Jump to content

Temp Caches Being "Listed" on GC.com


Cardinal Red
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp Found temp

What's the point?

Link to comment
What's the point?

[/size][/font]

The point those that do it give is "we found a cache, it was just as hard as any other cache, so we deserve the credit"

The *real* point is they didn't find a cache listed on GC.com, so why do they expect credit for them on GC.com? Do these same people log a GC.com find for every terracache or navicache they find? More importantly, do the terracachers and navicachers log mutiple finds on caches over on those sites to cover their GC finds?

 

Drop the public find counts and 90% of this kind of nonsense would stop.

Link to comment

Logging temp caches is wrong in my opinion.

Allowing them to be "listed" on GC.com is wrong.

I'd like to hear what Surfer Joe has to say about this.

What did he know, and when did he know it?

 

And am I reading this right?

The Temp Cache Owner also logs them? Unbelievable.

 

Halloween Hoopla -- A Social Event

 

edit: spelling

 

I wouldn't do it either...but it's within the guidelines, so there's nothing for Surfer Joe to answer.

Link to comment

The *real* point is they didn't find a cache listed on GC.com, so why do they expect credit for them on GC.com?

 

Did you click on the event link? The debate over logging Temp Caches is not new.

Listing them on a Cache Page as additional Waypoints is news to me.

You can download them in a PQ.

Link to comment

It is now the time for TPTB to do something about this.

 

1. Supply a field where you can fill in how many times you attended this event (ie. found temps).

 

2. How many times did you sign the event log.

 

Then the numbers should be added up to give you the desired boost of numbers in your find count.

 

This way only one log would be required. It is a win win solution. You get yor numbers fast and easy. The bandwidth gets less stress. :huh:

Link to comment

Interesting.

 

I actually don't mind the idea of listing the Temp Caches as additional waypoints on the event page. It sure beats having everyone punch in coordinates manually for all the temp caches at an event.

 

Logging the event multiple times so one gets credit for finding those temp caches is just lame, IMO. I still think this must be a bit of a regional thing as I've never seen it done on events around here -- yet. I'm sure eventually we'll see some numbers hound try it just to see what the event organizer does.

Link to comment

Did you click on the event link? The debate over logging Temp Caches is not new.

Listing them on a Cache Page as additional Waypoints is news to me.

You can download them in a PQ.

That's a pretty cool way to do it and consistent with Jeremy's comment when the cache permanence guideline was added

An "event" as defined can contain "caches," much like multicaches. If you want to post coordinates to pre-event caches on the event cache page, feel free. The fact that these caches are part of a specific event does not warrant their own cache page.

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

Link to comment

It is now the time for TPTB to do something about this.

 

1. Supply a field where you can fill in how many times you attended this event (ie. found temps).

 

2. How many times did you sign the event log.

 

Then the numbers should be added up to give you the desired boost of numbers in your find count.

 

This way only one log would be required. It is a win win solution. You get yor numbers fast and easy. The bandwidth gets less stress. :huh:

I love this idea. Implement it at once please!!!

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

 

Did I say abuse? My bad, please carry on.

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

 

Did I say abuse? My bad, please carry on.

Well, if you say thiat this is "one step closer to being labeled abusing the system," you must thing something abusive was going on.

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

I can't believe that I'm entering into the foray. Someone slap me. B)

 

Most people were admitting that using the additional waypoint feature to post the coordinates to temporary event caches was probably within the guidelines. I don't believe that people were admitting that it was then within the guidelines to log those temporary caches with a smilie on the event page. If a cache doesn't have its own GC#, then it isn't a cache listed on this site so people shouldn't be able to get a smilie for it. That's just logic. :huh:

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

 

Did I say abuse? My bad, please carry on.

Well, if you say that this is "one step closer to being labeled abusing the system," you must thing something abusive was going on.

 

Nah. We can talk about this later.

Link to comment

<snip>

Of course additional waypoints came about later but what a cool way to provide the coordinates for the temporary caches to those that attend your event. Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not you should log an attended log for each of these that you found.

 

You are correct, but it is one step closer to being labeled abusing the system. I'm happy.

What is so "abusive" about playing within the rules of the game? The King hid a bunch of caches. The people that came to his party FOUND a bunch of caches. Why shouldn't they be allowed to claim credit for each of their finds? I think everyone here has admitted that what was done was done within the guidelines set on the site.

I can't believe that I'm entering into the foray. Someone slap me. B)

 

Most people were admitting that using the additional waypoint feature to post the coordinates to temporary event caches was probably within the guidelines. I don't believe that people were admitting that it was then within the guidelines to log those temporary caches with a smilie on the event page. If a cache doesn't have its own GC#, then it isn't a cache listed on this site so people shouldn't be able to get a smilie for it. That's just logic. :huh:

 

You're a long way for me to reach with a slap, but the thought's there! B)

 

While it may be logic, logging of these temporary caches is still allowed under the current guidelines, so the debate centers more around whether that should be reclassified as an abuse and stopped.

 

I'd personally be perfectly happy to see events locked down to a single "Attended" log. Until such time, I just ignore the folks who decide they need to log a "Find" for all of these temporary caches.

Link to comment

Hey,

 

I see this is another great...discussion!!!

 

Quick, call the Geopolice...the temp loggers are at it again...oh, wait...I am one of them :huh:

 

I was at KB's event...I had a great time along with everyone else. Some log temps, some did not, but we all had fun and we all got along with eachother. Of course it was Minnesota or Wisconsin...we seem to actually accept the fact that the game is played many different ways and respect eachother while playing the game. If you don't like it, then quit trying to use our stats to compare yourselves to us...sure it may be the only way you can prove you are better then us B) but at least we have fun!!!

 

So, go get you stones, torches and pitchforks...I will wait right here for you B)

 

As far as "probably within the guidlines"...I think Jeremy's post (in a previous thread) is pretty clear that it "is within guidlines"...

 

As I said in a previous thread...

 

My stats are just that...MINE...not yours; I can honestly say I don't compare my stats to yours!!! So, if you want to compare yourself to me, be my guest...but at least I am having fun while I play the game...and I sleep very well at night.

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

 

Edit:Spelling...figure my logging temps if enough to make things worse...

Edited by ArcherDragoon
Link to comment

I can't believe that I'm entering into the foray. Someone slap me. B)

smack.gif

 

 

I can't believe that I'm entering into the foray. Someone slap me. B)

 

 

You're a long way for me to reach with a slap, but the thought's there! :D

 

 

I can't believe that I'm entering into the foray. Someone slap me. B)

smack.gif

 

Oh great, I was typing too much and now CTD and I are both trying to slap you! :huh:

 

B) I knew I could count on you guys. B)B)

Link to comment

Drop the public find counts and 90% of this kind of nonsense would stop.

 

Or add one more stat to the public find count to show the REAL numbers, and embarrass those into not doing it anymore.

 

icon_smile.gif November 5 by LameCacher (1329 found, 253 duplicates)

 

Please...enlighten me...how am I supposed to be embarrassed by that...you just about have my numbers correct :huh:

 

Again, they are my numbers...for my use. If you want to use them that is fine, it's public knowledge. Just take it for fact that we are both playing different versions of the same game...neither of us are wrong...neither of us are right.

 

What about those with "Locationless Caches" in their stats...I can't add those to mine...but then again, that was a different version of the same game we are playing now...weird...and yet that doesn't bother me.

 

I wish I had better things to do then argue about tupperware hidden in the woods...

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

Link to comment
Drop the public find counts and 90% of this kind of nonsense would stop.

The stuff you call nonsense may or may not stop. If it did, I guarantee something else would quickly occupy the number one spot on the "They're Doing It Wrong And It Must Be Stopped" list.

 

We'd still have a new thread every week about a practice that some of the people in the forums don't approve of, and they'd be calling for a site change to make sure other people aren't allowed to enjoy it.

 

I suppose eventually we'll end up with 1 type of cache, 1 hiding method, 1 way to find it, 1 way to log it, and 1 way to have fun. Anything else that someone wants to do will get them banned from the site. Woo-HOO! That sure sounds like fun.

Link to comment

It is now the time for TPTB to do something about this.

 

1. Supply a field where you can fill in how many times you attended this event (ie. found temps).

 

2. How many times did you sign the event log.

 

Then the numbers should be added up to give you the desired boost of numbers in your find count.

 

This way only one log would be required. It is a win win solution. You get yor numbers fast and easy. The bandwidth gets less stress. B)

I love this idea. Implement it at once please!!!

 

I love it B) it would make my logging so much easier :huh:

 

Are we there yet?

 

Meh.

 

I wish...it's getting cold up here in Minnesota...where are those torches???

Link to comment

Or add one more stat to the public find count to show the REAL numbers, and embarrass those into not doing it anymore.

 

icon_smile.gif November 5 by LameCacher (1329 found, 253 duplicates)

 

Nice idea but too simple in scope. B) I have 1310 Finds on 1225 caches. Those are real numbers. Each of the 1310 finds has involved a unique hunt, it is just that many of them have come on a grandfathered moving cache. So, you're suggestion would "out" me even though I did nothing "wrong".

 

To keep this post on topic I'll repeat what I said before: I like the idea of using the additional waypoints to post coordinates for the temporary caches. Those temporary caches are against the gc.com guidelines and should not count as smileys.

 

I know, I know...not my numbers so I shouldn't care -- same as people signing the log before someone hides a cache. I guess I am old fashioned enough to believe there are right ways and wrong ways of doing things and I don't believe in the "anything goes" mentality. :huh:

Link to comment

Or add one more stat to the public find count to show the REAL numbers, and embarrass those into not doing it anymore.

 

icon_smile.gif November 5 by LameCacher (1329 found, 253 duplicates)

 

Nice idea but too simple in scope. B) I have 1310 Finds on 1225 caches. Those are real numbers. Each of the 1310 finds has involved a unique hunt, it is just that many of them have come on a grandfathered moving cache. So, you're suggestion would "out" me even though I did nothing "wrong".

 

To keep this post on topic I'll repeat what I said before: I like the idea of using the additional waypoints to post coordinates for the temporary caches. Those temporary caches are against the gc.com guidelines and should not count as smileys.

 

I know, I know...not my numbers so I shouldn't care -- same as people signing the log before someone hides a cache. I guess I am old fashioned enough to believe there are right ways and wrong ways of doing things and I don't believe in the "anything goes" mentality. :huh:

 

I love this statement...but let's look at this closer.

 

Temporary caches are only against gc.com guidlines if the owner wants those caches listed seperatly (each with an individual cache page) on gc.com with no intentions af keeping active for at least 3 months...there is nothing that says temporary caches at an event are against the guidlines...and that is what these caches were; they were part of the event...no more, no less...just another part of a great event!!!

 

So, they "count" in my "event count"...seems only logical that event temp caches count in my "event count". So, there is my logic (as it were)...I found an event's temp cache so why not keep track of it in my event stats.

 

And again I add...they are my stats, so why do you care about my stats??? If it is how you prove you are a better cacher then I...then so be it.

 

Hey KB...doing good...great conversation isn't it!!!

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

Link to comment

 

I love this statement...but let's look at this closer.

 

Temporary caches are only against gc.com guidlines if the owner wants those caches listed seperatly (each with an individual cache page) on gc.com with no intentions af keeping active for at least 3 months...there is nothing that says temporary caches at an event are against the guidlines...and that is what these caches were; they were part of the event...no more, no less...just another part of a great event!!!

 

They only lasted as long as the event, so they don't meet GC guidelines. Is this the new method for lazy hiders to avoid maintenance, and cache permanence, placing "one day caches?"

 

So, they "count" in my "event count"...seems only logical that event temp caches count in my "event count". So, there is my logic (as it were)...I found an event's temp cache so why not keep track of it in my event stats.

 

So how many times did you actually attend the event?

 

And again I add...they are my stats, so why do you care about my stats??? If it is how you prove you are a better cacher then I...then so be it.

 

Your stats aren't the main issue. Its the nasty stink created by all of the "liberalization of geocaching," ploys. Examples include:

  1. Cachers log attends for non GC approved caches.
  2. Cachers log finds for caches they never found, but since they visited "ground zero" they deserve a find.
  3. Cachers log each waypoint of a multi as finds.
  4. Cachers continue hiding crappy caches in crappy locations, all to increase their hide stats.
  5. Cachers share TB and Geocoin lists to "discover" trackables they never found.

In short, there are many of us that would like Geocaching.com to have more black and white guidelines, to follow. Some of us jump into these threads strictly to stir the pot, and others (like me) debate these recurring issues because we feel strongly about them.

 

If you want to find your own Easter Eggs, log temp caches, etc, have fun.

Link to comment

800px-simpsons_angry_mob.png

 

I'm failing to get the urge to grab my pitchfork and light my torch. B)

 

Perhaps when these loggers of temp caches start to erase MY finds. I'll tax a braincell to care. *yawwwn*

 

I love it when the geo-police make themselves known. Annnnd from several states away yet. :huh: Thanks OP. B)

Link to comment

 

I love this statement...but let's look at this closer.

 

Temporary caches are only against gc.com guidlines if the owner wants those caches listed seperatly (each with an individual cache page) on gc.com with no intentions af keeping active for at least 3 months...there is nothing that says temporary caches at an event are against the guidlines...and that is what these caches were; they were part of the event...no more, no less...just another part of a great event!!!

 

They only lasted as long as the event, so they don't meet GC guidelines. Is this the new method for lazy hiders to avoid maintenance, and cache permanence, placing "one day caches?"

 

So, they "count" in my "event count"...seems only logical that event temp caches count in my "event count". So, there is my logic (as it were)...I found an event's temp cache so why not keep track of it in my event stats.

 

So how many times did you actually attend the event?

 

And again I add...they are my stats, so why do you care about my stats??? If it is how you prove you are a better cacher then I...then so be it.

 

Your stats aren't the main issue. Its the nasty stink created by all of the "liberalization of geocaching," ploys. Examples include:

  1. Cachers log attends for non GC approved caches.
  2. Cachers log finds for caches they never found, but since they visited "ground zero" they deserve a find.
  3. Cachers log each waypoint of a multi as finds.
  4. Cachers continue hiding crappy caches in crappy locations, all to increase their hide stats.
  5. Cachers share TB and Geocoin lists to "discover" trackables they never found.

In short, there are many of us that would like Geocaching.com to have more black and white guidelines, to follow. Some of us jump into these threads strictly to stir the pot, and others (like me) debate these recurring issues because we feel strongly about them.

 

If you want to find your own Easter Eggs, log temp caches, etc, have fun.

Did you hear about the easter egg hunt at the home for Alzheimer's Patients??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They hide their own eggs!!!!

Link to comment

In short, there are many of us that would like Geocaching.com to have more black and white guidelines, to follow.

 

Kit--

 

Let me begin by saying that I don't intend this to be a personal attack against you. I am simply trying to understand your line of thinking. You are a very active person on these forums, and often advocate for changes as you believe they should be, and that is why I take this example from your post to ask my question. I would gladly welcome an answer from anyone to this question, not just you.

 

I can't help but wonder what it is about people such as yourself that makes you insist on defining what's right for everyone else. People participate in geocaching in different ways for different reasons. What may seem right to you may not seem right to someone else, and vice-versa.

 

Just like the idea of what is fun and what is not fun. What some people think is a fun aspect of this game, others want no part of. The bottom line is, these forums would be much more pleasant if people could accept that just because people disagree with them doesn't make that person wron, inferior, or any less of a participant in the game then they are.

Link to comment

In short, there are many of us that would like Geocaching.com to have more black and white guidelines, to follow.

 

I would gladly welcome an answer from anyone to this question, not just you.

 

 

Maybe not an answer but a viewpoint.

 

I don't see it, so much, as defining what is right for everyone else but wanting to define the game geocaching under the geocaching.com domain. I can't help but think of the movie Caddyshack when I read these types of threads. In the movie Rodney Dangerfield/Al Czervik has his own version of a set of golf clubs. When he gained control of the golf course he changed the game from what the establishment knew it as to his version. It was funny to see the carnival sideshow set up on the course and the lawyer wanting to play contact golf. It was their version of golf and a number of them were having fun. Many on the other hand did not welcome the changes and fought against it.

I can see why many here don't like the changes taking place. It's a game they started playing a few years ago with what seemed like a pretty clear set of giude lines. Personally I don't understand the temp cache logging. I don't view the temp caches anything differently then a horseshoe tourny or a sack race. It is all part of the entertainment at the event. I don't see temp cache logging as an established acceptable practice within the gc.com framework. If it were there would be a way to properly log the temp caches rather then saying you attended an event 20 times or what ever the case my be.

This Caddyshack style of caching is not played in my area so it doesn't tend to concern me one way or the other. Pretty much everyone here plays it the way it started.

Edited by Klondike Mike
Link to comment

Maybe not an answer but a viewpoint.

 

I don't see it, so much, as defining what is right for everyone else but wanting to define the game geocaching under the geocaching.com domain. I can't help but think of the movie Caddyshack when I read these types of threads. In the movie Rodney Dangerfield/Al Czervik has his own version of a set of golf clubs. When he gained control of the golf course he changed the game from what the establishment knew it as to his version. It was funny to see the carnival sideshow set up on the course and the lawyer wanting to play contact golf. It was their version of golf and a number of them were having fun. Many on the other hand did not welcome the changes and fought against it.

I can see why many here don't like the changes taking place. It's a game they started playing a few years ago with what seemed like a pretty clear set of giude lines. Personally I don't understand the temp cache logging. I don't view the temp caches anything differently then a horseshoe tourny or a sack race. It is all part of the entertainment at the event. I don't see temp cache logging as an established acceptable practice within the gc.com framework. If it were there would be a way to properly log the temp caches rather then saying you attended an event 20 times or what ever the case my be.

This Caddyshack style of caching is not played in my area so it doesn't tend to concern me one way or the other. Pretty much everyone here plays it the way it started.

 

Do a search in the forums and you will find that multiple logs on the same cache is not anything new. I think that the thing that gets people bickering is that there is a small but vocal group who see geocaching as a game and the find count is how they keep score. Remove the score from public view and these people will quiet down.

Link to comment

My wife and I recently went to an event cache that encouraged a second smiley for finding a temporary night cache. I'd never done a night cache, and would have liked to ... and even though it was probably fairly 'lame (ez)' we opted not to even do the night cache. Sure we could have found it and not logged a second find, but to me it was a better option just to attend the event and NOT have anything to do with the temp cache.

 

I didn't say anything in my log of that event about choosing to only log my attendance, and not a 2cd as I just didn't really want to get into it, but if anyone were to ask me it is LAME.

Link to comment

In short, there are many of us that would like Geocaching.com to have more black and white guidelines, to follow.

 

Kit--

 

Let me begin by saying that I don't intend this to be a personal attack against you. I am simply trying to understand your line of thinking. You are a very active person on these forums, and often advocate for changes as you believe they should be, and that is why I take this example from your post to ask my question. I would gladly welcome an answer from anyone to this question, not just you.

 

I can't help but wonder what it is about people such as yourself that makes you insist on defining what's right for everyone else. People participate in geocaching in different ways for different reasons. What may seem right to you may not seem right to someone else, and vice-versa.

 

Just like the idea of what is fun and what is not fun. What some people think is a fun aspect of this game, others want no part of. The bottom line is, these forums would be much more pleasant if people could accept that just because people disagree with them doesn't make that person wron, inferior, or any less of a participant in the game then they are.

 

Excellent and very diplomatic post.

 

I hafta say on Kit's behalf, that when I think of hardline anal retentive geocachers, his handle doesn't even cross my mind. :D

 

To answer your question, from MY point of view, some folks just ain't free range chickens if you get my drift. :blink:

 

To paraphrase George Carlin (sorta) they have a rigid football mentality, but they feel forced to play in a less constrained baseball type system.

 

Some, but not ALL in this catagory neeeeed external actualization. They need to feel that they have been right allll along, or all their finger waggling will be for naught.

 

Whether by design or luck, the current system is freakin' genius. There's something for everyone. :)

 

We all know there are folks out there who enjoy nothin' more than something to get good and mad about. The totality of their posting records and cache logs usually outs them from miles away. B) Regardless of the rules these people exist on both sides of the fence.

 

Here's my take on RULES as opposed to guidelines:

 

Speed limits are just suggestions of what a reasonable and safe speed should be for the general population.... Unless the fuzz is present.... THEN it's a RULE. Ya dig? :huh:

 

We all know that the average IQ is between 90-110, so speed limits are there keep the livestock from killing themselves.

 

I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in YEARS, knock wood, and I seem to process speed at a different rate than other drivers around me. Just a tad faster. :huh:

 

Most "rules" are for the safety of the livestock.

 

I like guidelines better. It's much more fun to laugh at the cache police when they try to hand out tickets. :(:huh::(:D

Edited by Snoogans
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...