Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
txoilgas

Multiple Attending of Events

Recommended Posts

Some people wont even log as event as attended to receive a smiley because events arent a typical "cache". They are events, not caches.

 

Is it ok to log multi-caches multiple times on the ones where you actually find several "caches"? :P

 

Ummm... I vote No, cause a multi-cache is a single cache with multiple stages... not multiple caches.

 

Maybe i'm reading this wrong or something. :blink:

 

A multicache is a single cache that should be logged one time. Gotcha and i agree! So isn't an event cache a one time deal as well??? You certainly can't attend it more than once! :D

 

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Again... with a multi-cache, if a cache owner wants people to log each individual stage... who are we to say otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post

A multicache is a single cache that should be logged one time. Gotcha and i agree! So isn't an event cache a one time deal as well??? You certainly can't attend it more than once! :blink:

What if you leave to get something to eat and then come back? Or what if you are at the event and visit the bathroom, that is like two visits. What if you forget something at your car and go back to retrieve it. That is a lot of work. It should count for something.

Share this post


Link to post

Some people wont even log as event as attended to receive a smiley because events arent a typical "cache". They are events, not caches.

 

Is it ok to log multi-caches multiple times on the ones where you actually find several "caches"? :P

 

Ummm... I vote No, cause a multi-cache is a single cache with multiple stages... not multiple caches.

 

Maybe i'm reading this wrong or something. :blink:

 

A multicache is a single cache that should be logged one time. Gotcha and i agree! So isn't an event cache a one time deal as well??? You certainly can't attend it more than once! :D

 

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Again... with a multi-cache, if a cache owner wants people to log each individual stage... who are we to say otherwise?

 

By that theory, if I start placing caches which break the gecaching.com rules and my local reviewer refuses my hide, I should allow folks to start logging that unapproved cache by "some other means"? That is what temporary event caches are... hides that don't meet the standards to be listed here on the site.

 

At our last event here in Nor Cal we got 7 or 8 brand new "real, live and approved" caches in the park the event was in. If you're throwing an event, take the time, put in the work and create caches that can get approved.

 

Caches that don't meet the geocaching.com standards for publishing should not be logged on geocaching.com... period.

Share this post


Link to post

When I had only a few finds to my name, it seemed like a shame to spend an entire day finding caches and then only be able to claim one smiley at the end of it all. Now that I have found many caches, the smiley count is no longer that important to me. Now I like knowing that my find count is accurate and legitimate. Before I did my 1000th find, I went through all my previous logs and deleted any of the so-called "bogus" finds, so now I only have one log for any given event no matter how many temporary caches I found that day. However, that's just the rules that I like to play by. Like most things in life, I believe people have the right to decide for themselves how they want to play the game.

Share this post


Link to post

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Still comes back to gc.com being a listing service, and the cacher is logging caches that are not listed on this particular listing service just to bump ones find count on this service. So it really IS about the numbers... :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

When I had only a few finds to my name, it seemed like a shame to spend an entire day finding caches and then only be able to claim one smiley at the end of it all.

In a way i kind of like a low count at the end of the day. It just means we are not close to running out of caches to find in our area. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

When I had only a few finds to my name, it seemed like a shame to spend an entire day finding caches and then only be able to claim one smiley at the end of it all.

In a way i kind of like a low count at the end of the day. It just means we are not close to running out of caches to find in our area. :blink:

 

One thing about the numbers is that now that I have plenty of them under my belt, I really could care less about any one find of an essentially generic cache. Now If I did one of the legendary caches...I'd think differently but for the mot part 990 of that 1000 isn't legendary and the other 10 are debatable.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm just waiting for a 55 gallon drum full of film cannisters to show up at some event. That will get these threads in high gear.... :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Still comes back to gc.com being a listing service, and the cacher is logging caches that are not listed on this particular listing service just to bump ones find count on this service. So it really IS about the numbers... :blink:

 

True, gc.com is simply a listing service... and as of now the site is built in such a way that allows multiple logging of caches. Until TPTB step in and say "NO" what difference does it make how the individual users count their finds. After all, it's just a listing service, right?

Share this post


Link to post

Some people wont even log as event as attended to receive a smiley because events arent a typical "cache". They are events, not caches.

 

Is it ok to log multi-caches multiple times on the ones where you actually find several "caches"? :P

 

Ummm... I vote No, cause a multi-cache is a single cache with multiple stages... not multiple caches.

 

Maybe i'm reading this wrong or something. :blink:

 

A multicache is a single cache that should be logged one time. Gotcha and i agree! So isn't an event cache a one time deal as well??? You certainly can't attend it more than once! :D

 

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Again... with a multi-cache, if a cache owner wants people to log each individual stage... who are we to say otherwise?

 

By that theory, if I start placing caches which break the gecaching.com rules and my local reviewer refuses my hide, I should allow folks to start logging that unapproved cache by "some other means"? That is what temporary event caches are... hides that don't meet the standards to be listed here on the site.

 

At our last event here in Nor Cal we got 7 or 8 brand new "real, live and approved" caches in the park the event was in. If you're throwing an event, take the time, put in the work and create caches that can get approved.

 

Caches that don't meet the geocaching.com standards for publishing should not be logged on geocaching.com... period.

 

So says you... so it shall be!?!?!

 

Seriously, I'm not trying to be beligerent by any means here. Frankly I agree with you and would never log multiple attends on an event. But... that's just my way of doing things on a website that doesn't have rules about such a thing.

 

If you want people to log an unpublished cache by "some other means" then so be it. What do I care... I'm not going to log it. But if you were to do that... why not just list it on one of the other listing services.

Edited by BRTango

Share this post


Link to post

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Still comes back to gc.com being a listing service, and the cacher is logging caches that are not listed on this particular listing service just to bump ones find count on this service. So it really IS about the numbers... :blink:

 

True, gc.com is simply a listing service... and as of now the site is built in such a way that allows multiple logging of caches. Until TPTB step in and say "NO" what difference does it make how the individual users count their finds. After all, it's just a listing service, right?

I think at this point, TPTB let this go on for so long, that if they do decide to take it away, the vocal minority will rise up pitch forks and all...

The only real way to resolve this is by the community frowning upon this and also leading by example and not allowing multiple attended logs for temp caches at events, or better yet (as i read above) spend the time and place permenant ones instead of temps as has happened on both or our hosted CITO's, and other events I have attended...

Share this post


Link to post

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Still comes back to gc.com being a listing service, and the cacher is logging caches that are not listed on this particular listing service just to bump ones find count on this service. So it really IS about the numbers... :blink:

 

True, gc.com is simply a listing service... and as of now the site is built in such a way that allows multiple logging of caches. Until TPTB step in and say "NO" what difference does it make how the individual users count their finds. After all, it's just a listing service, right?

I think at this point, TPTB let this go on for so long, that if they do decide to take it away, the vocal minority will rise up pitch forks and all...

The only real way to resolve this is by the community frowning upon this and also leading by example and not allowing multiple attended logs for temp caches at events, or better yet (as i read above) spend the time and place permenant ones instead of temps as has happened on both or our hosted CITO's, and other events I have attended...

 

That sounds like a plan, but honestly... I just don't understand why it matters! For various other reasons, I would frown upon multiple (or dishonest as in logged but did not find) logs on other types of caches. (for more information on this, I largely agree with everything Briansnat says so just reference his posts on the subject) But for events... I just don't see what the big deal is. How is it hurting either you or the community at large?

 

PS. If the event host doesn't feel that multiple attend logs are appropriate... then I feel the event host is justified in deleting multiple logs. If they don't care... then neither do I.

Edited by BRTango

Share this post


Link to post

Deleting double post.

Edited by BRTango

Share this post


Link to post

Doesnt it also make the cache pages ugly/cluttered and give incorrect amounts on attendance?

Share this post


Link to post

True... but many events have temp caches set up specifically for the event. Although you can only attend the event once, if the event organizer explicity or implicitly allows multiple logs on the event to in order to accomodate those who wish to take count of the temp caches they've done... who are we to say they can't/shouldn't?

 

Still comes back to gc.com being a listing service, and the cacher is logging caches that are not listed on this particular listing service just to bump ones find count on this service. So it really IS about the numbers... :blink:

 

True, gc.com is simply a listing service... and as of now the site is built in such a way that allows multiple logging of caches. Until TPTB step in and say "NO" what difference does it make how the individual users count their finds. After all, it's just a listing service, right?

I think at this point, TPTB let this go on for so long, that if they do decide to take it away, the vocal minority will rise up pitch forks and all...

The only real way to resolve this is by the community frowning upon this and also leading by example and not allowing multiple attended logs for temp caches at events, or better yet (as i read above) spend the time and place permenant ones instead of temps as has happened on both or our hosted CITO's, and other events I have attended...

 

That sounds like a plan, but honestly... I just don't understand why it matters! For various other reasons, I would frown upon multiple (or dishonest as in logged but did not find) logs on other types of caches. (for more information on this, I largely agree with everything Briansnat says so just reference his posts on the subject) But for events... I just don't see what the big deal is. How is it hurting either you or the community at large?

 

PS. If the event host doesn't feel that multiple attend logs are appropriate... then I feel the event host is justified in deleting multiple logs. If they don't care... then neither do I.

If your would frown upon logging multiple times on a traditional cache, why not an event? It still does the same thing...artificially increment ones find count...

Share this post


Link to post

FYI, the next Wisconsin event will probably be mid-September. Y'all have three months to re-sharpen your pitchforks!

Share this post


Link to post
Seiously, I'm not trying to be beligerent by any means here. Frankly I agree with you and would never log multiple attends on an event. But... that's just my way of doing things on a website that doesn't have rules about such a thing.

 

If you want people to log an unpublished cache by "some other means" then so be it. What do I care... I'm not going to log it. But if you were to do that... why not just list it on one of the other listing services.

 

You do have a point,,, that being that GC.com allows the practice. What i don't understand is why someone would want to mess up their stats by posting more than one attended on an event. Say they actually attended 26 events but their stats show that they attended 432. I don't see how there can be any arguement that this is a messed up number now and is pretty much unuseable. This person now has no idea of how many events they actually attended or how many temp caches that they found either without going back and manually counting :blink: the logs. I can buy that temporary caches are important to some people but it seems that they would want to figured out another way of keeping a record of them! :P

 

I'm taking it that the OP started this thread here in order to ask for a change, so i'm gonna go ahead and throw my vote in for GC.com to stop allowing multiple "find" or "attend" logs on caches and events. I'll also go ahead and throw out a vote for adding another log category,,, possibly one like "found non-listed cache". Something like this might make everyone happy!!! :D

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like some people are just trying to cushion their stats.

To what end? So they can win geocaching?

 

I would laugh but the plain and simple truth is, Some people are doing it!

Share this post


Link to post
My kids set up a few caches in our yard. How can I log them for a smilie? :P
Sure why not? :P

Share this post


Link to post

Can i log my own caches as finds?

 

What if i visit on two separate occasions, thats a new find right?

 

What if i revisit and the cache migrated a couple feet. That definitely should count as a new find.

 

:P:P:P

Share this post


Link to post
I was interested to see that about 30 people attended the event GC10F47 WGA Geo-Campout 2007 over 1700 times.

 

GC has been very hard on those that promote or ingage in virtual logging. Is not the attending an event 20 time the same thing?

 

:P

1700/30 = 56. The way these events are being logged we should have a new number one cacher in the very near future. I'm glad that I only log them once. It sure seems like a lot of work logging an event 56 times... :P

I forgot to post once for each cache I found this weekend.

 

Well that kicked in the flood control filter. But it did give me an idea. They could turn on flood control for logs. Then when you log an event 56 times it takes you 56 days.

 

That's a good idea (repeat x 56)

Share this post


Link to post

Here's your Markwell for the day.

 

Be sure to read the quotes at the end...

How can you cheat when nobody wins? Did I miss the prize?
...everyone should do what they think is right and STOP worrying about what the other guy is doing.
I would also add that cachers should probably stop worrying about how others feel regarding what they are doing.

Share this post


Link to post

Just stumbled over this tread by accident.

 

Never heard of people logging more then one time if they attenden an event. 30 logging 1700 times on one event? For what? For finding non-geocaching.com caches? Or joining breakfest or lunch? I dont understand.

 

It's sick

Share this post


Link to post

I gots a friend who found geocaching from another online friend. He has found over 100 in a month or two (if that long) and is now putting out his own. He thinks I'm a goof for reading forums (any forums :P ) so he has no idea of this drama going on.

 

I must say he would be shocked people want to log every little thing they've done to try to get their numbers up. He loves going out and finding caches (I do the going out although the finding I'm not doing so well) and he loves that he has found over 100. But each smiley he has is exactly what it says it is. A found cache.

 

Everyone is different and has different opinions, but this seems rather off the wall concept even if it does have lots of support for it.

Share this post


Link to post

Just stumbled over this tread by accident.

 

Never heard of people logging more then one time if they attenden an event. 30 logging 1700 times on one event? For what? For finding non-geocaching.com caches? Or joining breakfest or lunch? I dont understand.

 

It's sick

 

Really? Sick? Quick... someone call a doctor!!

 

I found a cache on my browser. How can i log it for a smilie?

 

Any way you want... it's your game isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post

I found a cache on my browser. How can i log it for a smilie?

Lot's of people do this on virtual caches.

 

It quite simple. Maintenance of logs is left to the cache owner. GC.com does not get involved except in case of gross abuse (e.g. one cacher deleting all the logs of another cacher because they disagreed over something posted in the forums). So it is acccepted that a cache owner can reward a smiley as a bonus for finding temporary cachese or for posting a picture of the finder standing on his head at the cache site. Clearly there are many cachers who prefer that their find count is an accurate count of the caches they have found or events they have attended. These people would log only one log for each cache found or event attend and not use the log for any other reason. The good news it, the last time I looked there wasn't a way for a cache owner to force anyone to accept a bonus smiley. You can keep your statistics accurate. You cannot guarantee that anyone elses statistics are accurate.

Share this post


Link to post

I gots a friend who found geocaching from another online friend. He has found over 100 in a month or two (if that long) and is now putting out his own. He thinks I'm a goof for reading forums (any forums :P ) so he has no idea of this drama going on.

 

I must say he would be shocked people want to log every little thing they've done to try to get their numbers up. He loves going out and finding caches (I do the going out although the finding I'm not doing so well) and he loves that he has found over 100. But each smiley he has is exactly what it says it is. A found cache.

 

Everyone is different and has different opinions, but this seems rather off the wall concept even if it does have lots of support for it.

 

I'm not really sure how much support it has. The people who don't visit the forums that do this, probably do so because someone once told them it was ok. The ones who do visit the forums and see that people are against it may or may not stop.

 

I think what you'll find is that some people are adamantly against multiple logging and other are apathetic. Personally, I'm apethetic... why then (you're probably asking yoursefl) am I posting in support of people doing this? Well... easy answer is, I'm bored. At work I was bored and now that I'm home... still bored. Wifes out of town, son and dogs are asleep... it's raining outside and I don't feel like working out. So I'm posting :P

Share this post


Link to post
So it is acccepted that a cache owner can reward a smiley as a bonus for finding temporary cachese or for posting a picture of the finder standing on his head at the cache site.

Now that you mention it, we have been to one of those. The cache was average but the bonus request was kind of fun. So i give it a thumbs up. (The cache- not the extra smiley business.)

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I'm apethetic... why then (you're probably asking yoursefl) am I posting in support of people doing this? Well... easy answer is, I'm bored. At work I was bored and now that I'm home... still bored. Wifes out of town, son and dogs are asleep... it's raining outside and I don't feel like working out. So I'm posting :P

Your the devils advocate! LOL. Wait... i thought egami was? What did you do to him? Hes been quiet lately.

Share this post


Link to post

 

True, gc.com is simply a listing service... and as of now the site is built in such a way that allows multiple logging of caches. Until TPTB step in and say "NO" what difference does it make how the individual users count their finds. After all, it's just a listing service, right?

 

So maybe there should be a flag next to each cache type and the totals that indicates, "user has logged a find for at least one cache more than once".

 

So they get their numbers. And we all get to see how.

 

But that'd be pretty low priority for the coders if you asked me to prioritize it.

Share this post


Link to post

I would sure hate to have this cachers gas bill, and all in just 3 years.

 

Name Count

 

Traditional Caches* 2069

 

Multi-caches* 280

 

Virtual Caches* 103

 

Event Caches* 822

 

Unknown (Mystery) Caches* 156

 

Webcam Caches* 7

 

Locationless (Reverse) Caches* 55

 

Cache In Trash Out Events* 18

 

Earthcaches* 7

 

NGS Benchmarks 2

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

*Total Caches Found 3517

Share this post


Link to post

I'll throw my graphic in again:

2b8e4859-fc41-40a7-a6d1-bfa1c3dca3df.jpg

After I created that graphic, I did alter the position of my personal opinion on some of the gray areas.

 

The point is that there are some things we (as a Geocaching society) KNOW are wrong. There are some things that we KNOW are right. The area in between is largely gray and your own personal moral guide will let you know if you're falling on the dark side or light side of the force.

 

Jeremy also of course as site owner has the ability to step in and draw the line between dark gray and black.

Share this post


Link to post

I would sure hate to have this cachers gas bill, and all in just 3 years.

Name Count

Traditional Caches* 2069

Multi-caches* 280

Virtual Caches* 103

Event Caches* 822

Unknown (Mystery) Caches* 156

Webcam Caches* 7

Locationless (Reverse) Caches* 55

Cache In Trash Out Events* 18

Earthcaches* 7

NGS Benchmarks 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Total Caches Found 3517

It makes you think the rest of the count from the person you referenced is a bunch of BS. It does boil down to integrity. This person obviously has none.

:P

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds lame to me but there's nothing to be done about it so I'm not going to let it worry me. I'm going to finish out the work day and go home and have a beer. That sounds much better to me than worrying about some lamo padding their stats to impress ????? Hmmmmmmm........ I can't see that it will impress anybody. Like I said, it sounds pretty lame.

 

Anybody care to join me for a beer?

pint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I would sure hate to have this cachers gas bill, and all in just 3 years.

Name Count

Traditional Caches* 2069

Multi-caches* 280

Virtual Caches* 103

Event Caches* 822

Unknown (Mystery) Caches* 156

Webcam Caches* 7

Locationless (Reverse) Caches* 55

Cache In Trash Out Events* 18

Earthcaches* 7

NGS Benchmarks 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Total Caches Found 3517

 

How sad. It sure is hard to look through his events, this multiple logging seems to screw up the cache list viewing pages. I was trying to figure out how many events he had really attended and gave up.

 

One event, one smiley. One listed on gc.com cache, one smiley. Temps and non-gc caches are for fun, not smileys. If it doesn't have an online webpage of it's own, no logging should be done. And before someone throws rocks, the multiple finds we have were all on moving caches that were found in different locations each time. I usually feel guilty about those 9 finds... but not anymore!

-J

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds lame to me but there's nothing to be done about it so I'm not going to let it worry me. I'm going to finish out the work day and go home and have a beer. That sounds much better to me than worrying about some lamo padding their stats to impress ????? Hmmmmmmm........ I can't see that it will impress anybody. Like I said, it sounds pretty lame.

 

Anybody care to join me for a beer?

pint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gif

Maybe at the next event, the person or team with the highest find count has to buy the beer?

 

I think I like that.

Share this post


Link to post

It makes you think the rest of the count from the person you referenced is a bunch of BS. It does boil down to integrity. This person obviously has none.

:P

 

Integrity! That's the issue here! To anyone who attended an event more that once: Liar! Lair! Pants on fire!

Especially interesting since the log format changed from 'found' to 'attended'.

As someone noted: Temporary caches are not loggable on gc.com. They are not gc.com caches! They are not listed here! To say that one 'attended' an event more than once because they found a non-loggable, temporary cache is pure and simple prevarication. I have not logged on gc.com the terracaches that I've found. They are not listed here. I have not logged the letterboxes on gc.com that I have found. They are not listed here! There is (or was) a very nice letterbox located in the 911 Memorial near the first stage of In Our Hearts. (The letterbox was a lot easier to find than the first stage of the multi.) (Not even sure whether my reviewer would permit the hiding of a cache inside a 911 memorial...) Did I even consider logging that cache twice because I found a nearby cache not listed by gc.com? Never for a moment! That would be lying! I have found temporary caches at an event. Did I lie and say that I'd attended that event more than once? No. I only attended that event once. To say otherwise would be lying.

 

As txoilgas says: It does boil down to integrity.

 

I vote in favor of limiting smileys to one per cache or event!

Share this post


Link to post

I vote 56 times for letting people log the way that works best for them... :P

 

nfa

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds lame to me but there's nothing to be done about it so I'm not going to let it worry me. I'm going to finish out the work day and go home and have a beer. That sounds much better to me than worrying about some lamo padding their stats to impress ????? Hmmmmmmm........ I can't see that it will impress anybody. Like I said, it sounds pretty lame.

 

Anybody care to join me for a beer?

pint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gifpint.gif

Maybe at the next event, the person or team with the highest find count has to buy the beer?

 

I think I like that.

How about they can log the event for each time they buy us a beer! :P

Share this post


Link to post

I think that most of you are missing that most of these event finds are just that: actual and real finds. The only thing that makes them different is the fact that after the weekend is up they are picked back up. These caches nearly always abide by every GC rule save for the amount of time they spend on the ground. An interesting way to silence all you rabble rousers would be to leave the caches there for say three months and a day, then pick them all up.....but if that were the case you'd have nothing to complain about and then you'd be sad......er

 

It really is sad to read such trash as is brought out on this topic.

Edited by Lostby7

Share this post


Link to post
I think that most of you are missing that most of these event finds are just that: actual and real finds. The only thing that makes them different is the fact that after the weekend is up they are picked back up.
I'm not sure who you are referring to but I was serious. I will get a chair and sit at some coordinates and put an ammo box under my chair with a logbook. Then you can find my cache. However to log the cache there is one additional logging requirement that you must bring me a cold beer. Call it a beer cache! :P I win because I get a beer and you win because you get to log another smiley! :P This whole deal could work! :P

Share this post


Link to post

These caches nearly always abide by every GC rule save for the amount of time they spend on the ground.

 

If they abide by the rules then please show me a GC number of a cache that was placed and then picked up. To setup and have an event you have agreed to the rules put out by Goundspeak. Please show me where you comply with those rules with your temporary caches.

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
I think that most of you are missing that most of these event finds are just that: actual and real finds. The only thing that makes them different is the fact that after the weekend is up they are picked back up.
I'm not sure who you are referring to but I was serious. I will get a chair and sit at some coordinates and put an ammo box under my chair with a logbook. Then you can find my cache. However to log the cache there is one additional logging requirement that you must bring me a cold beer. Call it a beer cache! :P I win because I get a beer and you win because you get to log another smiley! :P This whole deal could work! :P

I think under the new rules this would have to be classified as a puzzle cache but that aside, getting someone in Wisconsin to part with a beer even if it was for a smily may be one heck of a hard sell. :P

Share this post


Link to post

I think that most of you are missing that most of these event finds are just that: actual and real finds. The only thing that makes them different is the fact that after the weekend is up they are picked back up. These caches nearly always abide by every GC rule save for the amount of time they spend on the ground. An interesting way to silence all you rabble rousers would be to leave the caches there for say three months and a day, then pick them all up.....but if that were the case you'd have nothing to complain about and then you'd be sad......er

 

It really is sad to read such trash as is brought out on this topic.

The hides my kids make in the yard are actual and real finds too.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...