Jump to content

Event Caches


Killerb

Recommended Posts

Nobody has come up with a rock solid reason why they should log caches (as attended events) that:

  1. Were never approved on GC.com
  2. Don't have to meet the guidelines to qualify as a "geocache."
  3. Are only available for one or two days.

I don't know what rock solid means here. Is is some legal term?

 

The people who log multiple attended logs for each temporary cache have stated the reason that they do so. The event owner has stated that you can log an extra attended for each temporary cache you found at the event If you believe that is not what an attended log is for you are not forced to log it. If you believe that the attended log can be used this way because Jeremy has decided not to limit you to one attended log per event then you can do this. The advantage you get by doing this is your 'find' count goes up :laughing: . The advantage of your 'find' count going up is mostly a personal thing. You may get some praise and maybe a token award from fellow cachers sooner because of this but you will also get the ridicule of people who think you are must really be driven by found count to try to count something other than a what they consider a find. The people who do this have decided that the "advantage" or personal enjoyment they receive from logging extra attended logs for temporary event caches is worth more than the ridicule. In fact they can pretty much discount the ridicule by pointing out that there is no "official" definition of when the 'found it' log or 'attended' log should be used and that while some people may feel it is silly to use these logs for other than finding a cache or attending an event, it comes down to what the cache owner allows.

Link to comment

Thankfully

 

If it is someones intention is to disparage the claims made by other cachers, stick their face into others people business, gloat over their "good smilies" or something along that line then I guess "Thankfully" may be the proper adjective to describe that junk stat.

Moving caches, recycled event pages and multiple target caches are all perfectly legitimate reasons why those programs are producing a junk stat. Here in Alberta where we actually have all those cache types the unique found number means nothing, it will not help people lord it over fellow geocachers or to claim others lack integrity.

 

Thankfully, I never worry about other peoples stats, I have no intention of disparaging others and I am not in the habit of sticking my mug into other peoples business.

Link to comment

"1 GC number should equal 1 and only 1 find". You called it lame. I called it my opinion and a position that I wish was adopted by HQ. That is all.

 

I don't want to "control" you.

 

You are pushing for the adoption of a rule that would eliminate my ability to recycle an event page, eliminate my ability to log multiple target caches, eliminate my ability to log moving caches multiple times and effectively restrict me from managing caches in the fashion I see fit. Maybe you don't want to assume personal control but that is a minor distinction from this chair. By pushing for central control you are demonstrating your desire to see others controlled. The rule you wish to adopt makes no sense in many areas but you don''t seem to care, I am just pointng out that your desire to see others controlled in a fashion that you find amenable is not laudatory in my opinion.

 

Why do you wish to eliminate all these freedoms?

 

Go ahead and wear a straightjacket of your own choosing, feel free to campaign for whatever you want but don't expect people to sit back and let you pretend that controlling others isn't the intention of your campaign. I would hazard that in your part of the world there are no moving caches, there are no caches that offer multiple targets and people don't recycle event pages. .

 

There is absolutely nothing vague about the way things work right now except in your mind. The cache owner assumes ALL reposnsibility for the listing, which part of the word ALL did you miss? It is very simple and very clear, you just don't like it becuase it lets others geocache n the fashion they see fit and that doesn't put sugar in your tea.

Link to comment

Why even have a count if it doesn't matter? OBVIOUSLY it matters!

 

The count is an adjunct to the cache log adopted by this listing service long ago.

This is obvious.

For many cachers that number is meaningless, they don't care, they never have cared and the fact that the system keeps track of a number means nothing to them, I thought this was obvious. It is obvious that you choose to think that the number does mean something but that is your saddle on your horse and I have no objections, it is your business.

 

If you try to put your saddle on my horse we are going to have issues, obviously. If this is not obvious then you have not been reading this thread.

 

So when a cache owner deletes twenty finds of yours because he doesn't like you what are you going to do? Are you going to log one of your own archived caches, are you going to complain to Groundspeak that you really found the caches? Are you going to try and correct this OBVIOUSLY "important number"?

 

Can you say "cheesy".

Link to comment

From my perspective, the only Find count that matters to me is my own. I compete against myself and myself only. Can I break my personal mark for caches in a day, month or year? Can I make it to next milestone faster than the previous one? Can I hit a certain number of Finds by a certain date?

 

I don't care if my personal records are lower than someone else's because I am not competing with them. I don't care if someone else wants to log a temporary cache my "attending" the same event several times. However, I would be upset if a cache owner started randomly deleting my logs because MY numbers ARE important to ME.

 

I cache my way, in a manner that makes sense to me and in a manner which I believe does not impact other players. I believe my manner of caching is a reflection of my personal integrity.

Link to comment

Thankfully

 

If it is someones intention is to disparage the claims made by other cachers, stick their face into others people business, gloat over their "good smilies" or something along that line then I guess "Thankfully" may be the proper adjective to describe that junk stat.

Moving caches, recycled event pages and multiple target caches are all perfectly legitimate reasons why those programs are producing a junk stat. Here in Alberta where we actually have all those cache types the unique found number means nothing, it will not help people lord it over fellow geocachers or to claim others lack integrity.

 

Thankfully, I never worry about other peoples stats, I have no intention of disparaging others and I am not in the habit of sticking my mug into other peoples business.

 

Thankfully,

 

Where I cache, people place geocaching.com caches that are available before, during, and months after an event has occured. I attended one event where the local cachers placed over 100 unique caches (before an event) all with their own GC #s. :shocked:

Link to comment
When we go golfing we don't use score cards, we don't count strokes, we just go out for fun. If the ball is in the rough kicking it back on to the fairway makes it easier to hit, no one is cheating because we aren't keeping score, we aren't competing, we are just having fun. If another golfer saw us kicking the ball onto the fairway and accused us of cheating he would be making a fool of himself, he would be intruding, he would be wrong, he would have issues and we would still just be having fun.

 

Try that in a league. We've actually thrown people out of our league for doing just as you say!

 

No, it shouldn't matter to someone else who isn't playing in your group (unless it's a league), but try to go in and brag up a good score with those who watched you cheat...you'll look pretty silly!

You would get tossed from any league I've been in too for doing that. What you do outside the league is different. So if you played practice rounds and hit mulligans then that's OK because you are not using that "practice" score in the league or to try to get acknowledgement for your golfing prowess.

 

I was also going to say that when I've found temp caches at events. I note finding them in my one "attended" log for that event. There is no way I would sit in front of my PC and log 50-75 "attended" logs for every temp cache I found. How the heck is that fun? Why not just say that you found 50 temp caches in your main "attended" log? That sure seems a lot easier to me. If a smiley is so "meaningless" then do why do people waste so much time sitting in front of a PC selecting "attended" ad infinitum for one event they attended?

Link to comment

Hey Wave...OBVIOUSLY you can have your opinion and OBVIOUSLY others will disagree. But the cheesy comment is uncalled for and OBVIOUSLY shows how you conduct yourself.

 

If you can't figure out that these numbers were put there by the PTB for a REASON, then OBVIOUSLY you aren't going to be swayed and OBVIOUSLY you are wasting your own time by reading an OBVIOUSLY silly (to you) topic.

 

Seriously though....why even complain so darned loudly if it doesn't matter to you? Numbers (or smilies) OBVIOUSLY do matter...if not to you that's, great. OBVIOUSLY it does matter to others.

 

eta: If someone were to delete my finds on caches I legitimately found, YES, I would log on an archived cache I own WITH explanation why, what cache I'm counting and all info I deem needed! I wan my count to be HONEST and reflect MY true find count!

 

oh...and keep your horse out of my corral and I won't put my saddle on it!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

If I paint a lead bar Gold and pretend it's real gold, that doesn't hurt anyone.

But if someone else sees it and thinks it's real, that IS bad, and if I allow them to continue believing it that is fraud.

Padding your find count is no different, as long as only you believe it to be legit. As soon as you allow others to believe it though it becomes fraud. People would treat me differently if they thought I had a gold bar than they would if they knew it was painted lead, my actions would thus affect theirs. Same with padded find counts, as has already been shown.

 

It never ceases to amaze me though at the creative excuses those who do so give to justify it, it doesn't matter how nicely you concoct an excuse, it doesn't matter how great you make it sound, underneath all the glitter and shine the lie will still remain.

 

Does it affect me? Probably not. I won't lose any sleep over it, but when I look at your profile and see 2000 finds I'll just have to assume it's really 200 finds and treat you accordingly.

Link to comment

Does it affect me? Probably not. I won't lose any sleep over it, but when I look at your profile and see 2000 finds I'll just have to assume it's really 200 finds and treat you accordingly.

Go right ahead. Personally, I don't treat anyone with 2000 finds any differently than someone with 200, but if you choose to, it's your decision.

 

But, just to satisfy my curiosity... how DO you treat a 2000 find cacher, and how is that different than a 200 find cacher?

 

It must suck being a cacher in your area, knowing that if I only have 200 finds and bump into you in the woods you would look down your nose to me...

 

Sheesh!

Link to comment

If I paint a lead bar Gold and pretend it's real gold, that doesn't hurt anyone.

But if someone else sees it and thinks it's real, that IS bad, and if I allow them to continue believing it that is fraud.

Padding your find count is no different, as long as only you believe it to be legit. As soon as you allow others to believe it though it becomes fraud. People would treat me differently if they thought I had a gold bar than they would if they knew it was painted lead, my actions would thus affect theirs. Same with padded find counts, as has already been shown.

The strange thing is by this definition nobody is committing fraud. People log 'Found It' logs that clearly state "Cache was missing. I am logging a find with the permission of the owner." People log one attended log "Thanks for the great event" and then log additional ones: "Found TC#1", "Found TC#2",....

Generally people are not lying about what they are doing. It's too easy for others to figure out what these logs are even if they did. They assume that you are not going to use their find counts for some purpose where it would be important to only count finds on permanent caches list on GC.com.

 

If I had a bar of gold would you buy it from me without getting it assayed first?

Link to comment

Does it affect me? Probably not. I won't lose any sleep over it, but when I look at your profile and see 2000 finds I'll just have to assume it's really 200 finds and treat you accordingly.

Go right ahead. Personally, I don't treat anyone with 2000 finds any differently than someone with 200, but if you choose to, it's your decision.

 

But, just to satisfy my curiosity... how DO you treat a 2000 find cacher, and how is that different than a 200 find cacher?

 

It must suck being a cacher in your area, knowing that if I only have 200 finds and bump into you in the woods you would look down your nose to me...

 

Sheesh!

 

You misunderstand me, I treat everybody the same until they give me a reason not to. If I discover someone is lying to me by claiming 2000 finds when they've been logging 20 attended logs per event I'll treat them as I would anyone else who lies to me to make themselves look better.

How do you treat people who make a habit of deceiving you?

 

The strange thing is by this definition nobody is committing fraud. People log 'Found It' logs that clearly state "Cache was missing. I am logging a find with the permission of the owner." People log one attended log "Thanks for the great event" and then log additional ones: "Found TC#1", "Found TC#2",....

Generally people are not lying about what they are doing. It's too easy for others to figure out what these logs are even if they did. They assume that you are not going to use their find counts for some purpose where it would be important to only count finds on permanent caches list on GC.com.

 

If I had a bar of gold would you buy it from me without getting it assayed first?

 

No, I'm reasonably certain that it is fraudulent to knowing allow someone to believe a falsehood for your own gain, in this case prestige.

Link to comment

I have read the entire thread. Yes. Regarding attending an event more than once there is an important function missing on the log page. There should have been an additional field for specifying how many times you attendet this event. It is a waist of resources logging several attends. No, just put in a box for how many attends do you want! Wouldn't that be nice? :shocked: (Sorry if bad english)

Link to comment

Had to cut my last reply short but the geist of what I'm saying is:

I don't care how many times you log an event as long as you are honest about doing it and don't gain from it. When they give you that 2000 find Geocoin, they already know how you arrived at that number and aren't laboring under the assumption that you really attended 1200 events or whatever. It's when you allow others to oh and ah over your numbers that it becomes fraud, and I have no respect for any who would do this.

 

And as for the gold bar, it doesn't matter what I or you or 12 million other people would do as long as there is one person out there who Would buy it, or worse kill you and steal it. Dishonesty often hurts the deceiver more than the deceived.

Link to comment

As Waverector has pointed out (frequently - 11 times so far), there are no rules, only guidelines.

It is up to the cache owner to determine what constitutes a find. If saying Hi to attendees at an Event qualifies as an "Attended Event", then so be it. Or cars in the parking lot.

Hey. I know of someone who logged a 'Drive by'. Unfortunately, the coords were thirty miles off. But, he logged a find on it anyway!

 

What others are talking about is honesty (or integrity.) Did you actually attend that event thirteen times?? Did you actually find the cache? No? Then why are you lying about it?

As has been pointed out, that's no skin off my nose. (Unless one lies and says that they found a cache that wasn't there, and someone drives two hours to find it based on that lie.)

 

If someone says that they attended an event thirteen times, my thought is "Liar. Liar. Pants on fire."

 

I think that 'Integrity' says it all.

Link to comment

As Waverector has pointed out (frequently - 11 times so far), there are no rules, only guidelines.

It is up to the cache owner to determine what constitutes a find. If saying Hi to attendees at an Event qualifies as an "Attended Event", then so be it. Or cars in the parking lot.

Hey. I know of someone who logged a 'Drive by'. Unfortunately, the coords were thirty miles off. But, he logged a find on it anyway!. . .

Now you are knocking drive-by finds? :shocked: Huh? What ARE you talking about? :):o I pride myself on my drive-by finds, and I also log plenty of fly-over finds as well, whenever I travel across the USA on the airlines. Under my rules, any time I pass within eight miles of a cache or an event, it counts as a smilie. :o That is only logical. :D In fact, I have been able to find thirteen different references in the Bible which state quite clearly that drive-by finds and fly-over finds are not only ethical but also highly desirable in the eyes of God and the Archangel Raphael, the patron archangel of geocaching.

Link to comment

And as for the gold bar, it doesn't matter what I or you or 12 million other people would do as long as there is one person out there who Would buy it, or worse kill you and steal it.

Great. I knew I shouldn't use that argument with a pirate. A pirate wouldn't get the gold assayed. A pirate would bite the gold to make sure it was real. :shocked:

Link to comment

Does it affect me? Probably not. I won't lose any sleep over it, but when I look at your profile and see 2000 finds I'll just have to assume it's really 200 finds and treat you accordingly.

Go right ahead. Personally, I don't treat anyone with 2000 finds any differently than someone with 200, but if you choose to, it's your decision.

 

But, just to satisfy my curiosity... how DO you treat a 2000 find cacher, and how is that different than a 200 find cacher?

 

It must suck being a cacher in your area, knowing that if I only have 200 finds and bump into you in the woods you would look down your nose to me...

 

Sheesh!

 

You misunderstand me, I treat everybody the same until they give me a reason not to. If I discover someone is lying to me by claiming 2000 finds when they've been logging 20 attended logs per event I'll treat them as I would anyone else who lies to me to make themselves look better.

How do you treat people who make a habit of deceiving you?

 

The strange thing is by this definition nobody is committing fraud. People log 'Found It' logs that clearly state "Cache was missing. I am logging a find with the permission of the owner." People log one attended log "Thanks for the great event" and then log additional ones: "Found TC#1", "Found TC#2",....

Generally people are not lying about what they are doing. It's too easy for others to figure out what these logs are even if they did. They assume that you are not going to use their find counts for some purpose where it would be important to only count finds on permanent caches list on GC.com.

 

If I had a bar of gold would you buy it from me without getting it assayed first?

 

No, I'm reasonably certain that it is fraudulent to knowing allow someone to believe a falsehood for your own gain, in this case prestige.

Here's an idea, why don't you just get to know PEOPLE rather than their stats? Is it really any of your business? If you really want to know and you think they are logging mulitple event logs, just subtract that number from their finds and you will now know how many geocaches they found as I stated before. I believe in most of the cases of people with large finds, they do this more for their own record of what they have found. I know quite a few people who have large numbers, I don't see them getting any "prestige" of any sort - they don't get money, cars, free airline tickets. What exactly are you referring to? If they get a few pats on the back and a couple of "way to gos", eh so what? MOST of their finds will have had to come from "legitimate" geocaching finds since you can't get to 8,000, 10,000 etc... with just event logs anyways.

Edited by lonesumdove
Link to comment

Here's an idea, why don't you just get to know PEOPLE rather than their stats? Is it really any of your business? If you really want to know and you think they are logging mulitple event logs, just subtract that number from their finds and you will now know how many geocaches they found as I stated before. I believe in most of the cases of people with large finds, they do this more for their own record of what they have found. I know quite a few people who have large numbers, I don't see them getting any "prestige" of any sort - they don't get money, cars, free airline tickets. What exactly are you referring to? If they get a few pats on the back and a couple of "way to gos", eh so what? MOST of their finds will have had to come from "legitimate" geocaching finds since you can't get to 8,000, 10,000 etc... with just event logs anyways.

 

Apparently some people are worried that a cacher will receive some coveted "1000 Finds!" geocoin or some such other trivial trinket when they only have 985 finds, thereby earning the undying respect and admiration of us mere mortals with only a few hundred finds. We will all have to bow to them when approaching them in public, and can no longer speak to them without them addressing us first. The infinite title of Lord Cacher will be forever bestowed upon them, and the rest of the caching population with fewer finds will forever be shunned.

 

Let it go, people, hmm?

Link to comment

All smileys are equal, but some smileys are more equal than others.

 

A lot is argued about whether the numbers matter or not. Whether they matter to an individual or not, that's up to each person to decide how much they matter. If you look at the number of milestone coins, awards, events, forum threads, etc., they obviously matter the community as a whole.

 

Many people disagree on how a smiley should be awarded. For me, I've decided find stats are like confederate money: neat to look at, but completely worthless. I'd never congratulate someone because they managed to amass $10,000 in confederate bills...why should a cache smiley be any different?

 

There's no way to measure what a "find" is worth...did the person hike as far as me? did they search as hard as me? did they log an event 200 times? do they count a missing cache as a find?

 

I'm not saying I like the fact that there are so many definitions of "finding" a geocaching.com listed geocache, but it's the way life is now, so I'll just worry about my find count and ignore all the rest.

Link to comment

Here's an idea, why don't you just get to know PEOPLE rather than their stats? Is it really any of your business? If you really want to know and you think they are logging mulitple event logs, just subtract that number from their finds and you will now know how many geocaches they found as I stated before. I believe in most of the cases of people with large finds, they do this more for their own record of what they have found. I know quite a few people who have large numbers, I don't see them getting any "prestige" of any sort - they don't get money, cars, free airline tickets. What exactly are you referring to? If they get a few pats on the back and a couple of "way to gos", eh so what? MOST of their finds will have had to come from "legitimate" geocaching finds since you can't get to 8,000, 10,000 etc... with just event logs anyways.

 

I've seen several events in Texas and elsewhere that are for nothing but celebrating someone's milestone. So yeah, some folks do get "prestige".

Link to comment

Here's an idea, why don't you just get to know PEOPLE rather than their stats? Is it really any of your business? If you really want to know and you think they are logging mulitple event logs, just subtract that number from their finds and you will now know how many geocaches they found as I stated before. I believe in most of the cases of people with large finds, they do this more for their own record of what they have found. I know quite a few people who have large numbers, I don't see them getting any "prestige" of any sort - they don't get money, cars, free airline tickets. What exactly are you referring to? If they get a few pats on the back and a couple of "way to gos", eh so what? MOST of their finds will have had to come from "legitimate" geocaching finds since you can't get to 8,000, 10,000 etc... with just event logs anyways.

 

I've seen several events in Texas and elsewhere that are for nothing but celebrating someone's milestone. So yeah, some folks do get "prestige".

:laughing: so? they have a party to celebrate - make someone's day, big deal? If they're having a party in Texas I don't know about it - it does not affect me in any way on how I conduct my business in the least. I also don't consider that "prestige." Difference of opinion on what is prestigious I guess. By the way, your hippo picture cracks me up everytime I see it! :yikes:

Edited by lonesumdove
Link to comment

Yes Lonesum, we DO all see prestige differently (I guess much like seeing the smilie issue), but if I go about to throw a party for a person who has 1000 finds, I'd sure hope I wasn't wasting my money, time and effort on someone who posed as one making this milestone! It might cause me to question their integrity as well.

 

I'm not saying I like the fact that there are so many definitions of "finding" a geocaching.com listed geocache, but it's the way life is now, so I'll just worry about my find count and ignore all the rest.

 

I boldened (I hope first time trying this) the relevant part here. A cache should only count if it has it's own gc number. :laughing:

 

edited out my blunder...sorry!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment
I'm not saying I like the fact that there are so many definitions of "finding" a geocaching.com listed geocache, but it's the way life is now, so I'll just worry about my find count and ignore all the rest.

 

I boldened (I hope first time trying this) the relevant part here. A cache should only count if it has it's own gc number. :laughing:

 

You did get it bolded....the problem is, that's your opinion of what should count and not that I disagree, but lots of people do...and TPTB have accepted the practice of extra logging, so they've given their approval.

Edited by KoosKoos
Link to comment

This practice of multiple logs at an event has been going on for a long time as can bee seen by an earlier thread with input from Jeremy.

 

What are guidelines for Events??

 

The practice came about because GC.Com didn't want to go through all the effort for creating cache pages for caches that were just going to be archive within a couple of days. So extra finds were just logged against the event page.

 

For myself, early on I found temp event caches acceptable since the ones I had done were not easy grab with one requiring a 1 mile walk each way. Latter I did an event with 17 really easy ones. Since then I stopped doing them, since they were just not fun any more. My find count does include these early ones since they were finds I had done with each having a log book.

 

Team Sand Dollar

Link to comment

Thanks for the link Team Sand Dollar. I especially noticed the following:

 

I couldn't give two hoots if someone wants to log an event cache twice. It's their find count and there is no competition here. So if you find a cache at an event, knock yourself out

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

I just love how I've turned into an evil gepcheat hater simply from posting my opinion that it's wrong to profit from dishonesty. What part of that is so tough to understand? The little doggy guy is downright hateful towards me now, where is that coming from? Getting excessively uposet and defensive normally indicates feelings of guilt you know.

If a cache is listed on GC.com, claim a find. If it isn't, don't. If you do it anyway I'll never know or care, but if it gains you anything at all you are gaining it dishonestly. I'm not here to play log police, I'm just stating how I see it.

 

Now as for Mr. T. I like his posts. No matter what he says I know he has looked at all sides of the matter and is trying to stay level headed and fair. And truth to tell, even when I disagree with his statements I often agree with his reasoning and several of the points he brings up. Wish I was half that good at getting a point across. :laughing:

Link to comment
Thanks for the link Team Sand Dollar. I especially noticed the following:

 

I couldn't give two hoots if someone wants to log an event cache twice. It's their find count and there is no competition here. So if you find a cache at an event, knock yourself out

How about 1230 times?

 

* That was the first one I checked. I'm sure there are higher ones. Does the "It's Not About the Numbers" site keep track of which people have attended the most events? I wonder what the record is?

 

Edit: Removed link.

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment
Thanks for the link Team Sand Dollar. I especially noticed the following:

 

I couldn't give two hoots if someone wants to log an event cache twice. It's their find count and there is no competition here. So if you find a cache at an event, knock yourself out

How about 1230 times?

 

* That was the first one I checked. I'm sure there are higher ones. Does the "It's Not About the Numbers" site keep track of which people have attended the most events? I wonder what the record is?

 

WOW, 36 "Will Attends" and 471 "Attended" logs. That's not just wrong, it's stupid. It's also indefensible by any honest experienced cacher, new cachers see it and assume that's the way it's done and the idiocy grows.

To borrow a phrase, it's only a game people, why do you feel the need to cheat so you can win it. :sad:

Link to comment

Discussing the concept is ok, Singling out individuals is not. Lets keep this to general concepts and not point fingers at people.

 

In other words.

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

This thread has so far been ok. Lets not go down hill now.

Edited by Michael
Link to comment

Discussing the concept is ok, Singling out individuals is not. Lets keep this to general concepts and not point fingers at people.

 

In other words.

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

This thread has so far been ok. Lets not go down hill now.

Thanks Michael, I was just about to post a response using the "P" word because this was beginning to look like a witch hunt. Hopefully your warning will keep this thread from deteriorating to that.

Link to comment

This one might hold the record because they have attended 1707 events.

 

As i've stated before, i don't think of this as cheating and in fact, i can kinda sorta see why people want to log finds on those temporary caches. But logging multiple attendeds on an event is certainly not the way to do it. Attended means one thing, that a person was present at the event,, nothing else!

 

I am curious,, do they have "milestone" type events up in that part of the country? Just asking because i would think it would be pretty tough for those who do this to keep up with what their true GC.com find count is. :sad:

Link to comment
Thanks Michael, I was just about to post a response using the "P" word because this was beginning to look like a witch hunt. Hopefully your warning will keep this thread from deteriorating to that.
I hate the "P" word. It's a very judgemental word. :sad:

 

Anyhow, if I asked who has the record for the most multi caches or mystery caches found there would have been no disrespect. So why should asking who has the record for the most events attended be disrespectful? If you think about it, it really shouldn't be. Setting records and milestones is fun part of this game for a lot of people. I don't participate but I'll always congratulate people. Why not? They've earned it and it makes them happy.... :grin:

Link to comment
For myself, early on I found temp event caches acceptable since the ones I had done were not easy grab with one requiring a 1 mile walk each way.

 

I don't think anybody is saying that temp event caches are not acceptable. I've found dozens of them over the years and had a great time finding them. Some were easy and some were harder than many permanent caches.

 

Because they weren't listed on this website the idea of circumventing the system to log them here never crossed my mind.

 

This one might hold the record because they have attended 1707 events.

 

As i've stated before, i don't think of this as cheating and in fact, i can kinda sorta see why people want to log finds on those temporary caches. But logging multiple attendeds on an event is certainly not the way to do it. Attended means one thing, that a person was present at the event,, nothing else!

 

 

Whether it is cheating is debatable. It certainly is misleading though. I would look at that guy's profile and think "Wow he attended 1,707, what a sociable person!".

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

This practice of multiple logs at an event has been going on for a long time as can bee seen by an earlier thread with input from Jeremy.

 

What are guidelines for Events??

 

The practice came about because GC.Com didn't want to go through all the effort for creating cache pages for caches that were just going to be archive within a couple of days. So extra finds were just logged against the event page.

 

For myself, early on I found temp event caches acceptable since the ones I had done were not easy grab with one requiring a 1 mile walk each way. Latter I did an event with 17 really easy ones. Since then I stopped doing them, since they were just not fun any more. My find count does include these early ones since they were finds I had done with each having a log book.

 

Team Sand Dollar

 

Wow, I remember looking for the oldest discussion of this issue a few months ago for a thread on the same topic (hard to believe it was discussed a few months ago, huh? :sad:) And the oldest I came up with was 2003. So I was surprised to see this link. But the one I came up with had a post from Web-Ling (a reviewer back then, don't know if they still are), basically stating the same thing, that logging on the event page was a way to take the load off the few and far between overworked reviewers (approvers back then), and that it was also done because the website did not want to list temporary caches that would be archived shortly after the event.

Link to comment
... but is this something that is advocated by Geocaching.com and is it acceptable?

I think one owner of this site called it "silly." They've nothing to prevent it. So, while it might not be "acceptable" it is accepted.

 

IMHO, the find is between the finder and the owner. It is cheesy to post unearned finds and I will continue to try to keep our caches clean.

 

Additionally, once you realize the "official" find count is FUBAR then the easier it is to accept questionable logging practices. For instance, can you tell how many caches I've found? Kind of, sort of. It's not accurate. I've not logged some caches I have found. I've found caches not listed on this site. I've logged a cache event or two--are they really caches?

 

The find count is no real indication of worth. Some folks may try to place worth on it, but I've encountered cachers with counts well into the four digits and, IMHO, absolutely suck lollipops as geocachers.

 

So, if it's a cache--a container with a signable logbook, maybe some trinkets to which pointed some coordinates--then it's a cache that can be claimed as a find. Where and how it is logged is pretty much up to the logger and owner of where it is logged.

 

You don't have to agree. You don't have to accept any one person's claim. You just have to realize you take any one find count with a grain of salt. Only you can determine how much validity you can put into the claim.

 

None of the above advocates throwing out all norms. I still believe a find is a signed logbook, etc. But I'm not going to lose sleep over someone logging unearned finds on someone else's cache. I will, however, think less of the cache owner who allows an unearned find to stand. But that's just me.

There was once a thread on who do you agree with most on the forums and I remember saying that I often find myself agreeing with CR. This post is an excellent example.

I also agree with CR.

 

Carp.

Link to comment

Whether it is cheating is debatable. It certainly is misleading though. I would look at that guy's profile and think "Wow he attended 1,707, what a sociable person!".

You'd be pretty gullible then. Supposed he's been caching 5 years. That would mean he attended an event a day for almost as long as he's been caching. My guess it that you're not being misled at all. You know exactly who has logged multiple attended on events or at least you know how to check for this easily. The people who chose to log multiple attended on events are doing it openly. They feel it is a legitimate way to keep track of the caches they found.

 

It is reasonable for you to believe that found it/attended logs should only be used to keep track of caches listed on GC.com that you've found and events listed on GC.com that you've attended. And the good news is, you can do just that. Nobody is forced to log attended because they found a temporary event cache and no one is forced to claim a find on a missing cache because the owner tells them its OK. The problem is that people want the "find count" to fit their definition. Jeremy has decided that Geocaching.com does not want to get into the business of determining what a find is and leaves it up to cache/event owner to decides what logs to accept. I don't think we're going to see any major change to this definition.

Link to comment

If you saw one of us kicking the ball back onto the fairway and decided we lacked integrity, the issue is on your side of the fence, you would have the problem, not the ball kicker.

You may be on the fairway and you may be kicking a ball back and forth. It may even be a golf ball, but you aren't playing golf. You may even be recording whatever score you wish, but it is meaningless to someone actually playing golf.

 

The problem here is that people are recording their scores on this site and they aren't playing the same game that the site was designed for. Go make your own site and record whatever score you wish, just don't interfere with our game here.

Edited by Team GPSaxophone
Link to comment

If you saw one of us kicking the ball back onto the fairway and decided we lacked integrity, the issue is on your side of the fence, you would have the problem, not the ball kicker.

You may be on the fairway and you may be kicking a ball back and forth. It may even be a golf ball, but you aren't playing golf. You may even be recording whatever score you wish, but it is meaningless to someone actually playing golf.

 

The problem here is that people are recording their scores on this site and they aren't playing the same game that the site was designed for. Go make your own site and record whatever score you wish, just don't interfere with our game here.

Just as it is impossible for the ball kickers to "interfere" with others on the course merely by having a different scorecard, it is impossible for any cacher to "interfere" with another cacher merely by logging differently.

 

One way is not "more right" than the other. I would have thought anyone could figure that one out by now, especially since TPTB have stated there is no "rule" on this issue.

Link to comment

If you saw one of us kicking the ball back onto the fairway and decided we lacked integrity, the issue is on your side of the fence, you would have the problem, not the ball kicker.

You may be on the fairway and you may be kicking a ball back and forth. It may even be a golf ball, but you aren't playing golf. You may even be recording whatever score you wish, but it is meaningless to someone actually playing golf.

 

The problem here is that people are recording their scores on this site and they aren't playing the same game that the site was designed for. Go make your own site and record whatever score you wish, just don't interfere with our game here.

Just as it is impossible for the ball kickers to "interfere" with others on the course merely by having a different scorecard, it is impossible for any cacher to "interfere" with another cacher merely by logging differently.

 

One way is not "more right" than the other. I would have thought anyone could figure that one out by now, especially since TPTB have stated there is no "rule" on this issue.

The interference comes when those people include their score with the scores of those that actually play the game as it is intended to be played.

 

If you're not really playing golf, do you still post your score at the clubhouse? No.

If you aren't finding caches listed on this site, why would you post your finds here?

Link to comment

If you're not really playing golf, do you still post your score at the clubhouse? No.

If you aren't finding caches listed on this site, why would you post your finds here?[/color]

 

I don't post my golf scores ANYWHERE...but that's besides the point.

 

Golf has hard, fast, carved-in-stone rules. Geocaching doesn't. THAT'S the difference.

 

That, along with the fact that I can golf with a PGA card carrying golfer, and my scores won't affect his game one bit.

Link to comment
If you saw one of us kicking the ball back onto the fairway and decided we lacked integrity, the issue is on your side of the fence, you would have the problem, not the ball kicker.
You may be on the fairway and you may be kicking a ball back and forth. It may even be a golf ball, but you aren't playing golf. You may even be recording whatever score you wish, but it is meaningless to someone actually playing golf.

 

The problem here is that people are recording their scores on this site and they aren't playing the same game that the site was designed for. Go make your own site and record whatever score you wish, just don't interfere with our game here.

Just as it is impossible for the ball kickers to "interfere" with others on the course merely by having a different scorecard, it is impossible for any cacher to "interfere" with another cacher merely by logging differently.

 

One way is not "more right" than the other. I would have thought anyone could figure that one out by now, especially since TPTB have stated there is no "rule" on this issue.

The interference comes when those people include their score with the scores of those that actually play the game as it is intended to be played.

 

If you're not really playing golf, do you still post your score at the clubhouse? No.

If you aren't finding caches listed on this site, why would you post your finds here?

But aren't those people playing the game 'as it is intended to be played'? They certainly would appear to be in line with how TPTB have sounded off on this issue in the past. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

If you saw one of us kicking the ball back onto the fairway and decided we lacked integrity, the issue is on your side of the fence, you would have the problem, not the ball kicker.

You may be on the fairway and you may be kicking a ball back and forth. It may even be a golf ball, but you aren't playing golf. You may even be recording whatever score you wish, but it is meaningless to someone actually playing golf.

 

The problem here is that people are recording their scores on this site and they aren't playing the same game that the site was designed for. Go make your own site and record whatever score you wish, just don't interfere with our game here.

Just as it is impossible for the ball kickers to "interfere" with others on the course merely by having a different scorecard, it is impossible for any cacher to "interfere" with another cacher merely by logging differently.

 

One way is not "more right" than the other. I would have thought anyone could figure that one out by now, especially since TPTB have stated there is no "rule" on this issue.

The interference comes when those people include their score with the scores of those that actually play the game as it is intended to be played.

 

If you're not really playing golf, do you still post your score at the clubhouse? No.

If you aren't finding caches listed on this site, why would you post your finds here?

Thanks Sax,, for another good post that is straight to the point and that asks a good question. :sad:

 

Of course i'm sure your question will remain unanswered since i have yet to see a good or logical reply get posted when a question was asked on the subject. The usual "how does this bother you", "play the game how you want" answers are lame and pretty much tell me that these advocates of the practice know what the rest of us know, that there are no good reasons for doing it. Oh wait, i take that back. There is one,,, to rack up them smilies. :grin::sad::(

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...