches the Top 100. Or Top 10. Wouldn't it be totally bogus to not be able to look at all the cachers' numbers...

 

Or even a simpler example, say someone has 1700+ finds and maybe he gets personal satisfaction out of being number one in his area. Maybe there is another cacher in the area who has 1900+ finds but has his numbers hidden, because he "doesn't want to be in your competition." The first thinks he is number one in his county when he really isn't. Or what if the second guy's numbers used to be shown, but if you implement this feature then they won't be, so the first guy knew the second guy had more than him but he can't strive to beat him. That's like saying Barry Bonds has 738 home runs, which is second to Hank Aaron, but how many Home Runs Hank Aaron hit would now be a secret.

 

It may be petty for some people to want to get involved with the numbers so much, but if they want to that's their choice, and they should have accurate numbers to work with or look at.

 

On the flip side, are the cachers that want to hide the numbers afraid that someone's going to look at their numbers and say, oh so-and-so only has 45 caches found so I guess she must not know what they're talking about? I think everyone should understand that due to whatever reasons that many reasons people have lower or higher cache totals. Some areas have higher or lower cache density, some people aren't in great health, some people simply have less spare time to cache...etc...

[+traildad]

I kind of confused... (and I'm new to all of this, and I've tried to digest the four pages of posts, but please bear with me...)

 

Wouldn't it be totally bogus to not be able to look at all the cachers' numbers...

 

Or even a simpler example, say someone has 1700+ finds and maybe he gets personal satisfaction out of being number one in his area. Maybe there is another cacher in the area who has 1900+ finds but has his numbers hidden, because he "doesn't want to be in your competition." The first thinks he is number one in his county when he really isn't. Or what if the second guy's numbers used to be shown, but if you implement this feature then they won't be, so the first guy knew the second guy had more than him but he can't strive to beat him. That's like saying Barry Bonds has 738 home runs, which is second to Hank Aaron, but how many Home Runs Hank Aaron hit would now be a secret.

 

So what your saying is that if I want to play this game for my own fun I must allow those people to use me as a measuring stick for their ego? If I didn't log online and had 2500 finds they would think they were number one when they were not. It is already ok to log a find in the log book and not do the log online. To hide the numbers allows those people to log online so they can have the benefit of the computerized records of all their finds. I don't see a problem with wanting to not be used in order for the highly competitive types to pat themselves on the back and feel superior.

[Shmooo]

Why is it that people who like the numbers are automatically "highly competitive types" who like to "pat themselves on the back and feel superior"? Where is that written?

 

I'm sorry, but I sorta like the numbers, and certainly don't feel superior to anyone who may have less finds than me. Don't be so quick to judge.

 

(Edited to fix typos...it's late)

Edited June 3, 2007 by Shmooo

[+flask]

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. Example, If someone is a "numbers freak" type of guy, and if there are let's say 268 cachers in a county, and he wants to know where he stands among finders in that county, he wants to know that he is for example, "113th out of 268 cachers" not "92nd out of the 212 cachers in the county that consent to having their numbers used for purposes of your little contest." Maybe he wants to celebrate when he reaches the Top 100. Or Top 10. Wouldn't it be totally bogus to not be able to look at all the cachers' numbers...

 

 

here's the thing: that guy with the highest LISTED numbers gets to claim the title. people who decide not to show up for the race cannot win. there's nothing bogus about it.

 

i hate to bring it back to bike racing (everything in my life at some point reverts to bicycles or geocaches), but in the years when i was state champion, i knew there were better riders than me out there. it did not diminish my championship, not one bit. it would have been silly for me to try to put my race in a context of being ranked among people who did not show up.

[+TrailGators]

Why is it that people who like the numbers are automatically "highly competitive types" who like to "pat themselves on the back and feel superior"? Where is that written?

 

I'm sorry, but I sorta like the numbers, and certainly don't feel superior to anyone who may have less finds than me. Don't be so quick to judge.

 

(Edited to fix typos...it's late)

Of course not everyone is like that but many people are.

 

I still don't see why people can't be allowed to choose how they manage their own accounts. We all started caching without thinking about numbers. In our early days it was just fun to do. However the focus changes for many people. This is fine for them but not for others. So live and let live.

Edited June 3, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Miragee]

<snip>

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. <snip>

But, but, but . . . this is not a competitive game.

 

Anyone who is into numbers is doing that on their own. Right now many, many people don't have accurate numbers anyway because of double- or triple- or multi-logging of individual caches, or logging non-listed caches on GC.com as multiple-Attended logs on Event caches.

 

Claiming to be number one is not accurate now. Hiding someone's numbers isn't going to change that fact.

[+TrailGators]

<snip>

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. <snip>

But, but, but . . . this is not a competitive game.

 

Anyone who is into numbers is doing that on their own. Right now many, many people don't have accurate numbers anyway because of double- or triple- or multi-logging of individual caches, or logging non-listed caches on GC.com as multiple-Attended logs on Event caches.

 

Claiming to be number one is not accurate now. Hiding someone's numbers isn't going to change that fact.

 

Good point. Some people have "attended" hundreds of events. I assume these people would be DQ'ed from the official race, but I wouldn't know. Also the numbers people would only be competing with the people that left their numbers visible and wanted to compete. Everyone else would still see their own numbers so they could continue to use their own numbers for other reasons...

[+traildad]

Why is it that people who like the numbers are automatically "highly competitive types" who like to "pat themselves on the back and feel superior"? Where is that written?

 

I'm sorry, but I sorta like the numbers, and certainly don't feel superior to anyone who may have less finds than me. Don't be so quick to judge.

 

(Edited to fix typos...it's late)

That is not what I mean at all. It is not simply the people that like the numbers. It is the people that insist that everyone should display numbers in order to have someone to be superior to.

[+WRASTRO]

I like the numbers, I won't deny that. I have a lot of fun looking at other peoples' profiles and their logs, regardless of the numbers. I won't ever be a top cacher from the perspective of the find count, but I know and admire many of the local cachers who fit into at least part of that description. I also know and admire others who don't. I do hope that my find count DOES add some credibility to my log when I post a DNF, and I do try to post all of my DNFs. I also hope that my found logs and notes help other cachers enjoy the game the way they choose to play it. I think my caching successes, adventures and failures are all a part of the community experience and I am happy to share them with all who take the time to read them.

 

What I lose when a cacher opts out is the ability to read their logs and appreciate the experiences they had while caching. My case in point is when CurmudgeonlyGal opted out and changed her logging style. She finds tough caches and writes outstanding and entertaining logs. I can't see those now because of the way she plays the game. I don't know what the circumstances were that caused her to change but I am sorry for it and miss her contributions. I would be thrilled if the profile page included tabs for DNF and Note postings.

 

When I travel I appreciate being able to read the logs posted by previous finders. They give me a flavor for the area and for the hide. And the find count is helpful in evaluating those logs. Those who opt out and do not log their experiences online are choosing to play the game in a way I do not, and my experience is, sadly, diminished because of that. I wish there was some way that we could encourage cachers to log their finds and share with the caching community, which benefits all of us, yet preserve the privacy some are seeking. Maybe we could have a range box for cachers to select if they choose not to have others see their "real" numbers. Kind of like the financial disclosures for political candidtaes. Joe Cacher has logged between 100 and 500 caches.

 

I don't know what has happened to some of the more vocal posters on this thread that has caused them such pain and anguish over others seeing their find totals. I have found the caching community to be overwhelmingly positive and supportive, regardless of real or percieved experience.

 

Just so you don't judge my post based on forum numbers, my first find was on 12/26/03 and I have 1,300+ finds. I am proud of my time in the game and of my find count. I enjoy every cache hunt and I do them all. If the hider was willing to take the time to place it and list it I am willing to hunt it. I am a bit tired of LPCs but I thought the first one I found was really cool. It is all a matter of perspective. The next cacher to find that LPC might just be making his or her first find.

[+Happy Humphrey]

good question, and one to which i have given some thought. yes, i would prefer to have my numbers removed from my profile, but i guess if you're desperate to know my find count, i have no problem with you counting them all in my caches found list.

 

i don't want to make my logs or my gallery private, just my stats. if you care enogh to reconstruct my stats from all that, i would think you were weird, but i wouldn't try to stop you.

 

i don't believe that hiding my numbers should cut me off from everything else on the page. i love to read other people's logs, see their pictures and such. i'm happy to send and answer messages. i'm not sure if what you are proposing is meant to be punitive or not.

I observed that the proposal to hide the find count doesn't actually hide the count very well in practice: it's available with one extra mouse click by looking at the profile stats. Even if they were hidden, clicking on "geocaches found" gives you a total number...

I wouldn't have to "reconstruct" your stats, just have a quick look at your summary totals.

 

So: your profile would have to be hidden if it's a "privacy" issue.

 

If it's a "competition" issue, I didn't propose it to be "punitive", but in trying to understand what's behind the desire to hide numbers: so surely it's best to simply not see anyone else's stats (OK, perhaps not seeing their logs is taking it too far).

 

If you do like to see other people's find counts, I'd hazard a guess that in most cases it's because you want a quick assessment of whether the cacher is an experienced team or newbie or whatever. Maybe a better option would be to view other people's find counts OR their status (based on average number of finds over a period): e.g. frequent cacher, occasional cacher, obsessive cacher, old-timer

 

HH

Edited June 4, 2007 by Happy Humphrey

[+brdad]

Maybe they should just test the option to hide find counts on charter members. Probably a high percentage of those who want to hide their count are charter members. With very few exceptions, charter members are seasoned cachers, meaning you probably don't need to know what their find count is to validate a DNF or other log.

 

Or, limit it to cachers who have been premium members more than X number of years if that was possible.

 

Maybe we need a "Seasoned Cacher" status. Over 100 finds and 4 years as a premium member.

Edited June 4, 2007 by brdad

[BRTango]

<snip>

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. <snip>

But, but, but . . . this is not a competitive game.

 

Anyone who is into numbers is doing that on their own. Right now many, many people don't have accurate numbers anyway because of double- or triple- or multi-logging of individual caches, or logging non-listed caches on GC.com as multiple-Attended logs on Event caches.

 

Claiming to be number one is not accurate now. Hiding someone's numbers isn't going to change that fact.

 

Good point. Some people have "attended" hundreds of events. I assume these people would be DQ'ed from the official race, but I wouldn't know. Also the numbers people would only be competing with the people that left their numbers visible and wanted to compete. Everyone else would still see their own numbers so they could continue to use their own numbers for other reasons...

 

I have no desire to compete... I have no desire to hide my numbers... therefore I will simply NOT compete. If someone else decides to use my numbers in their competition, that it is up to them, they may be competing with my numbers, but they are not competing with me... why? Because I'm not competing. Besides, how do you compete with something that is basically meaningless to anyone other than the user.

 

My numbers can't compete with others numbers because the caches I have done are different than the caches they have done.

[+flask]

 

If you do like to see other people's find counts, I'd hazard a guess that in most cases it's because you want a quick assessment of whether the cacher is an experienced team or newbie or whatever. Maybe a better option would be to view other people's find counts OR their status (based on average number of finds over a period): e.g. frequent cacher, occasional cacher, obsessive cacher, old-timer

 

HH

 

no, it's the reeason i gave above. i look at the find counts of people i know to see how they're doing and where they are in relation to any milestone for which i might offer congratulations.

 

i don't give two hoots as to whether a player is a newbie, and i don't make assessments based on find counts.

 

looking at my dad's stats lets me know what he's been up to lately.

[+Mudfrog]

My goodness, this thread has gotten lengthy in just a short time! This may have been mentioned but i'll throw in my .02 cents worth anyways.

 

I'm sure there are some out there that just totally don't care how many caches they have found. I mean, they don't look at their numbers, they don't count milestones, and they have no earthly idea how many caches they've found. It's fine if they don't want to have any record at all but what i'm seeing here is that most want their numbers and they only want this feature implemented to hide them from other cachers. I honestly cannot figure out why someone would want this except,, that maybe they are feeling a little guilty for some reason.

[+flask]

I honestly cannot figure out why someone would want this except,, that maybe they are feeling a little guilty for some reason.

 

i'm not sure where you made this huge leap. since this is your only idea of how this might make sense, i'm going to suggest that you somehow lack imagination.

 

it also shouldn't be hard to have at leat one other explanation since i've given my reasons pretty clearly.

 

i'm not sure if you intend to cast doubt on the integrity of people who want their numbers private, but you have done so nonetheless.

 

i can't understand how hiding numbers would help someone who's feeling guilty. guilty about what? i forgot to feed the cat yesterday; i think i'll hide my find count.

[+CurmudgeonlyGal]

 

looking at my dad's stats lets me know what he's been up to lately.

 

... deletia ...

 

michelle

Edited June 4, 2007 by CurmudgeonlyGal

[+TrailGators]

<snip>

 

The question I'm having with this is that wouldn't any hiding of any of the finds numbers, by definition, invalidate any of the numbers that the "numbers" people want to use. <snip>

But, but, but . . . this is not a competitive game.

 

Anyone who is into numbers is doing that on their own. Right now many, many people don't have accurate numbers anyway because of double- or triple- or multi-logging of individual caches, or logging non-listed caches on GC.com as multiple-Attended logs on Event caches.

 

Claiming to be number one is not accurate now. Hiding someone's numbers isn't going to change that fact.

 

Good point. Some people have "attended" hundreds of events. I assume these people would be DQ'ed from the official race, but I wouldn't know. Also the numbers people would only be competing with the people that left their numbers visible and wanted to compete. Everyone else would still see their own numbers so they could continue to use their own numbers for other reasons...

 

I have no desire to compete... I have no desire to hide my numbers... therefore I will simply NOT compete. If someone else decides to use my numbers in their competition, that it is up to them, they may be competing with my numbers, but they are not competing with me... why? Because I'm not competing. Besides, how do you compete with something that is basically meaningless to anyone other than the user.

 

My numbers can't compete with others numbers because the caches I have done are different than the caches they have done.

I think you missed a key part of what I said (above in bold)...The only thing that will be clear from this is the people that hide their numbers do not want to compete.