+cincol Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Hi All Being new to this sport I come across things that just don't make any sense to me at all. The objectives of Geocaching - as I understand them - are to use your GPSr to take to to a particular site and then to look for a cache [or clue] at a given point in the surface of the earth. There one will find a ache ranging in size from very small [nano] to large, OR a clue as to what you should do next. Now the question - I have noticed that the 4 virtual caches that I have visited and logged have been logged by many cachers that have NEVER been to the site at all. When the cache owner has placed specific questions that need to be answered - that can only be answered IF you have ACTUALLY visited the site - how can you "claim" the find without having been there? This defeats the object of caching as far as I am concerned. I have looked at a few of these people's profiles and many of them have huge numbers of virtual caches to their credit, and spread across the world, sometimes on the same date! Obviously it is quite acceptable to sit and surf the website "claiming" finds left, right and centre! Maybe I am old fashioned or my mother brought me up another way, but I will only log a cache if I have actually been there. Thoughts and discussion on the topic would be appreciated. Happy caching. Quote Link to comment
+LDove Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Hi All Being new to this sport I come across things that just don't make any sense to me at all. The objectives of Geocaching - as I understand them - are to use your GPSr to take to to a particular site and then to look for a cache [or clue] at a given point in the surface of the earth. There one will find a ache ranging in size from very small [nano] to large, OR a clue as to what you should do next. Now the question - I have noticed that the 4 virtual caches that I have visited and logged have been logged by many cachers that have NEVER been to the site at all. When the cache owner has placed specific questions that need to be answered - that can only be answered IF you have ACTUALLY visited the site - how can you "claim" the find without having been there? This defeats the object of caching as far as I am concerned. I have looked at a few of these people's profiles and many of them have huge numbers of virtual caches to their credit, and spread across the world, sometimes on the same date! Obviously it is quite acceptable to sit and surf the website "claiming" finds left, right and centre! Maybe I am old fashioned or my mother brought me up another way, but I will only log a cache if I have actually been there. Thoughts and discussion on the topic would be appreciated. Happy caching. While I agree it is lame, there are no cache "police" out there. These folks will have to live with their own stats, even if they are "dirty." If I were you, I would not worry about it and play your own game rather than worry about others sitting alone at night counting all their smilies! I mean does it REALLY affect you in any way personally? If there were a multimillion dollar prize at the end of all this then I would get shook up too, but... there isn't... Quote Link to comment
Motorcycle_Mama Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 People cheat. But ultimately, they are only cheating themselves. Quote Link to comment
+Lacomo Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 (edited) The only numbers that mean much to me are my own. I know they are accurate and I've earned every one of them. Like I have always been told "cheaters never win" I don't know why anyone would want to inflate their numbers by logging caches they had not found, or at least been to. By doing so they probably don't even know how many caches they have found. Edit to add: Talking about #s, this my post #100. What do I win? I want my prize!!!...LOL Edited September 17, 2007 by lacomo Quote Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 (edited) The first cache I looked at shows that the owner is giving permission for virtual logging. While such a practice may be allowed in some cases, gc.com has been known to lock caches when the privilege gets abused. edit: clarification. Edited September 17, 2007 by BlueDeuce Quote Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Hi All Being new to this sport I come across things that just don't make any sense to me at all. The objectives of Geocaching - as I understand them - are to use your GPSr to take to to a particular site and then to look for a cache [or clue] at a given point in the surface of the earth. There one will find a ache ranging in size from very small [nano] to large, OR a clue as to what you should do next. Now the question - I have noticed that the 4 virtual caches that I have visited and logged have been logged by many cachers that have NEVER been to the site at all. When the cache owner has placed specific questions that need to be answered - that can only be answered IF you have ACTUALLY visited the site - how can you "claim" the find without having been there? This defeats the object of caching as far as I am concerned. I have looked at a few of these people's profiles and many of them have huge numbers of virtual caches to their credit, and spread across the world, sometimes on the same date! Obviously it is quite acceptable to sit and surf the website "claiming" finds left, right and centre! Maybe I am old fashioned or my mother brought me up another way, but I will only log a cache if I have actually been there. Thoughts and discussion on the topic would be appreciated. Happy caching. How did these finders obtain the info needed to claim the find if they didn't physically visit the location? I know that I am missing something....please excuse me. Quote Link to comment
+cincol Posted September 17, 2007 Author Share Posted September 17, 2007 The first cache I looked at shows that the owner is giving permission for virtual logging. BlueDeuce That is exactly what I am getting at in my posting - they are SUPPOSED to get the permission of the owner, but there is NOTHING preventing them from logging without the owner's permission. Happy caching. Quote Link to comment
+LDove Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Yes there is, the owner could delete their logs if they were not accurate or he felt that the cache requirements were not met. Quote Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 The first cache I looked at shows that the owner is giving permission for virtual logging. While such a practice may be allowed in some cases, gc.com has been known to lock caches when the privilege gets abused. edit: clarification. What is "virtual logging"? Quote Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 (edited) Yes there is, the owner could delete their logs if they were not accurate or he felt that the cache requirements were not met. Exactus au Mundis! Amazingly complex sometimes isn't it? Of course that would be AFTER they logged wouldn't it.....rut roe Rorge, big trouble in River City. Edited September 17, 2007 by Team Cotati Quote Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 The first cache I looked at shows that the owner is giving permission for virtual logging. While such a practice may be allowed in some cases, gc.com has been known to lock caches when the privilege gets abused. edit: clarification. What is "virtual logging"? The act of not being there. Quote Link to comment
+W7WT Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 (edited) I have a virtual cache in the Olympic National Park. It has been there for about five years. It is at a very senic and enjoyable place. I feel an obligation to those that have and will log the cache properly to be sure there are no cheaters. I have only deleted two German cacher's logs. On the same date they logged my cache they logged several others in different states and countries. I do require they send me answers to some questions that can only be obtained by being at the site. However I will always accept a picture of the cacher holding his GPS in front of the structure. There are times when cross-country skiers and snowshoe hikers go there and the building is closed. If I have proof they we there that is all I am interested in. It is even better when the picture is date marked. Yes, being a National Park they do pay for a vistor's pass. Dick, W7WT Edited September 17, 2007 by W7WT Quote Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 How did these finders obtain the info needed to claim the find if they didn't physically visit the location? I know that I am missing something....please excuse me. No, you're not missing anything. According to the guidelines for placing a virtual cache There should be one or more questions about an item at a location, something seen at that location, etc., that only the visitor to that physical location will be able to answer. The questions should be difficult enough that it cannot be answered through library or web research. The use of a "certificate of achievement" or similar item is not a substitute for the find verification requirement. If the finder was able to obtain the information needed to claim a find without physically visiting the location, then, IMO, the cache would no longer meet the requirements for listing as a virtual. The cache owner should either find a new verification method or the cache should be archived. Quote Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 The first cache I looked at shows that the owner is giving permission for virtual logging. While such a practice may be allowed in some cases, gc.com has been known to lock caches when the privilege gets abused. edit: clarification. What is "virtual logging"? The act of not being there. That sounds more like "Virtual Finding" to me. Quote Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 How did these finders obtain the info needed to claim the find if they didn't physically visit the location? I know that I am missing something....please excuse me. No, you're not missing anything. According to the guidelines for placing a virtual cache There should be one or more questions about an item at a location, something seen at that location, etc., that only the visitor to that physical location will be able to answer. The questions should be difficult enough that it cannot be answered through library or web research. The use of a "certificate of achievement" or similar item is not a substitute for the find verification requirement. If the finder was able to obtain the information needed to claim a find without physically visiting the location, then, IMO, the cache would no longer meet the requirements for listing as a virtual. The cache owner should either find a new verification method or the cache should be archived. It must depend to a large extent upon what the meaning of "only" is......is?! "that can only be answered IF you have ACTUALLY visited the site - how can you "claim" the find without having been there?" I was correct, I am missing something. Problem is I don't know what it is.............is? You know, what I am missing. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.