Double logging and geo-ethics

[+Renegade Knight]

The people who boil things down to "one Find per GC number" might be oversimplifying things. I just finished entering 14 logs for the same GC number: 11 finds and 3 DNFs. It is a grandfathered traveling Virtual (GC43F3) and is one of the most cherished "local" caches around. It is designed to be found multiple times because each survey marker is a unique hunt in a unique location. My 14 logs today represent 14 unique hunts spread out over 12 hours and 600+ kilometers.

 

I also have logged the same event more than once. It was an event that happened on the last Thursday of the month, every month for 15 straight months. The cache page was recycled each month, only the date and description were changed. I logged that event 12 different times....

 

Two comments.

 

First, one find per cache merely changes how you go about things. 14 Finds on one cache would not be possible, but other variations would be. That you have a unique traveling virtual through the creativity of a cache owner is a good thing.

 

Second: You have attended 12 different events on different days and very likely with some variation of attendee's. That the cache page is recycled just seems goofy.

[Clan Riffster]

There's always one group that sees itself as the guardian/mentor of the activity, another that is just there for the enjoyment, and another that does what they want within loose confines of the activity("the rebels"). It seems that its always the guardians who are furious with the rebels because they "just won't listen".

Well put.

 

Yes . . . one does have to remember that, unfortunately.

Those who recognize that the little number next to each player's name is essentially meaningless, don't have to remember that. I maintain a 1:1 find/log ratio because that's what's fun to me. I could care less what number is next to someone else's name. Sweating about the accuracy of someone else is not fun for me, so I choose not to. Those who incorporate worrying about others into their definition of fun are welcome to it. I'm too old, fat & crippled to voluntarily add more stress to my life.

 

If anyone is furious, it's the people spewing terms like "witch hunt" about.

Sorry, but I gotta disagree with that. As one who is often utilizing terms like "witch hunt", I can assure you I am not furious. In fact, the only angst I see so far is coming from those folks who feel it's necessary to call someone who is not breaking any rules, and has no intention to deceive anyone, "cheaters".

 

Somehow those of us who think it is silly to log an Event as Attended multiple times for temporary caches get labeled as controlling and demanding, when all we are doing is having a discussion

Just to maintain some semblance of accuracy here, I suspect it's the folks who holler "Liar" and "Cheater" that are viewed as being controlling and demanding, not those who calmly state how they play, why they play that way, and the fact that they feel a particular practice, even if allowed, is silly. I also think double logging is a silly practice, but, unless someone does it with the intent to deceive, I will not try to label them as a liar or a cheater.

 

What used to be a simple game with simple rules is even becoming a mess.

But will adding more rules make it more of a mess, or less of a mess? As a cop, I cringe every time I hear some citizen squawking, "There aughta be a law...", filling in the blank with their pet peeve of the week. I believe education is the key to eliminating this behavior, not legislation. One of my self imposed obligations involves teaching newcomers my particular method of play, and explaining the benefits of that method. By making yourself a role model in your community, you can have a tremendous impact on people's behavior.

[+CYBret]

Those who recognize that the little number next to each player's name is essentially meaningless, don't have to remember that. I maintain a 1:1 find/log ratio because that's what's fun to me. I could care less what number is next to someone else's name. Sweating about the accuracy of someone else is not fun for me, so I choose not to. Those who incorporate worrying about others into their definition of fun are welcome to it. I'm too old, fat & crippled to voluntarily add more stress to my life.

 

lol...very well put!

[+TrailGators]

What used to be a simple game with simple rules is even becoming a mess.

But will adding more rules make it more of a mess, or less of a mess? As a cop, I cringe every time I hear some citizen squawking, "There aughta be a law...", filling in the blank with their pet peeve of the week. I believe education is the key to eliminating this behavior, not legislation. One of my self imposed obligations involves teaching newcomers my particular method of play, and explaining the benefits of that method. By making yourself a role model in your community, you can have a tremendous impact on people's behavior.

CR, I wasn't proposing more rules. Not sure why you thought I was.... I was actually implying the opposite by pointing out that we had simple rules that everyone followed. Edited June 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[Mr.Yuck]

The people who boil things down to "one Find per GC number" might be oversimplifying things. I just finished entering 14 logs for the same GC number: 11 finds and 3 DNFs. It is a grandfathered traveling Virtual (GC43F3) and is one of the most cherished "local" caches around. It is designed to be found multiple times because each survey marker is a unique hunt in a unique location. My 14 logs today represent 14 unique hunts spread out over 12 hours and 600+ kilometers.

 

I believe the Alberta grandfathered traveling cache contingent has been heard. I found a New Jersey traveling cache (once), in 2003 or 2004 that is still quite active to this day, and takes you to great locations (Wierd N.J locations). I'd sure as heck have found it more, if it coincided with my trips there (thank goodness, I'm not actually from Joisey )

[+TrailGators]

The people who boil things down to "one Find per GC number" might be oversimplifying things. I just finished entering 14 logs for the same GC number: 11 finds and 3 DNFs. It is a grandfathered traveling Virtual (GC43F3) and is one of the most cherished "local" caches around. It is designed to be found multiple times because each survey marker is a unique hunt in a unique location. My 14 logs today represent 14 unique hunts spread out over 12 hours and 600+ kilometers.

 

I believe the Alberta grandfathered traveling cache contingent has been heard. I found a New Jersey traveling cache (once), in 2003 or 2004 that is still quite active to this day, and takes you to great locations (Wierd N.J locations). I'd sure as heck have found it more, if it coincided with my trips there (thank goodness, I'm not actually from Joisey )

 

When you were in Joisey did you see any yoots?

 

I have found two different traveling caches each once. I signed the logs and moved on...

[Clan Riffster]

CR, I wasn't proposing more rules. Not sure why you thought I was.

Sorry Brother! I misinterpreted what you posted.

 

On the subject of travelling caches, I've only found one. If I find it again, I'll trade swag & log a Note. That's just my thing.

Edited June 17, 2007 by Clan Riffster

[+wavector]

To a large extent the abuse of logging won't impact your enjoyment or anyone elses enjoyment of caching. The thing is geocaching isn't a private activity. It's very much a public thing with the logs and caches for everone to see. The public nature (which is important) is why most of us strive for common ground on the basics. If someone uses an aluminum hiking stick and someone else carbon figer it really doesnt' matter. Logging practices do matter. It's a large part of what binds us as a community.

 

Commmunity is everyone, not a specific group but everyone who geocaches. I am not sure who you think is practicing an "abuse of logging". I have seen people suggest that logging moving caches more than once is an "abuse of logging" and it is a very common practice here.

In most cases the people who log caches differently than you adhere to customs that are different than yours, they believe differently than you do. The practices of people all over the world represent the "basics" of the geocaching community. Sure community matters but people who log caches in a specific manner aren't the community, the community is people all over the world having fun geocaching, there are many diverse practices.

The people in other places that log caches differently also make up the geocaching community, the practices they adopt are part of the "basics". Problems only appear when one group of people attempt to impose their belief on another group. The basis for an acceptable community standard should acknowledge that people might do things differently in other places. Even though you think it is goofy to recycle a cache page, the fact remains that it is done. You can choose to acknowledge that it is done or you can continue to think it is goofy, acknowledging that those doing it adhere to different practices expands the definition of the "basics" and won't cause any acrimony, it allows everyone to have fun geocaching, it won't impact your enjoyment.

[+TrailGators]

CR, I wasn't proposing more rules. Not sure why you thought I was.

Sorry Brother! I misinterpreted what you posted.

 

On the subject of travelling caches, I've only found one. If I find it again, I'll trade swag & log a Note. That's just my thing.

No problem CR, we are on the same page. Edited June 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Glenn]

Cheating? Whom is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

 

 

Can you clarify?

 

 

Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

 

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

 

 

You call my statement false, but you backed it up with exactly nuthin'.

 

I have two examples that number do count.

The first is the Geo-Achievement series of geocoins. http://www.trackablecoins.com/index.php/Geo-Achievement

 

Then there is the 1/1 cache that I logged a DNF on. After a few weeks I went looking for it again and logged another DNF. So I emailed the owner and the response that I got back was basically I didn't have enough finds yet for him to bother taking my DNFs seriously. He waited until after someone with more than 100 finds logged a DNF on the cache before taking the DNF log seriously.

 

As you can clearly see numbers do matter. Those that boost their numbers may not directly hurt those who play by the rules/guidelines but they do indirectly.

[+3 Hawks]

 

For the record, I have never called anyone a cheater. I just think it is silly to log "Attended" at an Event 78 times because there were a number of temporary caches there, especially since this is not a widespread practice, but is only accepted regionally. But, that's okay . . .

 

These are my opinions. I don't expect my "opinions" are going to change the way things are done on GC.com, but that is what these Forums are for, expressing our personal opinions.

 

 

I hate to point this out, since it is only your "opinion", but the practice of logging event temps is not limited to any one region. I checked the postings for 6 events in 6 different states. 3 allowed the practice for that event and 3 did not allow the practice for that event. The three who did allow it were not all in the same "region."

 

Opinions are fine, but be careful how you word them or they may seem to be an assertion of fact. Unfortunately, your facts are wrong.

 

The surface of the moon tastes like cheese. Is this my opinion or is it a statement of fact? Can you disprove it? See how easy it is? I can pass off opinion all day as fact and only the well informed would know the difference.

 

Does anyone have the latest edition of the rule book? No....Why?

 

I've logged two pocket caches as finds in my first year of caching. There were not 50 pocket caches at the event. There were only 2 pocket caches and I don't remember pocket caches at any other event I have attended. I’ve decided that I won't log pocket caches anymore because I agree that it's just odd. I had never seen a pocket cache before and others were telling me that it was acceptable to log it as a find. I assumed everyone did this and I assumed it was a normal part of the game. Now I know it is not widely practiced. I made the decision not to do this again in the future on my own accord, but I would never imply that anyone who does this is cheating.

 

I guess you could say that I'm flexible and accepting in my approach to caching. The geocaching.com FAQ's clearly state that there are many different ways to play and there are many variations on the cache types. The FAQ even encourages and celebrates these variations because they enhance the game. Does all of this mean Groundspeak is lying in the FAQ's? No!!! It means exactly what is written there for the whole world to see.

 

Most of the statements I've read in this thread are opinion only. Unfortunately, one side of the argument seems to try to pass them off as fact. I've seen quotes from imaginary rule books and a lot of misquotes and out of context statements.

 

I've got a ‘friggin’ smile from ear to ear! Lots of smiles; no angst here; just a love for caching and respect for others.

 

Edit: (SP) 12:06 AM

Edited June 17, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+Snoogans]

Cheating? Who is getting cheated? Is there a leaderboard? Are there site or off-site prizes to be won by the person with the most finds?

Yes.

 

And yes.

 

In fact, there are quite a few off-site prizes for achieving various levels of finds.

 

I find it pretty funny when people in these threads claim that there are no prizes for getting more smileys. The statement is just plain false.

 

 

Can you clarify?

 

 

Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

 

 

Please link to the prizes that are awarded to the "winners".

 

 

You call my statement false, but you backed it up with exactly nuthin'.

 

I have two examples that number do count.

The first is the Geo-Achievement series of geocoins. http://www.trackablecoins.com/index.php/Geo-Achievement

 

Then there is the 1/1 cache that I logged a DNF on. After a few weeks I went looking for it again and logged another DNF. So I emailed the owner and the response that I got back was basically I didn't have enough finds yet for him to bother taking my DNFs seriously. He waited until after someone with more than 100 finds logged a DNF on the cache before taking the DNF log seriously.

 

As you can clearly see numbers do matter. Those that boost their numbers may not directly hurt those who play by the rules/guidelines but they do indirectly.

 

 

Again, what governing body created these awards and then awards them to all geocachers who "achieve?"

 

If there is one, I've got several more coins coming that they OWE me.

 

 

The second example is user specific. It doesn't apply to everyone.

 

 

You haven't proven your point in the general way you stated it. Numbers mean different things to different people. Might as well herd cats than try to nail it down.

[Mr.Yuck]

The people who boil things down to "one Find per GC number" might be oversimplifying things. I just finished entering 14 logs for the same GC number: 11 finds and 3 DNFs. It is a grandfathered traveling Virtual (GC43F3) and is one of the most cherished "local" caches around. It is designed to be found multiple times because each survey marker is a unique hunt in a unique location. My 14 logs today represent 14 unique hunts spread out over 12 hours and 600+ kilometers.

 

I believe the Alberta grandfathered traveling cache contingent has been heard. I found a New Jersey traveling cache (once), in 2003 or 2004 that is still quite active to this day, and takes you to great locations (Wierd N.J locations). I'd sure as heck have found it more, if it coincided with my trips there (thank goodness, I'm not actually from Joisey )

 

When you were in Joisey did you see any yoots?

 

I have found two different traveling caches each once. I signed the logs and moved on...

 

What? No. I'm just trying to insult every State possible (in a lighthearted manner, of course). I just think Alberta traveling caches are being beat to death. I don't see how even the most Puritan among us would have a problem with multi-logging them.

[+p-luv]

I think double logging is cheating. However, There are some exceptions that some might argue. 1) if a cache dissapears and is replaced. 2) If a cache is moved to a new location. 3) If the cache is adopted by another cacher. Some cachers take these chances to log it again. I guess I could see how if the cache was moved to another location MAYBE! Moreso if a cache goes missing and is replaced in a different location, I could see how most cachers would find justification in logging again. In these cases it is up to the cacher to decide if it is ethical. Some cache hiders will post a note saying if you want to claim it again it is ok with them. In this case I could see where it comes down to the finder.

[+TrailGators]

The people who boil things down to "one Find per GC number" might be oversimplifying things. I just finished entering 14 logs for the same GC number: 11 finds and 3 DNFs. It is a grandfathered traveling Virtual (GC43F3) and is one of the most cherished "local" caches around. It is designed to be found multiple times because each survey marker is a unique hunt in a unique location. My 14 logs today represent 14 unique hunts spread out over 12 hours and 600+ kilometers.

 

I believe the Alberta grandfathered traveling cache contingent has been heard. I found a New Jersey traveling cache (once), in 2003 or 2004 that is still quite active to this day, and takes you to great locations (Wierd N.J locations). I'd sure as heck have found it more, if it coincided with my trips there (thank goodness, I'm not actually from Joisey )

 

When you were in Joisey did you see any yoots? I have found two different traveling caches each once. I signed the logs and moved on...

What? No. I'm just trying to insult every State possible (in a lighthearted manner, of course). I just think Alberta traveling caches are being beat to death. I don't see how even the most Puritan among us would have a problem with multi-logging them.

I was joking too. "Yoots" was a quote from the movie My Cousin Vinny. Anyhow, there are always exceptions and the these discussions seems to always get sidetracked by talking about the rare exceptions. My concerns were with the more widely practiced logging of events 50-68 times. I think many these temp caches typically violate the 528 foot rule. I know it would take at least 6-7 hours to find that many caches if they were all >528 feet apart. It doesn't seem plausible that all these temp caches comply with the guidelines. I have been to one event where there were temp caches and those were maybe 200 feet apart. I also doubt that anyone verifies who actually found them as we do with normal caches. So IMHO this practice leaves itself wide open for abuse. I still think that if there were no numbers then people wouldn't do it. Anyhow, I'm not going to do it. I'm not going to change it. I'm just one voice in the crowd.

[+Renegade Knight]

To a large extent the abuse of logging won't impact your enjoyment or anyone elses enjoyment of caching. The thing is geocaching isn't a private activity. It's very much a public thing with the logs and caches for everone to see. The public nature (which is important) is why most of us strive for common ground on the basics. If someone uses an aluminum hiking stick and someone else carbon figer it really doesnt' matter. Logging practices do matter. It's a large part of what binds us as a community.

 

Commmunity is everyone, not a specific group but everyone who geocaches. ...In most cases the people who log caches differently than you adhere to customs that are different than yours, they believe differently than you do. ...

 

This community is centered on geocaching. That's what we have in common. When you diverge too far from the center, you are not geocaching. You are doing something else. There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do. There is a lot wrong with someone trying to tell me that what they do doesn't matter. If it binds us as a community it matters. You can call this thread gentle guidance on double dipping. We all still claim the thread participants as our own. If this thread was about "Logging a find on a cache you stole". We would not be claiming that person as one of our own.

[+Renegade Knight]

 

For the record, I have never called anyone a cheater. I just think it is silly to log "Attended" at an Event 78 times because there were a number of temporary caches there, especially since this is not a widespread practice, but is only accepted regionally. But, that's okay . . .

 

These are my opinions. I don't expect my "opinions" are going to change the way things are done on GC.com, but that is what these Forums are for, expressing our personal opinions.

 

 

I hate to point this out, since it is only your "opinion", but the practice of logging event temps is not limited to any one region. I checked the postings for 6 events in 6 different states. 3 allowed the practice for that event and 3 did not allow the practice for that event. The three who did allow it were not all in the same "region."

 

Opinions are fine, but be careful how you word them or they may seem to be an assertion of fact. Unfortunately, your facts are wrong. ...

 

It does appear to happen more in certain regions than others. Like most generalizations that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen everywhere else or that some eligntened cachers in the afflicted regions don't do it right. Right of course being how I see it. There are regional styles. That's a fact I've observed. YMMV.

 

Of course all three of us probably agree that it's not worth the work to actually conduct a scientic investigation to go beyond generalizations that have been posted.

[+wavector]

There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do.

 

Working towards common ground is not an exclusionary process. As a community we have to accept that there are practices common to one area that may seem completely foreign to those in other areas.

Here is a webpage for one of our moving caches, as you can see the cache is moved a lot and cachers here enjoy seeing who hid it last, who has hidden it most and where it has been. Geocachers everywhere can accept that this is a common practice here or they can continue to insist that the center revolves around the practices common to the region in which they live. The latter is an exclusionary approach that will only cause acrimony, it is even worse when people throw the word "cheater" out to describe a practice which they personally do not accept.

Whether you like or not those who recycle Event cache pages are going to recycle Event cache pages and even if your practices differ it is fairly simple to acknowledge that those who do recycle cache pages are not cheating, they are doing nothing wrong, this is reality.

This really seems to be difficult for some people to accept, they want to write more code, add new rules, restrict or change the way other people do things when it really isn't required at all, they are simply expressing a desire to see everyone knuckle under to the personal preferences they have adopted.

 

People logging temporary caches at events are not doing anything wrong, there is not even a vague suggestion anywhere in the guidelines that would lead someone to suggest that they are doing something wrong. They are using the website to record the adventures they had while geocaching, it may not be your cup of tea or even my cup of tea but it is there, it is reality and I aver that it is geocaching. For some people that activity may not fit within the narrow confines of their accepted definition of geocaching but that isn't a problem for those doing it, it is a problem for the person who thinks that they have cornered the word "find" and that they have a right to apply the word "cheater" to others.

 

As far as "Logging a Find on a cache you have stolen", it is important to remember that this website logs your IP address and that type of logging should be restricted to the public library or a non-geocaching friends house.

[+Renegade Knight]

There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do.

 

Working towards common ground is not an exclusionary process. As a community we have to accept that there are practices common to one area that may seem completely foreign to those in other areas.

...

People logging temporary caches at events are not doing anything wrong, ...As far as "Logging a Find on a cache you have stolen", it is important to remember that this website logs your IP address and that type of logging should be restricted to the public library or a non-geocaching friends house.

 

If all of the sudden everone reached a concencus based on this discussion where is the exclusion?

 

As for temp caches, nobody is doing anything wrong in finding them. The debate is how in logging them. D ditto on travel bugs. As for that last log type...I wish those loggers were too stupid to figure out that correct logging practice!

[+Kit Fox]

I hate to point this out, since it is only your "opinion", but the practice of logging event temps is not limited to any one region. I checked the postings for 6 events in 6 different states. 3 allowed the practice for that event and 3 did not allow the practice for that event. The three who did allow it were not all in the same "region."

 

Opinions are fine, but be careful how you word them or they may seem to be an assertion of fact. Unfortunately, your facts are wrong.

 

Translation of 3Hawks post:

 

I've attended 6 event caches a total of 84 times, which means the pratice of logging "temps" in in "cheezeland" is ethical. Everyone else who disagrees with me is wrong and opinionated.

 

The surface of the moon tastes like cheese. Is this my opinion or is it a statement of fact? Can you disprove it? See how easy it is? I can pass off opinion all day as fact and only the well informed would know the difference.

 

Does anyone have the latest edition of the rule book? No....Why?

 

This is nothing more than cleverly written psychobabble used to muddy the water. In reality, you guys came up with an interesting number padding scheme to rack up extra smileys, there in "cheeseland."

 

I guess you could say that I'm flexible and accepting in my approach to caching.

 

Flexible? How about creating your own game.

 

The geocaching.com FAQ's clearly state that there are many different ways to play and there are many variations on the cache types. The FAQ even encourages and celebrates these variations because they enhance the game. Does all of this mean Groundspeak is lying in the FAQ's? No!!! It means exactly what is written there for the whole world to see.

 

I'm fairly sure when Groundspeak refers to geocaches, they are referring to permanent geocaches with their own cache page and GC # not temps. (My opinion shared by many other cachers.)

 

Most of the statements I've read in this thread are opinion only.

Just like your "statements of fact?"

 

This community is centered on geocaching. That's what we have in common. When you diverge too far from the center, you are not geocaching. You are doing something else. There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do. There is a lot wrong with someone trying to tell me that what they do doesn't matter. If it binds us as a community it matters. You can call this thread gentle guidance on double dipping. We all still claim the thread participants as our own. If this thread was about "Logging a find on a cache you stole". We would not be claiming that person as one of our own.

 

I think Groundspeak should create a questionaire to get a feel for what the majority actually thinks about these activities.

Edited June 17, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+wavector]

The debate is how in logging them.

 

I have been involved in this discussion on almost every thread that appears for the simple reason that in this area we have several logging practices which have been characterized as 'cheating" by some geocachers. (Multiple Logs on Event Caches, Multiple Logs on Moving Caches, Multiple Logs on Multi-target Caches) I don't mind people debating whether or not the metric they use has merit but I think it is clear that their personal choices are not the representative of the practices that are common in different regions.

 

A "Find" will always be what the owner of a cache says it is, changing that is possible but only if this listing service decides it is their role to undertake day to day control of every cache listed. If Joe Schmo says I can log a Find on his cache for painting my face blue, I can do that, it is Joe Schmo's cache and the rules as they stand right now say that Joe Schmo owns his cache, not this listing service.

 

We might reach a consensus but the only consensus that is likely to to be reached is that things work now and the numbers really don't mean anything, we are not going to agree that the word "find" should be clearly delimited so that the word "cheater" can be applied more liberally.

 

I have never stolen someone's cache but if I did I think it would be fine to log it as a Find, I would also add a DNF log afterwards to indicate that the cache really isn't there.

[+3 Hawks]

I hate to point this out, since it is only your "opinion", but the practice of logging event temps is not limited to any one region. I checked the postings for 6 events in 6 different states. 3 allowed the practice for that event and 3 did not allow the practice for that event. The three who did allow it were not all in the same "region."

 

Opinions are fine, but be careful how you word them or they may seem to be an assertion of fact. Unfortunately, your facts are wrong.

 

Translation of 3Hawks post:

 

I've attended 6 event caches a total of 84 times, which means the pratice of logging "temps" in in "cheezeland" is ethical. Everyone else who disagrees with me is wrong and opinionated.

 

The surface of the moon tastes like cheese. Is this my opinion or is it a statement of fact? Can you disprove it? See how easy it is? I can pass off opinion all day as fact and only the well informed would know the difference.

 

Does anyone have the latest edition of the rule book? No....Why?

 

This is nothing more than cleverly written psychobabble used to muddy the water. In reality, you guys came up with an interesting number padding scheme to rack up extra smileys, there in "cheeseland."

 

I guess you could say that I'm flexible and accepting in my approach to caching.

 

Flexible? How about creating your own game.

 

The geocaching.com FAQ's clearly state that there are many different ways to play and there are many variations on the cache types. The FAQ even encourages and celebrates these variations because they enhance the game. Does all of this mean Groundspeak is lying in the FAQ's? No!!! It means exactly what is written there for the whole world to see.

 

I'm fairly sure when Groundspeak refers to geocaches, they are referring to permanent geocaches with their own cache page and GC # not temps. (My opinion shared by many other cachers.)

 

Most of the statements I've read in this thread are opinion only.

Just like your "statements of fact?"

 

This community is centered on geocaching. That's what we have in common. When you diverge too far from the center, you are not geocaching. You are doing something else. There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do. There is a lot wrong with someone trying to tell me that what they do doesn't matter. If it binds us as a community it matters. You can call this thread gentle guidance on double dipping. We all still claim the thread participants as our own. If this thread was about "Logging a find on a cache you stole". We would not be claiming that person as one of our own.

 

I think Groundspeak should create a questionaire to get a feel for what the majority actually thinks about these activities.

 

Gee, thanks for the creative translations of my words. You've taken them out of context, twisted them, and translated tham to fit your arguement. You've even given me credit for a wave vector quote. Your actions have proven one of my points.

 

I really like your assumption of intent regarding GC.com's FAQ's. Are you sure they would be in agreement with your translations? You've taken their words, changed their meaning, implied intent, and twisted them to suite your arguement. You have once again proven my point.

 

Talk about muddied waters. That was my point. It appears that you are in agreement since you have taken my quote and restated exactly that point.

 

Man, this is fun! I make points and let you guys prove them. Thanks for the assistance.

 

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

 

After you've examined all of the logs for all of the events in the US, you may make generalizations about regional practices. Until such time, your assertions on the issue have no real merit and are only conjecture and opinion.

 

What are the practices in Germany or England? What do the Aussies do? How is the game played in Argentina? Their practices would also have to be taken into consideration.

Edited June 17, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+Miragee]

I guess for consistency, if people are logging all those extra caches they found at an Event, I wish the log type was "Found it" instead of "Attended."

 

That's the part that looks silly to the rest of us . . .

 

How many times can you "Attend" a single Event . . . ?

[+TrailGators]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

[+Snoogans]

This community is centered on geocaching. That's what we have in common. When you diverge too far from the center, you are not geocaching. You are doing something else. There is nothing wrong with working towards common ground. That's what communities do. There is a lot wrong with someone trying to tell me that what they do doesn't matter. If it binds us as a community it matters. You can call this thread gentle guidance on double dipping. We all still claim the thread participants as our own. If this thread was about "Logging a find on a cache you stole". We would not be claiming that person as one of our own.

 

I think Groundspeak should create a questionaire to get a feel for what the majority actually thinks about these activities.

 

 

It has already been done. Where were you?

 

 

3/28/06

 

 

You are invited to participate in this brief 5 – 7 minute survey regarding your use and satisfaction with geocaching.com. All responses will remain confidential and used in accordance with Groundspeak’s privacy policy. View Privacy Policy

 

This survey link will be active until April 14th. We value your feedback and look forward to learning how we can better serve the entire geocaching community.

 

Thank you,

The Groundspeak Team

 

 

The last time I brought this up I got a three day suspension of my posting rights from one of the frog's own minions. My first ever suspension in over 4 years of posting to this forum.

 

 

The ONLY reason I haven't posted a thread asking about what happened to the results of that OFFICIAL survey is it's NOT worth total bannination. I frankly don't care that much about it, but it's telling that I would get a suspension for the mere mention of it in a thread about another survey that has Groundspeak sanction.

 

 

Maybe the community has already spoken. Or maybe I'm just a conspiracy theorist nutjob.

 

 

After all, it was just 10 minutes of my time. Groundspeak doesn't owe me or the community the results, nor did they promise any. I should stop wondering about it for my own good.

[+Kit Fox]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

 

I prefer to attend event caches like this, where the geocaching community hid over 100 real geocaches with real GC #s, before the event. There wasn't want "temp" to be found, all were permanent geocaches that met GC guidelines.

 

Every event i've attended here in California featured newly listed caches, that weren't swept up after the event was over.

[+TrailGators]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

I prefer to attend event caches like this, where the geocaching community hid over 100 real geocaches with real GC #s, before the event. There wasn't want "temp" to be found, all were permanent geocaches that met GC guidelines.

 

Every event i've attended here in California featured newly listed caches, that weren't swept up after the event was over.

I attended that event! RocketMan, Flagman and I found 100 "real" caches before that event! We hiked over 10 miles and off-roaded to a bunch in the La Quinta area. It was a lot of fun.

[+3 Hawks]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

 

Well I've never attended an event with 68 temps. I've attended 6 events and I have 84 attend logs. After subtracting the actual event attends, that leaves 78 temps. That is only 13 per event. That is a far cry short of 50-68 per event. At 50 to 68 per event, my temp find count would be between 300 an 408!!

 

One of the events was a night event in the middle of a torrential rain storm. I was soaked to the bone. Another was a Superbowl event and the windchills were deadly. Winter storm warning were in effect and it was not advisable for anyone to be out in the elements. Everyone knows that would not stop cachers.

 

Most of the temps I've found were well over a tenth of a mile apart. Most were miles apart and you had to drive between them. All of the temps were standard hides and many had DNF's. I spent well over 25 hours hunting these temps. I average over 4 finds per hour on a standard day. Heck, I found 14 caches last evening in 3.5 hours with 1/2 hour spent on a muggled DNF. I will probably find over 30 tomorrow. No...I have a job and I work a 40+ hour work week. I just don't work Mondays. Gotta have time to hit the trails.

 

We'd be happy to log them as "finds," but that is only an option at CITO events. For consistancy, most log 'em as attends.

 

Not everyone in WI logs their event temps as finds/attends. It is a personal decision.

[+3 Hawks]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

I prefer to attend event caches like this, where the geocaching community hid over 100 real geocaches with real GC #s, before the event. There wasn't want "temp" to be found, all were permanent geocaches that met GC guidelines.

 

Every event i've attended here in California featured newly listed caches, that weren't swept up after the event was over.

I attended that event! RocketMan, Flagman and I found 100 "real" caches before that event! We hiked over 10 miles and off-roaded to a bunch in the La Quinta area. It was a lot of fun.

 

They must have been tricky hides to find all 100 before an event. Some might consider this to be a form of stat padding. The BoB series in Chicago was similar. .10 miles between magnetic caches on signs. Real challenging. I'd run down to Chicago to do them, but most have been muggled and archived.

 

How many hours did it take to find alll 100 in La Quinta? I'm sure you did it in less than 25 hours. Did you have any DNF's? What was the average search time?

Edited June 17, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+TrailGators]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

I prefer to attend event caches like this, where the geocaching community hid over 100 real geocaches with real GC #s, before the event. There wasn't want "temp" to be found, all were permanent geocaches that met GC guidelines.

 

Every event i've attended here in California featured newly listed caches, that weren't swept up after the event was over.

I attended that event! RocketMan, Flagman and I found 100 "real" caches before that event! We hiked over 10 miles and off-roaded to a bunch in the La Quinta area. It was a lot of fun.

 

They must have been tricky hides to find all 100 before an event. Some might consider this to be a form of stat padding. The BoB series in Chicago was similar. .10 miles between magnetic caches on signs. Real challenging. I'd run down to Chicago to do them, but most have been muggled and archived.

 

How many hours did it take to find alll 100 in La Quinta? I'm sure you did it in less than 25 hours. Did you have any DNF's? What was the average search time?

Read RocketMan's log to get all the details. Most of the caches we found were on trails. It was a cool area. We had three experienced cachers searching so we made good time finding the caches albeit many were under piles of rocks. We did some urbans at the very end. It was pretty tiring keeping up that pace for the whole day. None of us want to do it again, but it was fun.

[+3 Hawks]

I did not attend the WGA Campout, but it was a 3 day event. Many people cached all day log for 3 days and two nights to get up to the referenced 68. It is not that many when put in it's proper perspective.

 

There were injuries, poison ivy exposure, and many DNF's.

 

Look at them as "bonus" finds. Bonus finds seem OK to most people.

Edited June 17, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+TrailGators]

After you have attended a WI event, you will have the right to make comments. You guys would make it sound like event temps are placed 50 feet apart in an open field. You could not be further from the truth.

The number of temp caches at these events seems to growing to the point where it would be very easy for others to conclude there is some funny business going on. Why don't you tell us how far apart 68 temp caches are? Someone mentioned that as one of the higher numbers of temp caches at one event. It would also take most people all day just to find and log that many caches not counting spending time at the event....

 

Well I've never attended an event with 68 temps. I've attended 6 events and I have 84 attend logs. After subtracting the actual event attends, that leaves 78 temps. That is only 13 per event. That is a far cry short of 50-68 per event. At 50 to 68 per event, my temp find count would be between 300 an 408!!

My point was that there are events that have had in excess of 50 temp caches. I'm not sure what the most is but I was pointing out that this practice will lead to abuse. It's just a matter of time. There are cachers in your area that have "attended" over 800 events so far....

[+TrailGators]

I did not attend the WGA Campout, but it was a 3 day event. Many people cached all day log for 3 days and two nights to get up to the referenced 68. It is not that many when put in it's proper perspective.

 

There were injuries, poison ivy exposure, and many DNF's.

 

Look at them as "bonus" finds. Bonus finds seem OK to most people.

How do you log a DNF for a temp cache? Edited June 17, 2007 by TrailGators

[+3 Hawks]

I did not attend the WGA Campout, but it was a 3 day event. Many people cached all day log for 3 days and two nights to get up to the referenced 68. It is not that many when put in it's proper perspective.

 

There were injuries, poison ivy exposure, and many DNF's.

 

Look at them as "bonus" finds. Bonus finds seem OK to most people.

How do you log a DNF for a temp cache?

 

As a note, as a reference in another log, or by simply not logging it.

Edited June 17, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+Renegade Knight]

...I have never stolen someone's cache but if I did I think it would be fine to log it as a Find, I would also add a DNF log afterwards to indicate that the cache really isn't there.

 

Thats abuse!

[+TrailGators]

What is interesting about this whole discussion is that TPTB are not intervening with this practice, but they said they will if it gets abused. So can you temp cache hunters keep all your ducks in line or will some smiley gluttonous group of cachers finally abuse the freedom and push things too far? It will be interesting to see what happens.....

 

I also think the reason that TPTB allow this freedom is to give people the ability to create new and interesting variations on the game. I don't think temp caches are new and interesting but the Canadian game seems interesting to me. There are probably some others too...

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

I think if the game truly shifts to a situation where logging caches instead of caches is the focus, it will be to the detriment of the hobby. Luckily, I think these are isolated events and is not main steam.

 

I just don't see a difference between a rotten, moldy Easter egg in my back yard that was hidden on April 8th and a temporary cache at an event, as far logging a "Found It" log on geocaching.com is concerned. I'm sure the temp cache is more pleasant, (I've enjoyed the ones I've found) but it's the same as the egg in the most important aspect: it's not an approved geocache on GC.com.

 

You may find the following post as being beyond the pale:

If the cache is the size of my fingernail and cleverly hid so that it takes 5 hours to find, i'm not interested in finding it. I will, however, go for the adventure and log it as a find. I was there. That's my game.

 

But his reasoning is based in the same logic as multi-logging attendance at events.

 

If logging uniformity isn't an appropriate topic for analysis on these forums, I don't what would be. Logging a cache is one of only a few components in the game in the first place.

[+flask]

if i go to an event, i log every nearby cache, temporary cache, door prize or raffle container, mustard bottle or lip balm tube. if you are holding a napkin, i will log you, too. heck, one event i logged four hundred and sixteen times.

 

if a container moves more than six inches, i will log it again. so i hafta be vigilant; every time someone picks it up (vertical movement counts), i get to log it again.

 

this is, of course, my right to do. and besides, i'm the event organizer and i say it's ok.

 

so it's OK.

 

people went to an effort to hide those things (or at least leave them around), so i should log them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...or possibly i'll just be over there by the banana muffins (who brought those? they're fabulous), having a good time.

[+Harry Dolphin]

A "Find" will always be what the owner of a cache says it is, changing that is possible but only if this listing service decides it is their role to undertake day to day control of every cache listed. If Joe Schmo says I can log a Find on his cache for painting my face blue, I can do that, it is Joe Schmo's cache and the rules as they stand right now say that Joe Schmo owns his cache, not this listing service.

 

Curious. Call me silly! Somehow, I had always thought that the purpose that geocaching.com serves is to list approved caches, and record the finds on the approved caches. If the caches is not approved by gc.com, the why would anyone log a find on an event, or archived cache claiming that the 'attended it multiple times' or 'found it' multiple times?

Is the event cache listed on gc.com? No? Then it's not a 'find', nor an 'attended'. It is NOT listed here! If I logged 'traffic lights that I've seen, somewhere near geocaches' it would make as much sense.

[+Markwell]

Is there a non-optional leaderboard on THIS site?

That's not what you asked. There is a leaderboard.

 

They are ALL opt-in leaderboards. Sorry, that don't cut it.

 

This site is opt-out (not opt-in):

http://www.cacherstats.com/index.html

[+Green Bay Paddlers]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

[+TrailGators]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

 

Please share a quote where somebody said that your temp caches weren't "quality" caches....

[+Miragee]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

If you guys think the way you do it is the right way, why don't you lobby GC.com to change the "Attended" log to "Found it" so it is more correct.

 

Oh . . . and I don't think this cache is exactly a magnetic key holder on a light pole.

[+flask]

wait, wait, wait...

 

if you're not from WI you don't understand quality?

 

or is the argument that any unofficial cache of quality can rightly be claimed as found on this site?

 

i'd say that i just don't get it, except i get it all too well.

 

aparently being from wisconsin gives you license to play fast and loose with rules.

 

"hey, that's a quality butter sculpture i just put on your lawn! since i would have charged you with a ton of money for it if you'd hired me, i will now help myself to your TV and a few other things i noticed on the way in. that's QUALITY work. you wouldn't understand, you poor little person. you must not be from around here."

 

short postscript: i had not realized until a few moments ago that this thread is really about wisconsin-bashing. silly me. i thought it was about integrity, which i used to think was universal. apparently it's a mutable trait over there and depends on whether or not people are having fun.

 

i used to think that we were talking about principles, but wisconsin-bashing is much more fun. and someone told me it was ok to do. and i took a lot of time to craft my clever remarks. so not only is it ok for me to do this, but i get a smiley for it and i feel very, very sorry for you little people who do not understand quality thinking and feel a need to puff your chests and say anything about it.

[+Renegade Knight]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

 

Excellent because you don't seem to understand much of anything else.

Edited June 18, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+3 Hawks]

if i go to an event, i log every nearby cache, temporary cache, door prize or raffle container, mustard bottle or lip balm tube. if you are holding a napkin, i will log you, too. heck, one event i logged four hundred and sixteen times.

 

if a container moves more than six inches, i will log it again. so i hafta be vigilant; every time someone picks it up (vertical movement counts), i get to log it again.

 

this is, of course, my right to do. and besides, i'm the event organizer and i say it's ok.

 

so it's OK.

 

people went to an effort to hide those things (or at least leave them around), so i should log them.

 

...or possibly i'll just be over there by the banana muffins (who brought those? they're fabulous), having a good time.

 

Give me a holler if you ever decide to hold this event and I would be happy to give you a few ideas on where to stick some of your temp hides!

 

I wish you had been to our Superbowl Event. We could have just let you hike the 20 miles between all of the caches. Sure you would have frozen to death, but at least you would have acheived a better understanding of the practice before that tragic event.

 

Have you ever logged a "bonus" find? Have you ever found a cache where coords to a bonus were provided?

[+3 Hawks]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

 

Excellent because you don't seem to understand much of anything else.

 

We are almost to the "I know you are, but what an I" point. Maybe it's time to put this thread to bed for a bit?

[+3 Hawks]

wait, wait, wait...

 

if you're not from WI you don't understand quality?

 

or is the argument that any unofficial cache of quality can rightly be claimed as found on this site?

 

i'd say that i just don't get it, except i get it all too well.

 

aparently being from wisconsin gives you license to play fast and loose with rules.

 

"hey, that's a quality butter sculpture i just put on your lawn! since i would have charged you with a ton of money for it if you'd hired me, i will now help myself to your TV and a few other things i noticed on the way in. that's QUALITY work. you wouldn't understand, you poor little person. you must not be from around here."

 

short postscript: i had not realized until a few moments ago that this thread is really about wisconsin-bashing. silly me. i thought it was about integrity, which i used to think was universal. apparently it's a mutable trait over there and depends on whether or not people are having fun.

 

i used to think that we were talking about principles, but wisconsin-bashing is much more fun. and someone told me it was ok to do. and i took a lot of time to craft my clever remarks. so not only is it ok for me to do this, but i get a smiley for it and i feel very, very sorry for you little people who do not understand quality thinking and feel a need to puff your chests and say anything about it.

 

Yep! Wild and crazy is in the official WI tour guide. That's what we are all about. Foot loose and fancy free! We are rebels to the core.

 

Talk about integrity and ethics. Where is your sense of ethics in your rant. You've decided to make it personal. That is not the intended purpose of this Forum and it has no place in geocaching.

 

Anyway, thanks for your input. It is always easier to debate against an extremely illogical and purely emotional arguement. I will afford you the benefit of the doubt in that I will assume you made these statements to point out how silly this whole thing has become.

Edited June 18, 2007 by 3 Hawks

[+3 Hawks]

 

Oh . . . and I don't think this cache is exactly a magnetic key holder on a light pole.

 

GREAT photo. Thanks for sharing. We don't have too many mountains in WI. Sure we have the remains of one of the oldest mountain ranges in North America in the northern part of the state, but they don't quite compare.

 

The LaCrosse area, my old stomping ground, has the Mississippi River valley and some nice bluffs.

 

I've gotta get out west sometime to try my hand at some of your more picturesque caches.

 

See....there is always room for civility in any discussion. We are a community of cachers and we all share a common passion. Lets at least act respectful of each other.

[+3 Hawks]

3 Hawks. Forget it. Don't waste your breath. They haven't been to a WI event. That's fine. Their impression is probably what they call caching, which is to get coordinates for magnetic key holders on a light pole in some drug store parking lot. Since these "caches" each have their own web page, in their world these caches are automatically more difficult than our temp caches at our events. LOL

 

Let 'em rant. They don't understand how simple geocaching really is. You get coordinates, you plug them into your GPS, you find a cache, and you log it. That's it. Let them pound their chests and make themselves feel superior. They're not.

 

I'll sleep just fine tonight knowing that we understand quality caching in Wisconsin.

 

Please share a quote where somebody said that your temp caches weren't "quality" caches....

 

It's implied throughout this thread that event temps are just sitting around in the open for any blind squirrel to stumble across.

 

I know most don't think that 'cause that is not what the discussion is about. I'm fairly sure that the off handed remarks were intended to provoke a desired response and to pander to a an intended audience.

 

I don't know anyone in this Forum and I really don't care what anybody thinks of my views. I also understand that I will never change the opinions of anyone about the topic.

 

We could argue/debate/discuss the issues of "regional" logging practices/cheating/ethics till the internet dies and we would never get anywhere. It's all been said before. This thread will eventually die and it will be reborn again with new players making the same points. Some of the same rock and mud slingers will jump in, things will turn uggly, and the string will be closed or die. It will go on and on and on and........