Event Caches

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

The lack of a container is what killed virtuals. IMHO, events should obviously exist, but they should not count toward the find total.

 

If they did that then event attendance would suffer, especially in those areas where the point of an event is to pad numbers rather than to socialize.

 

What numbers hound in his right mind would spend an afternoon of idle chatter with other geocachers without the opportunity to increment his find count?

Ain't that the truth!

 

I'm surprised they even bother going to the event, just think how many more times they could log it if they stayed home in front of the computer that day. WOOHOO!!! We're having fun now!!

What we're multi-logging are things we used a GPS to find while at events, not the event itself. There's a major difference. Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

 

That's funny, a few minutes ago in the other thread you stated: I was at an event where 80+ of us logged 187 attended logs each to set a "world record" (and to flood the Reviewer's inbox since we knew he was watching).

 

THat doesn't sound to me like Geocaching, that sounds like SPAMMING a Reviewer for laughs.

 

Geocaches are logged on their own page, not on event pages. No GC number, no log. All the fun but none of the cheating.

[+BlueDeuce]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

 

Okay, so why all the effort to log the non/quasi-gc.com caches? I'm supposed to believe it's nothing to do with numbers?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

The lack of a container is what killed virtuals. IMHO, events should obviously exist, but they should not count toward the find total.

 

If they did that then event attendance would suffer, especially in those areas where the point of an event is to pad numbers rather than to socialize.

 

What numbers hound in his right mind would spend an afternoon of idle chatter with other geocachers without the opportunity to increment his find count?

Ain't that the truth!

 

I'm surprised they even bother going to the event, just think how many more times they could log it if they stayed home in front of the computer that day. WOOHOO!!! We're having fun now!!

What we're multi-logging are things we used a GPS to find while at events, not the event itself. There's a major difference. Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

 

That's funny, a few minutes ago in the other thread you stated: I was at an event where 80+ of us logged 187 attended logs each to set a "world record" (and to flood the Reviewer's inbox since we knew he was watching).

 

THat doesn't sound to me like Geocaching, that sounds like SPAMMING a Reviewer for laughs.

 

Geocaches are logged on their own page, not on event pages. No GC number, no log. All the fun but none of the cheating.

Yup, it was wrong by today's standards, it's was years ago, it's no longer done, but like pocket caches it remains legal and every cache owner's and geocachers choice, that was my point. BTW, if you read the logs of the many events I have attended or hosted you will not find a single complaint about this issue, only here in these forums, so it ain't just me, it's thousands of cachers you are labeling when you say multi-loggers are cheats and the equal of graffiti-spraying punks.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

What we're multi-logging are things we used a GPS to find while at events, not the event itself. There's a major difference. Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

I found the correct road with my GPS, so obviously the road is a geocache. Wow, I can start logging those now too!

 

Obviously your definition is flawed. Why not just log the geocaches you find and leave all that other stuff out?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

[+TrailGators]

I found the correct road with my GPS, so obviously the road is a geocache. Wow, I can start logging those now too!

I bet some of those guys are logging those as well as restaurants and hotels.... Edited October 8, 2007 by TrailGators

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

I expect that TPTB are quite capable of determining and stopping abuse of their system. Until they state that it is abuse and disallowed, it isn't.

[+TrailGators]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

I expect that TPTB are quite capable of determining and stopping abuse of their system. Until they state that it is abuse and disallowed, it isn't.

So far the fence has been pushed out to 1707 events being "attended" by one person. How far are you guys going to push it? You guys are actually your own worst enemy.... Edited October 8, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

I expect that TPTB are quite capable of determining and stopping abuse of their system. Until they state that it is abuse and disallowed, it isn't.

 

The thing is there is wrong, and there is permitted

If a cop clocks you driving 60 in a 55 he may decide it's not worth saying anything about it for any number of reasons. That doesn't make driving 5 over the limit right, only permitted.

Logging temp caches isn't right, it's only permitted.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

So far the fence has been pushed out to 1707 events being "attended" by one person. How far are you guys going to push it? You guys are actually your own worst enemy....

Don't know if you mean me in "you guys", since I haven't multi-logged an event in a year or so; I quit when the practice started drawing ire, but I defend anyone's right to do it until TPTB tell them to stop, and am not about to go go back and delete the logs because you don't like them.

 

If someone logged an event they didn't attend I quite agree that would be wrong, but that's a totally different topic.

[+CYBret]

I've got the perfect solution.

 

Start your own website called "Eventcaching.com." Host all your temporary event caches there and log them there.

 

You get the points, and geocaching.com stats stay nice n' clean.

 

See, everybody's happy.....right?

[+CYBret]

like pocket caches it remains legal and every cache owner's and geocachers choice, that was my point.

 

I'm confused. Legal in what sense? In the sense that the United States government won't arrest you for doing it or legal in the sense that geocaching.com supports and allows this?

 

Because if it's the former then I agree completely. If it's the latter than why did a bunch of pocket caches get shut down?

[+Mudfrog]

I've got the perfect solution.

 

Start your own website called "Eventcaching.com." Host all your temporary event caches there and log them there.

 

You get the points, and geocaching.com stats stay nice n' clean.

 

See, everybody's happy.....right?

Heck, why not name the website, "LogAnythingUWant2GetASmilieOn.com"???

[+briansnat]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

 

Uh no. Hunting containers using a GPS is geocaching. Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just logging your finds.

[+Team Cotati]

Geocaches which eventually become listed on www.geocaching.com are all reviewed by volunteer reviewers who, to the best of their ability and the information available to them, verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines as published at www.geocaching.com. Happy, happy joy, joy.

[+Team Cotati]

Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just visiting web site www.geocaching.com where you enter information regarding the circumstances and methods used when you discovered a container whose location was gleaned from information on www.geocaching.com. Alternatively you can also log the finding of a geocache that is listed at www.geocaching.com without entering the circumstances and methods used. It is purely your coice and your choice alone. Regardless, when you do this, you have just consumated the act of logging a geocache that you found using information located at www.geocaching.

[+Kit Fox]

 

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.

 

And that has what to do with you being thankful for some junk stat that doesn't mean anything? What possible value could be provided by that junk stat you said you were thankful for?

 

The junk stat you refer to is an accurate count of how many geocaching.com approved geocaches I found. I'm thankful this website records the fun i've had finding caches "listed" here. I've signed many peak registers (Mt. Emma, View, Mt. Williamson, Mt. Baden Powell, and Pinyon Ridge) while using my GPS, should I add more smileys to my GC.com Stats for peaks bagged?

[+tozainamboku]

The junk stat you refer to is an accurate count of how many geocaching.com approved geocaches I found. I'm thankful this website records the fun i've had finding caches "listed" here. I've signed many peak registers (Mt. Emma, View, Mt. Williamson, Mt. Baden Powell, and Pinyon Ridge) while using my GPS, should I add more smileys to my GC.com Stats for peaks bagged?

Fortunately, Mr. Kit Fox's stat is an accurate record of caches that he has found that are listed on geocaching.com and are not tainted by counting the peak registers he has signed while using his GPS. I have signed some of the same peak regsiters without using my GPS so I'm not impressed.

 

People who chose to accept a cache owner's offer to log multiple times in order to record temporary event caches have an accurate record that includes caches and events listed on Geocaching.com and additional finds for caches placed in conjunction with an event that the cache owner has decided to allow people who want to, to log. Perhaps if the caches places on Mt. Emma, Mt. Williamson, Mt. Baden Powell, etc. allowed one to claim a extra smiley for signing the peak register? I know that sometimes cachers who don't do a lot of summiting, will find the peak register when looking for a cache and sign it instead of the cache. In this instance, many cache owners will allow the found it log to remain on Geocaching.com even though the cacher didn't really find the cache. Given these kinds of practices, I doubt that Kit Fox can expect everyone's stats to be an accurate record of the caches he has found. If he does, there is a bigger problem caused by people who find caches, sign the physical log book, and then don't log online.

 

The best one can hope for is that the find count is an accurate count of the number of found it and attended logs recorded on Geocaching.com. One can examine a cachers profile to determine if they are logging multiple attended at events and judges them accordingly. It may be harder to determine if they logged a cache for signing the summit register instead of the cache. Personally, I don't worry too much about other people's counts.

Edited October 8, 2007 by tozainamboku

[+wavector]

and geocaching.com stats stay nice n' clean.

 

 

The idea that there is a clean smiley count is simply a failure to grasp the most basic tenet of this activity, the cache owner assumes ALL responsibility for the cache listing.

Your smilies are the same as everyone else's smileys which are the same as everyone else's smilies, every one has stats that are "nice n' clean".

Smilies are obtained by making a claim but the cache owner must allow your smilie claim to exist. All the stats on this lisitng service are "nice n clean", they are the claims that are made by geocachers and each claim has been adjudged by a cache owner who has allowed it to stand, this means it is nice n' clean. The cacher who has claimed 1700 plus multiple event logs has stats that are "nice n' clean", they are just as clean as yours or any other example you care to hold out, every claim made by that cacher has been allowed to stand by the cache owner, this is very straightforward.

Telling people to leave this site when they are not breaking any rules is not a great solution.

 

I have a solution, remove the Find count from all the cache logs, put it back in the profile where it belongs. Ignore the flack from the small but vocal crowd who think that having their find count displayed on other peoples caches is important, they would quickly get used to it. As Ed so rightly noted, the practice of logging temporary event caches is very common and there are only a handful of people who complain about it, they basically complain that people are "padding numbers" like it actually matters, that says it all.

Another option would be to allow cache owners to choose to opt out of having another cachers find count displayed on their caches. Those of us who really don't care about the numbers could simply place a check mark in the box and change the displayed find counts to a time stamp, thus placing ourselves clearly in the "we don't care about numbers" camp. People who want to complain about others would have to accept that the system works fine as it is and then no one needs to take your advice and leave this listing service for another one where the numbers really don't matter because you know what, they don't matter here or anywhere else. If someone feels the need to disparage another geocachers Find count then they have problems, not the person they are complaining about.

[+svladcjelli]

WTH happens to a geocoin listed in an event? One of my coins is listed as being 'in' an event that happened 2 weeks ago, where is this actual coin? WTF is happening with this, it is a joke. I will never, ever, log an event (or a cache not listed on gc.com) as a 'found'. This is really really sad, I feel bad for you all who have done this.

Edited October 8, 2007 by svladcjelli

[+wavector]

The junk stat you refer to is an accurate count of how many geocaching.com approved geocaches I found.

 

That is simply a claim you are making.

Every cache I have found is a geocaching approved cache, every one has been a unique find, thus proving incontrovertibly, to me, that the stat is junk.

 

So explain why you are thankful that this junk stat exists?

I don't see the use of the stat so please explain exactly what it does for you?

You say it is an accurate count of your finds on geocaching.com, so you need that stat to accept your own claim?

[+wavector]

Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just logging your finds.

 

For me geocaching is all about connecting to other people, that is why I hide caches, so that other people can log them online, why do you hide them?

[+Rockin Roddy]

TAR, I read where you used to log tep caches and then quit when the yelling started on the forums. If you feel this is right (temp cache logging), why did you stop? If you feel it wrong, why not go back and correct the wrong by deleting the temp caches?

 

My point, you quit because others thought it wrong. Either you are easily swayed by others' actions (and words) or you truly thought the logging to be less than kosher, but either way, you must have come to the decision it was wrong or you wouldn't have quit....right??

 

Around here, the LEO are supposed to enforce a law requiring youngsters to wear a helmet while biking. It isn't being enforced since the LEO are just too thinly spread to do ALL their jobs...they look the other way. It's all good until someone gets hurt.

 

I think this temp logging is pretty much the same thing. Jeremy knows about it, just doesn't feel the abuse is soooo bad that it needs the attention of their volunteer staff who are quite busy worrying about bigger complaints. If the time comes when this IS addressed, I'm hoping it'll be to stop the abuse. It's all good until someone gets hurt (they are called on their stats and made to look bad...possibly resulting in bad feelings and maybe even geocide).

[+briansnat]

Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just logging your finds.

 

For me geocaching is all about connecting to other people, that is why I hide caches, so that other people can log them online, why do you hide them?

 

So people can FIND them.

[+Windrose]

Just for argument's sake - logically, if you're going to log an event 6 times (once for attending and 5 times for the temporary event caches you found) then when you find a 6 stage multi - you should log it 6 times. Once for each stage you found. Each stage was a cache after all (even if it was just a micro/nano). So a 12 stage multi - that's 12 finds.

 

Windrose

[+Rockin Roddy]

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.

Obviously you are not following the many threads on this subject. I said that there are good reasons that a cacher might log a cache of their own, I even pointed out the example you just gave, I was told unequivocally by another cacher that it was "cheesy", those reading all the threads likely caught the reference. You didn't but decided that it was good enough reason to launch a personal attack. I guess that reflects on you for those who do read.

My point was you cannot win when you are sticking your nose into someone elses Find Count. As a cache owner you have the ability to do anything you wish to your own caches, manage them in any fashion you see fit, including using them to make sure your Find count is the number you choose to claim and no the number that certain busybodies decide you should have.

Since you agree it is clear that we are likely on the same side of the fence when it comes to the rights of cache owners.

The rights of a cache owner are absolute, this is not an opinion. You are echoing StarBrand and his "vague and opinionated" stance when you tell me that it is my opinion cause it isn't, it is the way it works today and it isn't boken, it works just fine. The word ALL is absolute, only those who want to limit others in some fashion think that there is something wrong with the system, do you want everyone to have log caches in the same fashion as you?

 

Now you need to go read and figure out who actually thinks you are being cheesy when you log your own caches, cause I don't care. The only thing I do care about is the fact that certain people are pushing for the adoption of rules that would eliminate my ability to manage my caches in the fashion I see fit, I care about that.

 

A good clue that I wasn't reading the other threads would have been my lack of participation.....a personal attack is being called cheesy, pointing out how someone was aiming an attack at me ISN'T a personal attack...unless you have really thin skin! But glad we're on the same page now.

 

Great reply Windrose...logging multi's as separate caches IS about the same as logging temp caches!!

[+Ambrosia]

the practice of logging temporary event caches is very common

But somewhat regional. If I hadn't read about it in the forums, I wouldn't have known of its existence.

[+Team Cotati]

Actually.

[+sbell111]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

I disagree.

 

TPTB gave their blessing to this practice way back when. As such, I have no reason to believe that they find the practice to now be abusive.

Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just logging your finds.

For me geocaching is all about connecting to other people, that is why I hide caches, so that other people can log them online, why do you hide them?

So people can FIND them.

Ummm, your response kind of flies in the face of your typical reaction to those people who don't log online, doesn't it? One would think, from your typical response to that issue that you felt that the 'connection' aspect is VERY important.

There are poeple who don't log. I think its rude. If someone takes the time, effort and expense to place a cache, the least someone can do is tell the owner they found the cache and enjoyed the hunt.

[+Mudfrog]

Smilies are obtained by making a claim but the cache owner must allow your smilie claim to exist. All the stats on this lisitng service are "nice n clean", they are the claims that are made by geocachers and each claim has been adjudged by a cache owner who has allowed it to stand, this means it is nice n' clean. The cacher who has claimed 1700 plus multiple event logs has stats that are "nice n' clean", they are just as clean as yours or any other example you care to hold out, every claim made by that cacher has been allowed to stand by the cache owner, this is very straightforward.

The 1700 you refer to is not "nice and clean" by any means. Matter of fact, it's a fine example of how and why "junk" stats have come about.. Just because the cache owner can make up his own silly rules doesn't make it right. There are still guidelines and common sense issues that need to be followed by these owners...

[+StarBrand]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

[+sbell111]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

[+drat19]

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

It only matters to those who would compare stats between one cacher and another as some sort of measure of "value" or "qualification".

 

(Didja miss me, sbell?)

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

Show me where TPTB have said they "approve" of this practice. The best you have is that they haven't shut down the ability because it hasn't been abused enough to warrant that much attention. It has been written off as being "silly". They have more important enhancements to make to the website at the moment.

[+sbell111]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

Show me where TPTB have said they "approve" of this practice. The best you have is that they haven't shut down the ability because it hasn't been abused enough to warrant that much attention. It has been written off as being "silly". They have more important enhancements to make to the website at the moment.

A link and quote was provided way up there, somewhere. (I also remember the message that the 'approvers' were giving out at the time, which clearly showed direct approval - no pun intended.) Edited October 8, 2007 by sbell111

[+Rockin Roddy]

I truly think everyone understands the reasons many of us feel the practice of logging temporary (note the name, these caches aren't allowed to be published on this site, but some feel they are allowed to log them on this site....hmmmm...) is misleading. I also think that many of us can and do understand that this practice really doesn't affect us (except to have to wonder just how truthful someone's stats might be, leading us to wonder just how truthful that person might be as well). Play as you want, just keep in mind that others might not be as trusting of you if they feel you "lied" to them with your stats. My integrity is much more important to me than my stats.

 

I'm even more concerned that some would boast of their stats when they know full well the count is flawed. Really brings into question their character IMHO. I liken it to the Bonds home run scandal....sure, he was allowed to "log" the HR, but......

[+tozainamboku]

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

It only matters to those who would compare stats between one cacher and another as some sort of measure of "value" or "qualification".

 

(Didja miss me, sbell?)

Dam those who don't log their finds on-line. Because of them I can not use the stats as some sort of measure of "value" or "qualification". There are probably people out there who have found a lot more caches then their stats show and I can't tell what value to give to ones they do log or whether I should treat them with awe when I meet them at an event.

[+tozainamboku]

I'm even more concerned that some would boast of their stats when they know full well the count is flawed. Really brings into question their character IMHO. I liken it to the Bonds home run scandal....sure, he was allowed to "log" the HR, but......

There is no room for performance enhancing drugs in geocaching

[+Mudfrog]

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

It only matters to those who would compare stats between one cacher and another as some sort of measure of "value" or "qualification".

 

(Didja miss me, sbell?)

While it can give an idea of a person's geocaching prowess, it really is only a measure of one thing,,, how many geocaches a person has found. Or at least it used to be before these silly practices began. I think it's safe to say that we who argue that there should be common sense used in what constitutes a find, do not want to and would not ever try to judge a person on his or her find count.

 

Any judgement that does come is a result of when it's obvious that the almighty smilie is so important to some that they resort to doing anything to get them.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Great post Mudfrog!

 

As well, there shouldn't be room for "stat enhancing temporary caches" Toz .

[+Driver Carries Cache]

Logging things we find using a GPS is called, uh, I will think of it in a minute, oh yeah - geocaching!

"Geocaches" are all reviewed to verify that they are in compliance with the site guidelines and then listed on geocaching.com.

Actually, not.

 

Geocaches and geocaching exist quite seperate from the geocaching.com listing service, pre-dated it and will likely outlive it.

 

Geocaching.com is great, I love it, support it, promote it - but it doesn't own the game. It's a good thing to remember!

Yes, you can find a geocache that isn't listed on this site. It may be a temporary cache at an event, a terracache, a navicache, etc. The point is, why would you log any of those things on this site? That's abusing the system.

I disagree.

 

TPTB gave their blessing to this practice way back when. As such, I have no reason to believe that they find the practice to now be abusive.

 

I would disagree with that totally. No "blessing" was given to multiple logging, TPTB chose not to get involved. Jeremy himself described the practice as "stupid" (or was it silly... either works).

 

We could say that multiple logging has been blessed by the Church Of Stupid (or Silly, take your pick).

 

How fitting.

 

DCC

Edited October 8, 2007 by Driver Carries Cache

[+briansnat]

 

Logging your finds ain't geocaching, it's just logging your finds.

For me geocaching is all about connecting to other people, that is why I hide caches, so that other people can log them online, why do you hide them?

So people can FIND them.

 

Ummm, your response kind of flies in the face of your typical reaction to those people who don't log online, doesn't it? One would think, from your typical response to that issue that you felt that the 'connection' aspect is VERY important.

There are poeple who don't log. I think its rude. If someone takes the time, effort and expense to place a cache, the least someone can do is tell the owner they found the cache and enjoyed the hunt.

 

They are distinct things. If you spent the weekend catching up on your online logs I doubt you would tell someone you spent the weekend geocaching. The fact of the matter is that many people geocache and don't log online.

 

I love to ski. I like it for a number of reasons and one of them is the social aspect. Retiring for a drink in front of the fireplace with friends after a day of skiing is a big part of the skiing experience for many. No matter how connected the practice is to the sport, I don't think anybody would argue that sitting in front of a fireplace with a hot chocolate or snifter of Cognac is skiing. Similarly, typing on your PC is not geocaching.

Edited October 8, 2007 by briansnat

[+Driver Carries Cache]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

 

I agree with Sarbrand 100% here. And I would argue again that the practice has never been "approved" by TPTB. And as for the practice being "benign"... when you're arguing whether a practice is right or wrong, the idea of "hey, it doesn't hurt anybody" is just a vote for irresponsibility.

 

DCC

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

Show me where TPTB have said they "approve" of this practice. The best you have is that they haven't shut down the ability because it hasn't been abused enough to warrant that much attention. It has been written off as being "silly". They have more important enhancements to make to the website at the moment.

A link and quote was provided way up there, somewhere. (I also remember the message that the 'approvers' were giving out at the time, which clearly showed direct approval - no pun intended.)

Actually, the "reviewers" (there are no approvers) don't deal with cache logs, that would be TPTB.

[+sbell111]

I've seen a lot of silly argument in this thread about "accurate" counts of things found. The relative value of a smiley. Wether or not HQ "approves" of the practice. Who "owns" the cache and the logs. Who "controls" whom. etc - etc etc - ad naseum .........

 

But to me - what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found things that have no listing page on this listing service?? Saying we "found" them more than once?

 

I say "NO".

 

It is just a sad shame that the programming of the site allows for this. Even though TPTB find the practice "silly". I take that to mean that they see the "need" to programmatically police the listings to be something that should not be necessary. They expect us to be adult enough to not make that necesary. Sad that this even needs to be discussed.

 

I know - I know - here I am chaining people up again............

I certainly agree that this is an issue of personal ethics.

 

One group of people beleive it is wrong to log these event caches individually to the event pages. The personal ethics of these people would never allow them to make such a log.

 

One group believes that finding event caches and logging them to the event pages is perfectly normal and approved by both the organizers of the event and TPTB. Since the practice, is 'normal', accepted by their community, and approved by the organizers of the event and TPTB, they see nothing wrong with the practice and their personal ethics allow for the logs.

 

I'm a little concerned about the personal ethics of those that would condemn these players for this benign activity, however.

Show me where TPTB have said they "approve" of this practice. The best you have is that they haven't shut down the ability because it hasn't been abused enough to warrant that much attention. It has been written off as being "silly". They have more important enhancements to make to the website at the moment.

A link and quote was provided way up there, somewhere. (I also remember the message that the 'approvers' were giving out at the time, which clearly showed direct approval - no pun intended.)

Actually, the "reviewers" (there are no approvers) don't deal with cache logs, that would be TPTB.

At the time, they were approvers. That's why I used the term.

[+sbell111]

Back when the 'permanent' guideline was created, the 'approvers' stopped 'approving' temporary caches. Event organizers were given the message that they could still have the caches and have teh finders log the finds to the event page. That message is approval of the actions.

 

Jeremy certainly gave his approval when he posted this:

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.

 

I gues my question is, what's the point? People at the event seek these things out, so what's wrong with using the event cache page?

Edited October 8, 2007 by sbell111

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Back when the 'permanent' guideline was created, the 'approvers' stopped 'approving' temporary caches. Event organizers were given the message that they could still have the caches and have teh finders log the finds to the event page. That message is approval of the actions.

 

Jeremy certainly gave his approval when he posted this:

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.

 

I gues my question is, what's the point? People at the event seek these things out, so what's wrong with using the event cache page?

Ah yes, the "twice" comment. Jeremy didn't say "go ahead and log as many extra finds as you want" he only said he didn't really care if someone logged an event twice. An extra find here and there for finding a "temporary" event cache is one thing. Logging hundreds of extra finds is abusing the system.

[+Rockin Roddy]

A link to that conversation would be more helpful than a few lines taken out of context...IMHO.

[+wavector]

what it really all comes down to is personal ethics. Should we be logging that we found

 

I hope your own words are clear enough for you.

We should not be involved in your personal ethics.

We is not the personal pronoun.

We hope that this is clear for us.

 

I do think your insistence that restrictive policies should be adopted is a reflection of your personal ethic, I don't concern myself with the claims made by others unless those claims are made on a geocache I own.

So why should everyone be restricted to logging caches in a fashion that pleases you?

Are you still of the mind that things are "vague and opinionated" or do you agree that this statement is perfectly clear... "The cache owner assumes ALL responsibility for the cache listing."