Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
txoilgas

Multiple Attending of Events

Recommended Posts

...

If the "attended" logs would quit counting toward your find count, then this practice would most assuredly increase.

 

Markwell, I agree with everything you said except this last sentence. I think that if if attended logs did not count as a 'find' there would be no incentive for them to log it multiple times, since there rational is they found X number of temporary caches and there find count should go up by that amount. But that does not detract from a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post

"then this practice would most assuredly increase" - I meant the practice of logging finds on other archived caches, not logging multiple attended logs.

Share this post


Link to post
I think that while temp caches at an event are fun things to do, unless they follow all the rules (including the 0.1 mile rule) and are approved and published they should not count and should not be logged.
The easiest solution that everyone is dancing around is that "attended" logs for events would not not count in a profile's total number of caches found. An "event" is even less of a cache than the grandfathered virtuals, webcams and locationless caches are. If y'all want to go to the extreme of saying that you should only get a "find" on a "cache" listed on GC.com, then let's grandfather the existing "Attended" logs to count (since GC.com likes to grandfather rules) and from today forward attending an event does not increase your find count.

 

Just as if you find ... a cache listed on another site you can't just log another cache again just to get credit.
But there are those that do JUST that. Navicache listings and Terracache listings are being found by people obsessed with having "correct" numbers, and they are using old archived caches they own to log their find, and thus increase their find count the appropriate number. I know that this is frowned upon by the head office, but it DOES happen.

 

If the "attended" logs would quit counting toward your find count, then this practice would most assuredly increase.

 

My solution. ;)

 

A GC account would allow you one find per cache (regardless of type), it will not allow you to log a find on your own caches, and it would put a cap on back dated logs. The last item would be great incentive for cachers that are 1000 logs behind, which I don't get.

 

The easiest solution that everyone is dancing around is that "attended" logs for events would not not count in a profile's total number of caches found. An "event" is even less of a cache than the grandfathered virtuals, webcams and locationless caches are. If y'all want to go to the extreme of saying that you should only get a "find" on a "cache" listed on GC.com, then let's grandfather the existing "Attended" logs to count (since GC.com likes to grandfather rules) and from today forward attending an event does not increase your find count.

I'm sure there are those that would create a regular listed cache, near the event, for logging all the event caches into. The event itself might not have multiple logs, but the micro that is 0.1 miles away will have dozens of finds per person that enjoys multi-logging events.

Share this post


Link to post

"then this practice would most assuredly increase" - I meant the practice of logging finds on other archived caches, not logging multiple attended logs.

While the logging of archived caches may increase some, i doubt it would increase as much as the multiple logging of event caches would decrease.

 

That was a mouthful.

Share this post


Link to post

"then this practice would most assuredly increase" - I meant the practice of logging finds on other archived caches, not logging multiple attended logs.

 

Understood and I agree. But I think the number of bogus finds of archives won't be as high as the number of present multiple attended logs as it might be little harder for some to rationalize there cheating.

Share this post


Link to post

i vote no on capping the backdated logs. i am so chronically behind, but i hope to catch up at some point and tell the story of what happened, which is the whole point of geocaching, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
My solution. ;)

A GC account would allow you one find per cache (regardless of type), it will not allow you to log a find on your own caches, and it would put a cap on back dated logs. The last item would be great incentive for cachers that are 1000 logs behind, which I don't get.

 

I agree with the first part, but the back dated logs I don't have a problem with. On more than one occastion I have gone to a cache and discovered I signed the log two years ago and somehow forgot to log it. If you update a log it puts a timestamp indicating when. I think its reasonable that if you backdate a log more than one month, at timestamp is automatically included in the text.

Share this post


Link to post

The easiest solution that everyone is dancing around is that "attended" logs for events would not not count in a profile's total number of caches found. An "event" is even less of a cache than the grandfathered virtuals, webcams and locationless caches are. If y'all want to go to the extreme of saying that you should only get a "find" on a "cache" listed on GC.com, then let's grandfather the existing "Attended" logs to count (since GC.com likes to grandfather rules) and from today forward attending an event does not increase your find count.

I like that. Maintain separate counts for caches, benchmarks, events, and trackables. (And an additional column for "other" so people can "keep their numbers accurate": temp caches, N*v*caches, beers that you got someone to fetch for you, etc?)

 

dave

I think each cacher should be allowed to specify an adjustment number to their find count in their profile. This number would be added to the find count when it is displayed. Those that want their find count to reflect the number of temporary event caches and Navicaches or Terracaches (or waymarks) that they have found could put this number in their profile and it will be added to their find count. Then there would be no need to log multiple attended logs or logs on archived caches so their numbers will be "correct". Similarly, the adjustment could be negative for people who want to hide their find count. They could just set the adjustment to minus whatever number of caches they have found so their find count would be zero.

Share this post


Link to post

i fully support the right of lame people to make bogus logs of every film cannister, gum wrapper, and bottlecap they find while looking for, finding, or thinking about finding any geocache.

 

these integrity-challenged giants of the numberboard can and must be allowed to post these "finds" on any convenient cache or event, provided the owner/organizer allows it.

 

in exchange, the rest of us will retain the right to laugh overtly or covertly in a derisive manner. some people have a very low threshhold for self-respect and and dance happily from foot to foot, logging a find every time they strike the ground, giddy with self-approbation.

 

if those of us who enjoy both freedom AND integrity are to survive, we have to tolerate these bozos.

 

smile.

 

OMG.... thankfully the mouthful of water I had was small when I read this. :D

 

Beautiful (and extra points for wording and poetic license). :D

 

DCC

Share this post


Link to post

Stats for this thread:

 

knight2000 46

BRTango 35

Renegade Knight 17

BlueDeuce 11

Driver Carries Cache 11

Markwell 10

TrailGators 9

vtmtnman 9

tozainamboku 9

Kit Fox 7

txoilgas 7

Pto 6

The Cheeseheads 6

Blanston12 5

Always & Forever 5 5

KoosKoos 4

Guyute1210 4

ETfonedhome 4

Mudfrog 4

Lostby7 4

Jeremy 3

Prying Pandora 3

NFA 3

Mushtang 3

JohnnyVegas 3

The Leprechauns 2

Thrak 2

Ice Dragon 2

Jennifer&Dean 2

0ccam 2

flask 2

vagabond 2

Keystone 1

ReadyOrNot 1

kealia 1

marc_54140 1

delta123 1

stepshep 1

Criminal 1

dabhid07 1

Elaur 1

junglehair 1

NoLemon 1

Harry Dolphin 1

McKryton 1

Half-Canadian 1

Trudy & the beast 1

Semper Questio 1

Stunod 1

Share this post


Link to post

...I think each cacher should be allowed to specify an adjustment number to their find count in their profile....

 

There is a flaw in that logic. It involves both work and math... :D

Share this post


Link to post

I remember being a main user on another forum years ago. I remember lots of people were so concerned about getting a high post count number. I was glad to be here with such a low number compared to everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post

Stats for this thread:

 

knight2000 46

BRTango 35

Renegade Knight 17

BlueDeuce 11

Driver Carries Cache 11

Markwell 10

TrailGators 9

vtmtnman 9

tozainamboku 9

Kit Fox 7

txoilgas 7

Pto 6

The Cheeseheads 6

Blanston12 5

Always & Forever 5 5

KoosKoos 4

Guyute1210 4

ETfonedhome 4

Mudfrog 4

Lostby7 4

Jeremy 3

Prying Pandora 3

NFA 3

Mushtang 3

JohnnyVegas 3

The Leprechauns 2

Thrak 2

Ice Dragon 2

Jennifer&Dean 2

0ccam 2

flask 2

vagabond 2

Keystone 1

ReadyOrNot 1

kealia 1

marc_54140 1

delta123 1

stepshep 1

Criminal 1

dabhid07 1

Elaur 1

junglehair 1

NoLemon 1

Harry Dolphin 1

McKryton 1

Half-Canadian 1

Trudy & the beast 1

Semper Questio 1

Stunod 1

 

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard. in return, i will offer to post some other count, such as the number of little corn muffins i have eaten today,or how many pairs of shoes i own.

Share this post


Link to post

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard.

LOL. I was playing with INATN and later realized that my info was shown on the site for everyone to see. I hurriedly emailed the owner hoping for it to all be deleted before i found out how to keep that info private.

Share this post


Link to post

in return, i will offer to post some other count, such as the number of little corn muffins i have eaten today,or how many pairs of shoes i own.

 

You have how many? (Note: off-topic thread)

Share this post


Link to post

 

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard. in return, i will offer to post some other count, such as the number of little corn muffins i have eaten today,or how many pairs of shoes i own.

 

Do I sense an Ender reference?

Share this post


Link to post
My solution.

 

A GC account would allow you one find per cache (regardless of type), it will not allow you to log a find on your own caches, and it would put a cap on back dated logs. The last item would be great incentive for cachers that are 1000 logs behind, which I don't get.

 

That gets my vote! I know Jeremy has stated a few times that he doesn't want to impose this right now but i think it will come about, seeing as how the silliness is becoming more prevalent.

 

I've seen some say that there is no solution to this but i have to disagree. There would be a significant drop in false logging if tptb initiated one find or attended per cache or event. Of course there are always going to be those who lack integrity and want the smilie no matter what the cost. They would figure out another loophole such as logging archived caches and caches they hadn't found to get it. Still, it would certainly help alleviate the problem.

Share this post


Link to post

 

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard. in return, i will offer to post some other count, such as the number of little corn muffins i have eaten today,or how many pairs of shoes i own.

 

Do I sense an Ender reference?

 

huh?

Share this post


Link to post

Stats for this thread:

 

knight2000 46

BRTango 35

Renegade Knight 17

BlueDeuce 11

Driver Carries Cache 11

Markwell 10

TrailGators 9

vtmtnman 9

tozainamboku 9

Kit Fox 7

txoilgas 7

Pto 6

The Cheeseheads 6

Blanston12 5

Always & Forever 5 5

KoosKoos 4

Guyute1210 4

ETfonedhome 4

Mudfrog 4

Lostby7 4

Jeremy 3

Prying Pandora 3

NFA 3

Mushtang 3

JohnnyVegas 3

The Leprechauns 2

Thrak 2

Ice Dragon 2

Jennifer&Dean 2

0ccam 2

flask 2

vagabond 2

Keystone 1

ReadyOrNot 1

kealia 1

marc_54140 1

delta123 1

stepshep 1

Criminal 1

dabhid07 1

Elaur 1

junglehair 1

NoLemon 1

Harry Dolphin 1

McKryton 1

Half-Canadian 1

Trudy & the beast 1

Semper Questio 1

Stunod 1

 

Yes, but my four posts took a LOT longer to think about than Markwell's 10...and I know that he double-posts on some of his comments so that he can look like a more active poster than the rest of us.

 

:D

 

P.S. sweet....15 more posts and someone will honor me with a gold ammo can for hitting my first big milestone!!!! oh wait, numbers don't matter to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Due to a server time out, I double-posted.....thus soiling my heretofore untarnished reputation for perfection in posting. I feel so dirty.

 

:D

Edited by KoosKoos

Share this post


Link to post

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Due to a server time out, I double-posted.....thus soiling my heretofore untarnished reputation for perfection in posting. I feel so dirty.

 

:D

Maybe you could get an extra icon for that.

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :D

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

Share this post


Link to post

...May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

 

You know, I like that. That would work as well as the Event Cache Only Log.

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.

 

 

Naw, they're only up to 70 or so finds per event in Cheeseland. But I'm sure it will increase at the next one. :D

 

 

But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :D

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

 

I agree. Excellent idea.

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :D

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

 

I never thought of that but i think it's a great idea. That would keep the numbers easy to figure out, not only for others who come across them, but for the owner of them as well. :D

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :D

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

Or, we could just not worry about it, and let everyone play as they see fit, since it's not a competition in the first place, and the numbers don't mean anything except to their owners.

 

Apparently, that's not gonna happen...

Share this post


Link to post

yes, fine. i like the option with both the find count and the number of unique finds. i can think of one group that will hate it: those who will have a large difference between the two figures. they will be mightily exposed and fall under much laughter.

 

what's inatn?

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :D

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :D

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

GENIUS!

Share this post


Link to post

yes, fine. i like the option with both the find count and the number of unique finds. i can think of one group that will hate it: those who will have a large difference between the two figures. they will be mightily exposed and fall under much laughter.

 

what's inatn?

 

It's Not About the Numbers

Share this post


Link to post

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldnt log an event more than once.)

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldn't care if an event were logged more than once.)

If it didnt show numbers at all i would still care. Its is a waste of site resources and it makes an event page cluttered and currently it shows a lot more people attended than really did.

Share this post


Link to post

yes, fine. i like the option with both the find count and the number of unique finds. i can think of one group that will hate it: those who will have a large difference between the two figures. they will be mightily exposed and fall under much laughter.

 

If that bothers someone they shouldn't have logged multiples to begin with. They have the option to go back and delete "finds" if they want their numbers to match.

 

I saw on an earlier post that there are 2 games being played on 1 website. This just shows at a glance which game a person is playing.

Share this post


Link to post

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldnt log an event more than once.)

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldn't care if an event were logged more than once.)

If it didnt show numbers at all i would still care. Its is a waste of site resources and it makes an event page cluttered and currently it shows a lot more people attended than really did.

 

So then when you host an event... delete the multiple posts.

 

I'm sure when it begins to bother the other event hosts... they'll do that as well.

Share this post


Link to post

If it didnt show numbers at all i would still care. Its is a waste of site resources and it makes an event page cluttered and currently it shows a lot more people attended than really did.

Unless this was YOUR event (in which case you can delete any/all logs you see fit to delete, so it would be a moot point), how and why does this matter to you?

Share this post


Link to post

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard.

LOL. I was playing with INATN and later realized that my info was shown on the site for everyone to see. I hurriedly emailed the owner hoping for it to all be deleted before i found out how to keep that info private.

It's a good thing you took your numbers off INATN or else we'd all flock to see them.

 

I don't understand something. Not only did you make sure to keep your stats off INATN, but you also felt the need to point it out in this thread, yet you have your stats proudly displayed on your gc.com profile. You've got your stats chopped up and displayed in so many ways it takes at least three screens to scroll through it all. :rolleyes:

 

BTW, you need to update your profile. Those stats were for back when you had 11 fewer finds. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldnt log an event more than once.)

(Pssst. But it is, or people wouldn't care if an event were logged more than once.)

(Pssst.See my sig line.) :rolleyes::blink:

Share this post


Link to post

You have how many? (Note: off-topic thread)

Regular members cannot view. What's up with that?

:rolleyes:

 

SHHHHHH!

 

Uh there's no off topic thread....nope.never was.He's kidding.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't understand something. Not only did you make sure to keep your stats off INATN, but you also felt the need to point it out in this thread, yet you have your stats proudly displayed on your gc.com profile. You've got your stats chopped up and displayed in so many ways it takes at least three screens to scroll through it all. :rolleyes:

Thats easy. You dont know the facts. You think i put them there for you to see? Nope. I dont have a personal web site. I put them there so i could share our adventures with family. I was hoping to share our logs with them as well, but i am still working on that.

 

Who said they were proudly displayed? I could care less- but i do love numbers. Not getting a lot of them- just the math involved. It interests me. I deleted the stats that i didnt find interesting.

 

If it bothers you, i will take them down. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, you need to update your profile. Those stats were for back when you had 11 fewer finds. :blink:

FYI- i have only put the stats up once and never updated. You are correct that they are not accurate. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

please remove my stats from your blasted leaderboard.

LOL. I was playing with INATN and later realized that my info was shown on the site for everyone to see. I hurriedly emailed the owner hoping for it to all be deleted before i found out how to keep that info private.

It's a good thing you took your numbers off INATN or else we'd all flock to see them.

 

I don't understand something. Not only did you make sure to keep your stats off INATN, but you also felt the need to point it out in this thread, yet you have your stats proudly displayed on your gc.com profile. You've got your stats chopped up and displayed in so many ways it takes at least three screens to scroll through it all. :rolleyes:

 

BTW, you need to update your profile. Those stats were for back when you had 11 fewer finds. :blink:

 

if they were meant for display, they might be current.

 

your honor, the defense rests.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't understand something. Not only did you make sure to keep your stats off INATN, but you also felt the need to point it out in this thread, yet you have your stats proudly displayed on your gc.com profile. You've got your stats chopped up and displayed in so many ways it takes at least three screens to scroll through it all. :rolleyes:

Thats easy. You dont know the facts. You think i put them there for you to see? Nope. I dont have a personal web site. I put them there so i could share our adventures with family. I was hoping to share our logs with them as well, but i am still working on that.

 

Who said they were proudly displayed? I could care less- but i do love numbers. Not getting a lot of them- just the math involved. It interests me. I deleted the stats that i didnt find interesting.

 

If it bothers you, i will take them down. :blink:

I still find it interesting the site calls itself INATN,yet they break down your numbers everywhich way including shotgun and Barney style.Not my thing but everyone has that something that annoys/pesters/bothers someone else on here. :D

Share this post


Link to post

Mushtang- all fixed. Now i just need to find my own webspace so people like you dont read into it to much.

 

Happy Friday caching everyone!

Share this post


Link to post

I don't understand something. Not only did you make sure to keep your stats off INATN, but you also felt the need to point it out in this thread, yet you have your stats proudly displayed on your gc.com profile. You've got your stats chopped up and displayed in so many ways it takes at least three screens to scroll through it all. :rolleyes:

Thats easy. You dont know the facts. You think i put them there for you to see? Nope. I dont have a personal web site. I put them there so i could share our adventures with family. I was hoping to share our logs with them as well, but i am still working on that.

 

Who said they were proudly displayed? I could care less- but i do love numbers. Not getting a lot of them- just the math involved. It interests me. I deleted the stats that i didnt find interesting.

 

If it bothers you, i will take them down. :blink:

Well, you can see how someone would be confused right? Making sure your INATN stats were blocked but having them on your profile not blocked....

 

I'm just sayin. :D

 

And no, it doesn't bother me. Just made me giggle a little.

Share this post


Link to post

Mushtang- all fixed. Now i just need to find my own webspace so people like you dont read into it to much.

 

Happy Friday caching everyone!

People like me? Just what are people like me like?

Share this post


Link to post

I just scanned this thread so I offer my apologies if this has been suggested.

 

I really don't get the multiple logging . I also really don't care. Post 300 finds on each event.But let it show up like the stat on INATN

 

I think this could keep both sides happy

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(88 unique) :blink:

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (2348 found)(88 unique) :rolleyes:

 

Would this work for everyone? :D

 

Not bad, but it's still not honest. It should be

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(0 faked)

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(2260 faked)

Share this post


Link to post

People like me? Just what are people like me like?

People who dont know my intentions. I guees bad choice of words. My apologies. Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post

I still find it interesting the site calls itself INATN,yet they break down your numbers everywhich way including shotgun and Barney style.Not my thing but everyone has that something that annoys/pesters/bothers someone else on here. :rolleyes:

That's called irony. I named the site that on purpose... :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

Not bad, but it's still not honest. It should be

 

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(0 faked)

or

May 19 by TeamBarstool (88 found)(2260 faked)

Pretty funny, but i wouldn't go that far.

 

Although few may try to fake logs for numbers, i would guess the majority do not.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...