Are we allowing the degradation of geocaching?

[+Mudfrog]

I am. Over half of the bogus finds were MY CACHES. Oh, and It's MY hood not yours BD. I wasn't runnin' a bunch of PQ's and then being a nusance. I was busting a C H E A T E R. Not pointing out the obvious. Although, it should have been obvious to the KC phonies that they didn't find the caches.

Hey, buddy. I think you dropped this:

 

(Am I the only one amused by an Iowan being all 'street'? I mean no offense, but I'm really quite amused by it.)

Am i missing something here? It sounds like NVG checked on his own caches to see whether or not someone else actually found them or not. He found physical cache logs that were NOT signed and then deleted the bogus online logs. Isn't this the proper thing to do? Dsn't the GC.com guidelines for placing and maintaining geocaches mention this very thing?

Yup and yup. NVG then checked the logs on approximately 55 caches that he didn't own. That's what sounded kinda Kravitzy, to me.

What gets me is that some of you advocate lying. That's exactly what's happening when someone doesn't physically find a cache but logs it online. Granted, those bogus cache finds up in Iowa or whereever don't directly affect me, but lying is lying and it doesn't sit well with me at all. It's hard to believe that there are some of you on here that don't see this as being wrong and in fact, go out of your way to defend it!

Please point me to a post where someone advocated or defended lying.

We haven't had trouble with bogus logging in our area but i'm sure glad that we are a close bunch that would hollar at each other if something like this was ever suspected. Down here, we call it doing what's right and helping fellow cachers out, not the "geocaching police"...

There's helping, and then there's nosing, and then there's nosing and thumping your chest about it, and then...

I couldn't figure out how to format this properly so here i hope this will do.

 

On your first reply: Kravitsy,, i like that and i understand what you're saying. I agree that for the most part, a person shouldn't get too involved with other people's caches. In NVG's case, i'm not sure what the other cachers thought about him getting involved and letting them know. But i do know that the cachers around here would appreciate it if i saw something fishy and then let them know about it. I'm not being the cache police if and when i did that. I'm simply being helpful. Of course it's up to the various cache owners as to whether they want to take any action after this.

 

Second: A person that doesn't find a cache but logs it online as a find is lying. People that say this doesn't affect anyone or try to tell others to turn their heads the other way are pretty much saying that it is ok. Seems to be advocating lying to me.

 

Third: Chest thumping? I'm guessing you're saying that because NVG called out some liars, exposed them, and didn't mind letting others know that he did this. Bolder than i may be but i really don't see this as a being bad thing!

[+Driver Carries Cache]

Post showing the GC.com guidelines for cache placement.... removed due to redundancy.

 

(Man that Johnny Vegas is fast!)

 

DCC

Edited January 31, 2008 by Driver Carries Cache

[+Mudfrog]

The way I see it is if someone logs finds they didn't find then the only real person they're cheating is themselves.

 

That's your perception, and a valid one, but I think a number of cache owners feel "cheated" if their cache was used in this manner. Personally, I wouldn't knowingly enable someone to use my cache for this purpose.

That's why it's important to remember that a 'find' is basically an agreement between cache 'finder' and cache owner. If the owner doesn't believe a find has been made, hwe can ask for the log to be changed and/or delete the 'bogus' log.

 

I've never really contested this concept.

Well, than how can a person pass judgement on someone else's finds on still another person's cache? Also, why is it acceptable for some cachers to elect themselves as the roving log checker of everyone's caches?

I'm not one for making analogies but this thought came to my mind when i read your last statement.

 

This is like me sitting in front of a bank and watching a bank robber come out the door with the loot. I may not own the bank or even do business with that bank, but i certainly have the right to pass judgement when i see this happening with my own eyes. Same with caching, if for whatever reason, i see a false log come in, whether it's my cache or not, i reserve the right to pass judgement on the liar.

 

Edited to add: Even if the cache owner doesn't have the (round thingies) to do anything about it or they simply don't care,,, I still have the right to call it like it is.

Edited January 31, 2008 by Mudfrog

[+Renegade Knight]

...Third: Chest thumping? I'm guessing you're saying that because NVG called out some liars, exposed them, and didn't mind letting others know that he did this. Bolder than i may be but i really don't see this as a being bad thing!

 

Too many people in society like to bury bad things as if they don't happen. It just encourages the behavior. Nobody should be afraid to call someone on the carpet for being a doofie or worse. But time and again the person punished is the one actually doing the right thing.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Well, than how can a person pass judgement on someone else's finds on still another person's cache? Also, why is it acceptable for some cachers to elect themselves as the roving log checker of everyone's caches?

 

You have two things tied up here.

Passing judgment on the find is just fine. If it's bogus and they have seen the proof, great. Call it a BS find.

The other one though hits a different concept. At least for Christian types. Don't worry about the splinter in someone elses eye when you should be worried about the plank in your own. I'm not sure that was one of the better translations...but the concept is "Mind your own issues before you go out of your way to mind someone elses".

 

If I happen to find a BS log I'll let the cache owner know. It's all I can do to maintain my own caches in the meantime.

[+sbell111]

That's why it's important to remember that a 'find' is basically an agreement between cache 'finder' and cache owner. If the owner doesn't believe a find has been made, hwe can ask for the log to be changed and/or delete the 'bogus' log.

I've never really contested this concept.

Well, than how can a person pass judgement on someone else's finds on still another person's cache? Also, why is it acceptable for some cachers to elect themselves as the roving log checker of everyone's caches?

I'm not one for making analogies but this thought came to my mind when i read your last statement.

 

This is like me sitting in front of a bank and watching a bank robber come out the door with the loot. I may not own the bank or even do business with that bank, but i certainly have the right to pass judgement when i see this happening with my own eyes. Same with caching, if for whatever reason, i see a false log come in, whether it's my cache or not, i reserve the right to pass judgement on the liar.

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

[+Team Cotati]

...Third: Chest thumping? I'm guessing you're saying that because NVG called out some liars, exposed them, and didn't mind letting others know that he did this. Bolder than i may be but i really don't see this as a being bad thing!

 

Too many people in society like to bury bad things as if they don't happen. It just encourages the behavior. Nobody should be afraid to call someone on the carpet for being a doofie or worse. But time and again the person punished is the one actually doing the right thing.

 

"Too many people in society like to bury bad things as if they don't happen."

 

You don't say.

Edited January 31, 2008 by Team Cotati

[+Mudfrog]

That's why it's important to remember that a 'find' is basically an agreement between cache 'finder' and cache owner. If the owner doesn't believe a find has been made, hwe can ask for the log to be changed and/or delete the 'bogus' log.

I've never really contested this concept.

Well, than how can a person pass judgement on someone else's finds on still another person's cache? Also, why is it acceptable for some cachers to elect themselves as the roving log checker of everyone's caches?

I'm not one for making analogies but this thought came to my mind when i read your last statement.

 

This is like me sitting in front of a bank and watching a bank robber come out the door with the loot. I may not own the bank or even do business with that bank, but i certainly have the right to pass judgement when i see this happening with my own eyes. Same with caching, if for whatever reason, i see a false log come in, whether it's my cache or not, i reserve the right to pass judgement on the liar.

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

I have the right to help in anyway i can. In this situation i'm not qualified to try and stop a robbery in progress and in fact could impede police progress by doing so. But as a good citizen, i think it's my duty to help if i can, at least to a point.

 

Again, i guess you are implying that NVG may have all the caches in his area on a watchlist or something and is monitoring everything that goes on just to find wrong doing. Yes, that would be a bit overbaord for my taste but didn't think his posts were implying this. If he caught a person(s) falsely logging caches he owned and deduced that it may have happened with caches of other owners in the area then went and looked to find out, then i say more power to him. I would appreciate him letting me know so i could look into the matter further.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

 

Maybe not, but I certainly wouldn't be telling people "to let that poor bank robber earn a living in the manner they've chosen".

[+egami]

Again, i guess you are implying that NVG may have all the caches in his area on a watchlist or something and is monitoring everything that goes on just to find wrong doing. Yes, that would be a bit overbaord for my taste but didn't think his posts were implying this. If he caught a person(s) falsely logging caches he owned and deduced that it may have happened with caches of other owners in the area then went and looked to find out, then i say more power to him. I would appreciate him letting me know so i could look into the matter further.

 

His posts weren't implying this...he specifically stated this started with an incident on HIS cache and his e-mail correspondence with them threw up red flags. So, from there he dug into it. It's pretty easy to quickly check area logs of multiple cachers manually online. Sure enough a couple logs were on caches of two very close caching friends...those owners checked their physical logs and at that point the red flags were justified.

 

It wasn't like he was baby-sitting and looking for this to happen. Had it not been problematic on one of his caches...no one would of likely noticed.

Edited January 31, 2008 by egami

[cezanne]

Oh, my fault. I did mention "Greetings from Germany".

 

No it wasn't your fault. My comment was addressed to the German geocacher who had replied to your previous posting and who had oversimplified the counting task and not to you.

I had just briefly scanned through the log file of the cache you liked to manually and recognized the aliases of a quite a number of European cachers where it was obvious that they have logged the cache in an armchair style. Only a minority of them had used the formulation "Greetings from Germany". That was the point I was trying to make.

 

Cezanne

[+sbell111]

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

Maybe not, but I certainly wouldn't be telling people "to let that poor bank robber earn a living in the manner they've chosen".

Again, I haven't suggested that cache owners don't have the right or even the obligation to take action against truly bogus logs on their caches.

[+sbell111]

His posts weren't implying this...he specifically stated this started with an incident on HIS cache and his e-mail correspondence with them threw up red flags. So, from there he dug into it. It's pretty easy to quickly check area logs of multiple cachers manually online. Sure enough a couple logs were on caches of two very close caching friends...those owners checked their physical logs and at that point the red flags were justified.

 

It wasn't like he was baby-sitting and looking for this to happen. Had it not been problematic on one of his caches...no one would of likely noticed.

It's not easy to go out and check 110 log books, 55 of which are in caches you don't own.

[+JohnnyVegas]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

 

I even had one cacher I know ask me to add his name to a log

in cache that he did not have time to do on his own. This was just a few minutes after he was telling about a found it log he had deleted on one of his cachers because he said the persons logs was phony.

[+egami]

His posts weren't implying this...he specifically stated this started with an incident on HIS cache and his e-mail correspondence with them threw up red flags. So, from there he dug into it. It's pretty easy to quickly check area logs of multiple cachers manually online. Sure enough a couple logs were on caches of two very close caching friends...those owners checked their physical logs and at that point the red flags were justified.

 

It wasn't like he was baby-sitting and looking for this to happen. Had it not been problematic on one of his caches...no one would of likely noticed.

It's not easy to go out and check 110 log books, 55 of which are in caches you don't own.

 

Sometimes maintaining integrity takes work. I see no problem there.

[+infiniteMPG]

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically,

 

I don't think that means you have to validate that everyone who says they found the cache actually DID. I know how we are but that's not how others may be. We have hiked a mile into a preserve, found a cache, realized neither of us had a pen so I jogged back to the Jeepster to snag a pen so we could sign the log. It's an ethics thing.... but I don't expect everyone to be that way.

 

Not to say if something was blatently obvious I "wouldn't" take action, but I don't go looking for it. And when you break it down to the basic aspects, it's how serious you take this. Just like golf, you can apply the USGA rules to the pro's, but don't try to make Mr. Play Once a Year follow them or ream him good for not taking that stroke penalty or he'll be dropping his clubs off at Goodwill. Geocaching exits for the fun of it, and if some warped people have fun cheating then they'll do it with this, too. If others have fun tracking down cheaters in some battle between good and evil, they'll do that here, too. Geocaching doesn't change the way we are, it only gives us another outlet to express ourselves.

Edited January 31, 2008 by infiniteMPG

[+sbell111]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

[+egami]

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically,

 

I don't think that means you have to validate that everyone who says they found the cache actually DID. I know how we are but that's not how others may be. We have hiked a mile into a preserve, found a cache, realized neither of us had a pen so I jogged back to the Jeepster to snag a pen so we could sign the log. It's an ethics thing.... but I don't expect everyone to be that way.

 

I think this line may be more to the point from the guidelines:

Cache Maintenance

 

The cache owner will assume all responsibility of their cache listings.

 

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

No, it doesn't seem to be a mandate, but it is clearly an advisable and responsible thing to do and pay attention to.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

Maybe not, but I certainly wouldn't be telling people "to let that poor bank robber earn a living in the manner they've chosen".

Again, I haven't suggested that cache owners don't have the right or even the obligation to take action against truly bogus logs on their caches.

Nice try, but essentially all you've said is that someone directly responsible for protecting the bank has the right or even obligation to take action against bank robbers? Yeah, I think that's pretty obvious.

[+infiniteMPG]

No, it doesn't seem to be a mandate, but it is clearly an advisable and responsible thing to do and pay attention to.

 

Active hiders who have a lot of hides can not possibly take the time to validate logs. It's enough to just keep up with damaged containers, MIA's, wet logs, construction, etc (just repaired a cache on the way back to work from lunch). Some of my caches are paddle-only or dozen mile hikes. When a log is enetered for them I don't think I'll be planning a day long paddle or hike to validate the person actually did find it. There has to be some level of trust here and then weed out the blatently obvious bogus stuff. Last thing geocaching needs to become is a system of checks and validations on every find. I have enough of that at work.

[+infiniteMPG]

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

 

Sometimes it takes more then one person to figure out a puzzle cache. And what about a group of people caching together? You put 8 people out caching together, one person finds the cache, should they be quiet and run off somewhere and wait until each individual in the group personally finds it???

[+egami]

No, it doesn't seem to be a mandate, but it is clearly an advisable and responsible thing to do and pay attention to.

 

Active hiders who have a lot of hides can not possibly take the time to validate logs. It's enough to just keep up with damaged containers, MIA's, wet logs, construction, etc (just repaired a cache on the way back to work from lunch). Some of my caches are paddle-only or dozen mile hikes. When a log is enetered for them I don't think I'll be planning a day long paddle or hike to validate the person actually did find it. There has to be some level of trust here and then weed out the blatently obvious bogus stuff. Last thing geocaching needs to become is a system of checks and validations on every find. I have enough of that at work.

 

First off, I don't see anything in your reply that contradicts what I stated.

 

Secondly, I don't think anyone is suggesting you need to be out to check each log as it happens, that was a ridiculous assertion really.. I think more to the point is that IF you notice a bogus log that you delete it.

 

Some people will be more proactive about it than others I am sure, but the underlying point is that it IS actually part of cache maintenance.

[+JohnnyVegas]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

They may have worked out the puzzle together, some people are not very good at doing puzzles.

Two people working on a puzzle together is not the same as calling someone on the phone and asking them for the coordinates. Some people just are not very good a doing puzzles, I am one of those, so I have not done many puzzle caches.

 

I have a 5 part cache that takes about 1.5 hours to do. There was a group of cachers in the area doing a cache run. They loged the find, they knew I would not believe them when they said they took the time to do a long mulit on a day of doing cache run, they said they found the final to my cache by accident while looking for another cache in the area. So I went to look, the final for my cache was gone. Gee I wonder were it went. I guess they thought I would believe them when said they were off in the search for another cache by over 500 feet, these are cacher with several thousand finds but they do not know how to use a GPS, if anyone believes that I have a big orange bridge for sale in San Fransicso.

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

[+infiniteMPG]

First off, I don't see anything in your reply that contradicts what I stated.

Didn't think I had to contradict previous statements.

 

Secondly, I don't think anyone is suggesting you need to be out to check each log as it happens, that was a ridiculous assertion really.. I think more to the point is that IF you notice a bogus log that you delete it.

I have +230 hides, if I picked one a day to check the logs on I would never have time to seek caches <-- sarcasm implied

 

Some people will be more proactive about it than others I am sure, but the underlying point is that it IS actually part of cache maintenance.

If you find a obvious bogus log, but then the question I'd have to ask is how do you determine a bogus log? If maintaining a cache you view the log book and see it obviously doesn't match the online logs. If you know a cache is MIA but someone logs a find. There are a few rather obvious situations, but as far as making a special trip to a cache just to find out if someone really found it, I think I'd rather be working on my next camo job

[+egami]

Good, then I'll assume you agree with my point.

[+infiniteMPG]

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

I would have to agree that if certain cachers have a reputation for that type of action (and I mean the bogus logs and not the stealing of the cache) then I'd watch, too. But that reputation would proceed them. Kind of like a baseball player convicted of steroid use, they can flash all kinds of numbers in your face, but how much weight does it carry?

[+infiniteMPG]

Good, then I'll assume you agree with my point.

Yup, but when the guidelines state Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. I take a little issue with the term appear to be bogus. I think I would handle this with care as I would rather allow 100 bogus logs then delete 1 valid one. If I saw someone logged a find and then I did a maintenance run and saw no signature, I'd approach the cacher before I'd delete the log. Maybe they could validate the find (with a different twist to most of my hides this wouldn't take much more then "What was the container?" being asked). I just don't see myself going out of my way to see if a valid looking log is valid or not.

 

As stated before, someone entering "TFTH - Nice cache!" as a log entry pasted into a dozen of my caches would send up a flag long before someone who actually took the time and effort to post an actual log entry unique to that cache.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

I would have to agree that if certain cachers have a reputation for that type of action (and I mean the bogus logs and not the stealing of the cache) then I'd watch, too. But that reputation would proceed them. Kind of like a baseball player convicted of steroid use, they can flash all kinds of numbers in your face, but how much weight does it carry?

With this group, every time they cache in a area were I have caches some of my cache seem to vanish.

I have even had ammo boxes chained and locked to trees vanish.

[+Jeep_Dog]

Now I waste half of my spare time researching caches that don't take me to parking lots, housing tracts, dumps, bum outhouses, pickle parks, and any other place where you have to ask yourself, "Why the hell would a geocachers share this place with me?"

 

Kit Fox, that is probably more poignant than anything I have seen lately. It now takes me an inordinate amount of time to find appropriate and meaningful caches when I am doing the activity as a family-oriented event.

 

Just because a location could have a cache doesn't mean it has to have a cache. For the likes of me, I do not understand why some folks feel the need to place caches - to stroke their egos that they "own" something in geocaching?

 

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand -

 

1) The standards do seem to be slipping;

2) Cache owners are allowing "bogus" logs despite agreeing to the guidelines each time they submit a cache or update the cache that they will not allow such "bogus" activities;

3) TPTB will not usurp cache owner hegemony, which seems the only way to police up caches owned by folks who refuse to enforce the guidelines.

4) The problem seems as if it will not go away since neither the collective whole of cache owners nor the listing site will take responsibility to enforce the written standards (our espoused values).

 

When groups' actions in practice do not meet espoused values, failure normally follows. What will the failure for geocaching be? Hard to tell.

[+TeamGumbo]

When groups' actions in practice do not meet espoused values, failure normally follows. What will the failure for geocaching be? Hard to tell.

 

Great...you made me cry. Way to go, man.

 

 

 

 

(and just in case...)

 

[+egami]

Good, then I'll assume you agree with my point.

Yup, but when the guidelines state Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. I take a little issue with the term appear to be bogus. I think I would handle this with care as I would rather allow 100 bogus logs then delete 1 valid one. If I saw someone logged a find and then I did a maintenance run and saw no signature, I'd approach the cacher before I'd delete the log. Maybe they could validate the find (with a different twist to most of my hides this wouldn't take much more then "What was the container?" being asked). I just don't see myself going out of my way to see if a valid looking log is valid or not.

 

As stated before, someone entering "TFTH - Nice cache!" as a log entry pasted into a dozen of my caches would send up a flag long before someone who actually took the time and effort to post an actual log entry unique to that cache.

 

That's fine, your contention as I see it is more with the guidelines than my position...again, I am not stating you're wrong...feel free to maintain, or not maintain, a cache as you deem appropriate.

 

It's just that some are seemingly suggesting that deleting bogus logs aren't part of cache maintenance when in fact quite the opposite is true.

[+infiniteMPG]

With this group, every time they cache in a area were I have caches some of my cache seem to vanish.

I have even had ammo boxes chained and locked to trees vanish.

Sounds like time for a geocaching stake-out. Post a cache that the container sounds totally amazing and make a day of scum-cacher hunting....

 

Wasn't too long ago a few of Florida's finest (highway patrol) were near a stage of a multi-cache of mine when some cachers were seeking it. The cachers explianed geocaching but had to leave before finishing. Later that day they bumped into them again at a restaurant where one of the officers said not to search for it as they took it and they all laughed. I went out the next day and the final was gone. Not sure if it was coincidence but sure didn't sit too well with me.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Good, then I'll assume you agree with my point.

Yup, but when the guidelines state Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements. I take a little issue with the term appear to be bogus. I think I would handle this with care as I would rather allow 100 bogus logs then delete 1 valid one. If I saw someone logged a find and then I did a maintenance run and saw no signature, I'd approach the cacher before I'd delete the log. Maybe they could validate the find (with a different twist to most of my hides this wouldn't take much more then "What was the container?" being asked). I just don't see myself going out of my way to see if a valid looking log is valid or not.

 

As stated before, someone entering "TFTH - Nice cache!" as a log entry pasted into a dozen of my caches would send up a flag long before someone who actually took the time and effort to post an actual log entry unique to that cache.

On one of my recent log deletions I was notified by another cacher that there was a problem with a cache that I had just replaced. I went to check the cache the next day (a 90 mile drive, one way)

The cache had been tampered with, the cache required a special tool to get the container with the log out.

I sent the finder 3 e-mails asking how he got the container out. He would not reply. So I deleted his log. guess what, now he sends me and e-mail asking why I deleted his find and he re logs his find.

He said he did not remember how he got the container out and challenged me to recall each of the five finds I had that same day, so I told how I found each one, and I deleted his find again.

I got these guys thinking I am crazy enough to drive 90 miles to check a cache, Ha! I had an appointment 2 miles away that day. Ha! Now they know I am serious about checking my caches.

[+infiniteMPG]

Now I waste half of my spare time researching caches that don't take me to parking lots, housing tracts, dumps, bum outhouses, pickle parks, and any other place where you have to ask yourself, "Why the hell would a geocachers share this place with me?"

Sometimes things change. Have a cache out north of the Skyway Bridge and it was a beautiful spot when I hid the cache. Now people have totally trashed the place and it's a mess. Another was at a nice clearing in the woods at the end of old abandoned RR tracks, neat spot with a lot of history. Homeless moved in, people dumped truckloads of trash, total wasted spot now. Not all caches at cr@ppy spots started out that way. Edited January 31, 2008 by infiniteMPG

[+Team Cotati]

Now I waste half of my spare time researching caches that don't take me to parking lots, housing tracts, dumps, bum outhouses, pickle parks, and any other place where you have to ask yourself, "Why the hell would a geocachers share this place with me?"

Sometimes things change. Have a cache out north of the Skyway Bridge and it was a beautiful spot when I hid the cache. Now people have totally trashed the place and it's a mess. Another was at a nice clearing in the woods at the end of old abandoned RR tracks, neat spot with a lot of history. Homeless moved in, people dumped truckloads of trash, total wasted spot now. Not all caches at cr@ppy spots started out that way.

 

Did anyone imply that ALL such caches started out that way? From my personal observations though, I can tell you that MOST of them certainly did and that is the point.

 

And in my opinion, those caches that do exist at such cr@ppy, illegal and/or potentially dangerous locations ought to be archived. Whether you or I or anyone filters them out, is irrelevant.

 

Sometimes things do change, sometimes.

Edited January 31, 2008 by Team Cotati

[+Bad_CRC]

Now I waste half of my spare time researching caches that don't take me to parking lots, housing tracts, dumps, bum outhouses, pickle parks, and any other place where you have to ask yourself, "Why the hell would a geocachers share this place with me?"

 

Kit Fox, that is probably more poignant than anything I have seen lately. It now takes me an inordinate amount of time to find appropriate and meaningful caches when I am doing the activity as a family-oriented event.

 

Just because a location could have a cache doesn't mean it has to have a cache. For the likes of me, I do not understand why some folks feel the need to place caches - to stroke their egos that they "own" something in geocaching?

 

I'm the same way, I've given up caching in my area because there aren't any caches left that are "worth finding" to me.

 

Now, that said, there are a couple points to this that are important.

 

first- in my area, there aren't that many "good" places for a cache. Even if there weren't caches in "lame" or "Bad" areas, it wouldn't increase the number of good places for caches.

 

second - what I view as "lame" there are plenty of others who think it's great. A lampskirt? Not my thing, but there are plenty of people who can't understand why I'd want to walk through bug-infested woods or climb a rocky hill just "for fun" Different strokes.

 

I'd love a category system of some type to keep these kinds of caches in groups so urban people and wilderness people can all have caches they enjoy without sifting through other kinds they don't. I've already got micros filtered out of my pocket queries, I'd love to have the ability to only find caches in the woods.

[knowschad]

I can't believe that people would drive around and actually check the physical logs in their caches just to make sure that those that posted online had actually signed the log.

Isn't that part of a cache owner's responsibility of maintaining a cache?

 

No.

You are so wrong - from the guidelines

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically,

 

The question was specifically if driving around to check the physical logs to make sure there were no bogus online logs was a part of a cache owner's responsibility. The guideline you bolded does not even hint at that. I stand by my answer. This is not about cache maintenance, which is something that I do very well.

[+Renegade Knight]

Now I waste half of my spare time researching caches that don't take me to parking lots, housing tracts, dumps, bum outhouses, pickle parks, and any other place where you have to ask yourself, "Why the hell would a geocachers share this place with me?"

 

Kit Fox, that is probably more poignant than anything I have seen lately. It now takes me an inordinate amount of time to find appropriate and meaningful caches when I am doing the activity as a family-oriented event.

 

Just because a location could have a cache doesn't mean it has to have a cache. For the likes of me, I do not understand why some folks feel the need to place caches - to stroke their egos that they "own" something in geocaching?

 

I'm the same way, I've given up caching in my area because there aren't any caches left that are "worth finding" to me.

 

Now, that said, there are a couple points to this that are important.

 

first- in my area, there aren't that many "good" places for a cache. Even if there weren't caches in "lame" or "Bad" areas, it wouldn't increase the number of good places for caches.

 

second - what I view as "lame" there are plenty of others who think it's great. A lampskirt? Not my thing, but there are plenty of people who can't understand why I'd want to walk through bug-infested woods or climb a rocky hill just "for fun" Different strokes.

 

I'd love a category system of some type to keep these kinds of caches in groups so urban people and wilderness people can all have caches they enjoy without sifting through other kinds they don't. I've already got micros filtered out of my pocket queries, I'd love to have the ability to only find caches in the woods.

 

Back in the day I'd look at a map with all the caches on it and decide my route. Today I still do that. If the route is urban it's going to have urban kinds of caches. If it's remote it's going to have remote kinds of caches. The only thing that's different is that instead of a big loop to find some caches I can now pick a destination and find a buch in the general area. My biggest problem is that my PQ limits out before I can see all the places I can go on a day trip.

[+Bad_CRC]

 

Back in the day I'd look at a map with all the caches on it and decide my route. Today I still do that. If the route is urban it's going to have urban kinds of caches. If it's remote it's going to have remote kinds of caches. The only thing that's different is that instead of a big loop to find some caches I can now pick a destination and find a buch in the general area. My biggest problem is that my PQ limits out before I can see all the places I can go on a day trip.

 

well that is one thing that does really suck, and made me sad for a while. Back when there were more "good" caches, it was easy to just use google maps and look around for a good area. Now, there are so many urban or "bad" (to me) caches, that's not remotely possible anymore.

[+sbell111]

Do you also reserve the right to track down the bank robbers? Do you then stake out all the banks in your town so you can foil any other robberies?

Maybe not, but I certainly wouldn't be telling people "to let that poor bank robber earn a living in the manner they've chosen".

Again, I haven't suggested that cache owners don't have the right or even the obligation to take action against truly bogus logs on their caches.

Nice try, but essentially all you've said is that someone directly responsible for protecting the bank has the right or even obligation to take action against bank robbers? Yeah, I think that's pretty obvious.

My post was about caching, not banks. Please don'ttwist my positions. If you question how I stand on an issue, just ask me.

[+sbell111]

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

 

Sometimes it takes more then one person to figure out a puzzle cache. And what about a group of people caching together? You put 8 people out caching together, one person finds the cache, should they be quiet and run off somewhere and wait until each individual in the group personally finds it???

Not in my opinion.

[+Renegade Knight]

 

Back in the day I'd look at a map with all the caches on it and decide my route. Today I still do that. If the route is urban it's going to have urban kinds of caches. If it's remote it's going to have remote kinds of caches. The only thing that's different is that instead of a big loop to find some caches I can now pick a destination and find a buch in the general area. My biggest problem is that my PQ limits out before I can see all the places I can go on a day trip.

 

well that is one thing that does really suck, and made me sad for a while. Back when there were more "good" caches, it was easy to just use google maps and look around for a good area. Now, there are so many urban or "bad" (to me) caches, that's not remotely possible anymore.

 

You must be a lot more urban than I am. I tend to know the good areas that result in good caches just by looking at the map. Give a cacher the right location and they have a hard time messing up the cache.

[+sbell111]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

They may have worked out the puzzle together, some people are not very good at doing puzzles.

Two people working on a puzzle together is not the same as calling someone on the phone and asking them for the coordinates. Some people just are not very good a doing puzzles, I am one of those, so I have not done many puzzle caches.

What if they didn't work on the puzzle together?

 

Cacher A solved the puzzle. Cachers A & B went to look for the cache. Cacher A made the actual find. Both cachers signed the log and claimed the find on-line.

I have a 5 part cache that takes about 1.5 hours to do. There was a group of cachers in the area doing a cache run. They loged the find, they knew I would not believe them when they said they took the time to do a long mulit on a day of doing cache run, they said they found the final to my cache by accident while looking for another cache in the area. So I went to look, the final for my cache was gone. Gee I wonder were it went. I guess they thought I would believe them when said they were off in the search for another cache by over 500 feet, these are cacher with several thousand finds but they do not know how to use a GPS, if anyone believes that I have a big orange bridge for sale in San Fransicso.

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

I'm confused. Is it your suspicion that they didn't find the cache or that they stole it? I don't think they could have done both. Edited February 1, 2008 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

<snip>

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand -

 

1) The standards do seem to be slipping;

2) Cache owners are allowing "bogus" logs despite agreeing to the guidelines each time they submit a cache or update the cache that they will not allow such "bogus" activities;

3) TPTB will not usurp cache owner hegemony, which seems the only way to police up caches owned by folks who refuse to enforce the guidelines.

4) The problem seems as if it will not go away since neither the collective whole of cache owners nor the listing site will take responsibility to enforce the written standards (our espoused values).

...

I think you've hit the nail on the head. This is a cache owner issue.

[+egami]

It's not just a cache owner issue...the cache owner just plays a large role in the issue.

[+sbell111]

It's not just a cache owner issue...the cache owner just plays a large role in the issue.

The only person who can allow bogus logs is the cache owner.

[+tozainamboku]

 

Back in the day I'd look at a map with all the caches on it and decide my route. Today I still do that. If the route is urban it's going to have urban kinds of caches. If it's remote it's going to have remote kinds of caches. The only thing that's different is that instead of a big loop to find some caches I can now pick a destination and find a buch in the general area. My biggest problem is that my PQ limits out before I can see all the places I can go on a day trip.

 

well that is one thing that does really suck, and made me sad for a while. Back when there were more "good" caches, it was easy to just use google maps and look around for a good area. Now, there are so many urban or "bad" (to me) caches, that's not remotely possible anymore.

I don't remember there being more "good" caches back in the day. There were fewer good caches and fewer lame caches. Perhaps you mean that in some areas the ratio of good caches to lame caches has gone down. For reasons I gave in an earlier post there was a time when a higher percentage of caches would have satisfied you. Urban caches tended to take you to some place the hider wanted to share with you. Caches were more likely to be hidden in a park than in a parking lot and even for those in parking lots the cache page would explain that the cachers favorite restaurant was here or there was a great store to buy geocaching supplies here.

 

What has change are the new "urban" geocachers. They tend to hide caches because they enjoy finding caches and not because they see geocaching as something extra to do while on a hike or when visiting a new area. So there is a higher percentage of caches that seem to have no other reason for being their other than to get another smiley. Some people have difficulty accepting this change in the character of geocaching. Instead of complaining here's what you can do. Premium members can start bookmark lists of worthwhile urban caches. Start sharing with each other the caches you think are still worth doing. Then people can use these lists to find the good urban caches and ignore the lame ones. Sure someone will say they have a cool location which is only .1 miles from the nearest LPC. They can try to get the LPC owner to archive or move their cache. Many times the LPC owner will be surprisingly cooperative - after all they really didn't spend much effort on their cache. If not you can post in your log that if you walk half a block you can see whatever it is that you thought was cool. Post a picture. I' hoping that the awards system being proposed for v2 will work something like this. People will propose awards categories. Others can nominate caches for awards. When a cache gets a certain number of nominations it gets added to that award category - like a Waymarking category or a bookmark list. I could imagine that award categories will be managed by groups of geocachers like Waymarking categories are. In order to prevent ballot stuffing and other abuse the managers could remove a cache if they feel it doesn't really deserve an award.

[+JohnnyVegas]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

They may have worked out the puzzle together, some people are not very good at doing puzzles.

Two people working on a puzzle together is not the same as calling someone on the phone and asking them for the coordinates. Some people just are not very good a doing puzzles, I am one of those, so I have not done many puzzle caches.

What if they didn't work on the puzzle together?

 

Cacher A solved the puzzle. Cachers A & B went to look for the cache. Cacher A made the actual find. Both cachers signed the log and claimed the find on-line.

I have a 5 part cache that takes about 1.5 hours to do. There was a group of cachers in the area doing a cache run. They loged the find, they knew I would not believe them when they said they took the time to do a long mulit on a day of doing cache run, they said they found the final to my cache by accident while looking for another cache in the area. So I went to look, the final for my cache was gone. Gee I wonder were it went. I guess they thought I would believe them when said they were off in the search for another cache by over 500 feet, these are cacher with several thousand finds but they do not know how to use a GPS, if anyone believes that I have a big orange bridge for sale in San Fransicso.

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

I'm confused. Is it your suspicion that they didn't find the cache or that they stole it? I don't think they could have done both.

They find and steal it, in my book, if they take the cache they do not deserve the find. I caught on of them placing a film can in place of one of my caches that was missing (That is not a find) I am not the only one who has caught him doing this.

If they log the find they know I will check the log, the final is maybe 1.5 miles from my home, weather permiting I ride my bike past the final almost daily. If they they take the cache I cannot prove they did not find it.

This has been a problem I have been dealing with for almost two years, it started when I deteted on dertain person find in another cache. I find it strange I have my caches go missing when this cacher and his partners are caching in areas that my caches are placed.

Edited February 1, 2008 by JohnnyVegas

[+sbell111]

This is another version of cheating,

How about cachers that give each other the final coordinates for a puzzle of multi stage cache.

There are cachers that trade this information.

Would you have a problem if one person solved the puzzle and found the cache with his friend?

They may have worked out the puzzle together, some people are not very good at doing puzzles.

Two people working on a puzzle together is not the same as calling someone on the phone and asking them for the coordinates. Some people just are not very good a doing puzzles, I am one of those, so I have not done many puzzle caches.

What if they didn't work on the puzzle together?

 

Cacher A solved the puzzle. Cachers A & B went to look for the cache. Cacher A made the actual find. Both cachers signed the log and claimed the find on-line.

I have a 5 part cache that takes about 1.5 hours to do. There was a group of cachers in the area doing a cache run. They loged the find, they knew I would not believe them when they said they took the time to do a long mulit on a day of doing cache run, they said they found the final to my cache by accident while looking for another cache in the area. So I went to look, the final for my cache was gone. Gee I wonder were it went. I guess they thought I would believe them when said they were off in the search for another cache by over 500 feet, these are cacher with several thousand finds but they do not know how to use a GPS, if anyone believes that I have a big orange bridge for sale in San Fransicso.

I did not delete there find becuse log and cache were not there so I could not prove the logs were bogus.

They know I check any logs by this group when they log finds on my caches. One of them has been nailed in the past by me and another cacher

I'm confused. Is it your suspicion that they didn't find the cache or that they stole it? I don't think they could have done both.

If they log the find they know I will check the log, the final is maybe 1.5 miles from my home, weather permiting I ride my bike past the final almost daily. If they they take the cache I cannot prove they did not find it.

This has been a problem I have been dealing with for almost two years, it started when I deteted on dertain person find in another cache. I find it strange I have my caches go missing when this cacher and his partners are caching in areas that my caches are placed.

I understand. I was just confused before. I thought that you were taking the position that they didn't find the cache. Then, when you suggested that they stole it, I got addled.

 

Could you respond to my questions about the puzzle, please?

Edited February 1, 2008 by sbell111

[+egami]

It's not just a cache owner issue...the cache owner just plays a large role in the issue.

The only person who can allow bogus logs is the cache owner.

 

The issue of standards slipping isn't just their issue though...it's also an issue of people deciding to take actions to put an owner in that position.

 

The issue of bogus logs, specifically, can be addressed both by the cacher and the cache owner.