Are we allowing the degradation of geocaching?

[+Bad_CRC]

back again to the original post.

 

I think everybody here agrees that actions which are bad for geocaching should be eliminated where possible.

 

The only real disagreement in the topic comes in attempting to define "what is actually bad for geocaching"

 

The OP said that those who want to let others have fun are hurting geocaching.

 

Several others in the thread have said that the only purpose of this *GAME* is for the solo players to have *FUN* and those people who have elected themselves to be "Cache nazis" accomplish nothing other than to sour the game for others and in the process do far more real harm overall than any "evil rule breakers" ever could.

[+Prfctly Mad]

I haven't seen too many false logs...At least not in Physical caches. The only time I audit my logs is if it is there is an issue that has been brought up......About a year after i started someone from 300 miles away logged all the caches in my area in 2 days (bout 250 caches)... Others had complained about no logs and there was no log for this person in my cache either so I did delete his log... But other than that 1 time I have never audited logs...

[+paleolith]

The rules as most often stated are:

1. Take something from the cache

2. Leave something in the cache

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

Even these seem to get debated since they mention trading and you can't really trade in a log only micro or if you find a cache that has nothing in it but the log, geocache note, and a pencil. Note that the "rules" say nothing about logging online. ...

 

The logging of your finds on geocaching.com or any other website is not geocaching.

Your argument is:

a. geocaching is said to be 1, 2, and 3

b. but 1 and 2 don't always apply

c. therefore 4 cannot possibly apply

 

Now, as someone else has mentioned, I need to apologize for injecting logic into a perfectly good rant. But you keep citing this list, and yet your own argument shows that it's just an informal introduction, not a formal description or set of rules.

 

For me, geocaching.com is an important part of geocaching. Logging finds is part of that. If someone wants to find my caches and not log online, fine, I have no problem with that. But I won't know they exist until some future time when I retrieve the log books, and at that point I probably won't even notice that the books contain logs from cachers who didn't log online. OK, if that's the way they want it. But most of my contact with other geocachers is via gc.com, so I'm sad that I won't know about their adventures.

 

Edward

[+paleolith]

back again to the original post.

Party pooper.

 

Edward

[+Bad_CRC]

back again to the original post.

Party pooper.

 

Edward

 

[+Radnord]

All of us can only do what we can do.

 

IF IT IS TO BE IT IS UP TO ME

 

Most cachers that I know of are honest and care deeply about the continued good health of the sport. There will always be the "bad apples" and there is really nothing the rest of us can do about them here. Many sports rely on the honesty of the player and they continue to thrive because the vast majority are honest. A dishonest golfer soon finds no partners; a dishonest cacher will find no community with other cachers at events, social gatherings, e-mail exchanges, or in these forums. If the honest cachers do their part and call out those who are not, it will discourage false logs and the stealing of geocoins.

 

What is the point of logging 250 finds in two days from 300 miles away if there is no one to share that with? If a cacher logs a find and no one cares, did it really happen? Even though we log finds from the privacy of our homes, there are many local geocaching communities and an imposter will not last long in a community of people who care about geocaching.

[+Campcreekers]

If some knucklehead wants to cheat on his/her count. Why is it any of my buisness. I have 22 caches. I don't check every online entry against the logbook. Who are they cheating? Me, you, No they are cheating themselves. It must get them aroused in some way. Yes, I suppose it bothers me a little too but why don't we focus our attention to something we can make a difference in, like eliminating cheating at chess,checkers, or hopskotch.

[+briansnat]

If some knucklehead wants to cheat on his/her count. Why is it any of my buisness. I have 22 caches. I don't check every online entry against the logbook. Who are they cheating? Me, you, No they are cheating themselves. It must get them aroused in some way. Yes, I suppose it bothers me a little too but why don't we focus our attention to something we can make a difference in, like eliminating cheating at chess,checkers, or hopskotch.

 

When a person logs a "Found it" he is essentially telling the geocaching community that the cache is there. That can entice people into wasting their time searching for a cache that is missing. I know of one geocacher who was lured into a fruitless 100 mile round trip because someone logged a false find on a cache. I wasted my gas and nearly an hour of my time searching for a cache that was gone. Had I seen recent DNFs I would have chosen to hunt a different cache, but the cache had recent "found its" that turned out to be bogus.

 

It also affects cache owners. If the cache is missing, a bogus find can delay needed maintenance. A cache of mine had several DNFs and I was about to head out there and check on it when a "found it" log appeared. Great! No problem, so I don't have to worry about it. Well something about the log was fishy to me, so I checked into it and it turned out to be a phony find. There actually was a problem with the cache that I nearly ignored thanks to some liar who gets his jollies by logging fake finds.

 

So by logging phony finds uou are screwing with your fellow geocachers. This game isn't solitaire. Our actions do not occur in a vacuum. What we do can and does affect other geocachers.

[Dinoprophet]

Right, but what has become clear through the thread is that people define "visiting a cache" different ways. Some posters here -- not yourself -- have made it known that they would consider these logs fake and worth deleting. I think that kind of hardline legalism is more likely to turn people off of geocaching than the possibility that a cache owner might fail to notice a fake log online.

 

hardline legalism is more likely to turn people off of geocaching

that is fine, I do not want people that get turned off by what you call hardline legalism onvolved in geocaching. If they do not like the rules/guidelines let then go off and start their own game. These are the same people that the will decide that the guidlines for placing a cache do not apply to them, then we can all just think about the days when we use to play a game called geocaching. The game to got band becuse of some self centered **(%^

 

I'd love for hardline rules, and a gradual disappearance of all the "wish washy" geocachers. These are the same cachers who could care less about rules. They ignore posted hours, they destroy landscaping in parks, and they revolve around themselves, rather than the future of geocaching.

No, they are not the same people. I seriously doubt anyone here who is arguing that the rules of logging are flexible would dream of doing those things. This is the same argument as, "If you log online without a signature in the logbook, then you probably cheat on your taxes and wife, too". No, that does not follow.

Edited February 3, 2008 by Dinoprophet

[CoyoteRed]

No, they are not the same people. I seriously doubt anyone here who is arguing that the rules of logging are flexible would dream of doing those things.

I'm sure it's not a one-to-one correlation, but there is some overlap in my experience.

 

I'm not for hardline rules, but I'd certainly like to see a "firming up."

[+Mudfrog]

Logging online without finding anything is wrong. It has to do with honesty and integrity which should be upheld in all aspects of our lives!

You never play Monopoly with house rules such as collecting $500 for landing on Free Parking?

You never play poker with a wild card?

You never drive just a *little* over the speed limit?

You never cheat on your taxes?

You never shot a man just to watch him die?

We're talking about a hobby/game that many many people enjoy where numbers (smilies) are accumulated and that everyone sees. I realize there are gray areas in what constitutes a find for alot of people and that this in itself causes grief for some people. For instance, someone seeing the cache up in a tree but not being able to climb that tree to sign the log. Or not finding the cache but the person thinking they know where it is supposed to be and replacing it. While i don't agree with doing either of these, i guess i can see why some might choose to do them.

 

But in this thread, we're not talking about any of this gray area. The OP stated that there were cachers who logged finds online when they knowingly never found caches in his area. This is not a case of "playing the game a little differently" or "geocaching my way" where no one else is affected. This is stating untruths, showing a lack of integrity and flat out lying,,,. I just don't see how anyone here can see it any other way!

 

I'll bite and go ahead and answer your questions...

Yes, all agreed who were involved so no integrity issues to speak of. But, we would not try to make up our own little rules if alot of other players were involved.

Yes, same as above.

Yes, back when i was younger (i admit that i was wrong) and now maybe either accidently or in an emergency.

Nope, not that i know of.

and NO, not sure where this question came from and now i'm really starting to worry about you.

[Mushtang]

You never play Monopoly with house rules such as collecting $500 for landing on Free Parking?

Yes, all agreed who were involved so no integrity issues to speak of. But, we would not try to make up our own little rules if alot of other players were involved.

The way I see the issue in the OP is the same. If you play monopoly by your house rules, why should that bother me if I'm in a completely different house (state, country) playing monopoly too.

 

As you said, "all agreed who were involved". So if a California cache owner doesn't care that someone in Germany is false logging his cache (or cares so little he doesn't do anything about it), I can't see how a cacher in Georgia (me) can give a hoot. No integrity issues to speak of here either. It may be wrong by your standards to do so, so don't do it.

 

If the cache owner does care, and wants to delete the Find, then he absolutely should!

[+Mudfrog]

Looks like striving for honesty is now a character flaw.

Striving for honesty is never a character flaw, but it's a pretty futile task trying to mandate it. We all migrate towards what we like, and our hides and how we maintain them are reflections of ourselves. We each do what we think is right, but no one should expect everyone to have the same definition of what that is.

This is true for many things in life but it doesn't fly here. Those few out there who falsely log caches know darn well that they are doing wrong.

Are you sure? This thread is proof that agreement on what is a .bogus log' is not so easy to obtain. Everyone pretty much agrees that if someone didn't look for a cache, they shouldn't log it as a find. Beyond that...

I don't agree. I think everyone pretty much agrees that someone not finding the cache but logging the find online is bogus. What i see in this thread are some people saying that those who do this are not detrimental to geocaching and that they are not hurting anyone when they do it.

 

I do agree in that i do not think it is detrimental to our hobby. It doesn't occur often enough for one thing and when it does, it is usually taken care of uneventfully. Either by the owner deleting the find or that same owner not caring or, in some cases, being afraid to make the deletion. As far as hurting someone, it can certainly cause problems for the cache owner and future finders for reasons that Briansnat and others have brought up. For me personally, it's more of a integrity issue than anything and if i saw it happening firsthand, then i know in my mind that it's going to cause me to think less of the person who did it.

[+Driver Carries Cache]

As you said, "all agreed who were involved". So if a California cache owner doesn't care that someone in Germany is false logging his cache (or cares so little he doesn't do anything about it), I can't see how a cacher in Georgia (me) can give a hoot. No integrity issues to speak of here either. It may be wrong by your standards to do so, so don't do it.

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

[+Mudfrog]

You never play Monopoly with house rules such as collecting $500 for landing on Free Parking?

Yes, all agreed who were involved so no integrity issues to speak of. But, we would not try to make up our own little rules if alot of other players were involved.

The way I see the issue in the OP is the same. If you play monopoly by your house rules, why should that bother me if I'm in a completely different house (state, country) playing monopoly too.

 

As you said, "all agreed who were involved". So if a California cache owner doesn't care that someone in Germany is false logging his cache (or cares so little he doesn't do anything about it), I can't see how a cacher in Georgia (me) can give a hoot. No integrity issues to speak of here either. It may be wrong by your standards to do so, so don't do it.

 

If the cache owner does care, and wants to delete the Find, then he absolutely should!

This is what is so hard for me to understand. Not trying to argue but i don't see this as being "my standards". I try to keep an open mind and honestly try to see things from other's points of view, but this is something that i cannot see as being open to any interpretation. It's blatantly obvious that a person who logs falsely is doing wrong. How can anyone see this as being a right thing to do?

[+KBI]

When a person logs a "Found it" he is essentially telling the geocaching community that the cache is there. That can entice people into wasting their time searching for a cache that is missing. I know of one geocacher who was lured into a fruitless 100 mile round trip because someone logged a false find on a cache. I wasted my gas and nearly an hour of my time searching for a cache that was gone. Had I seen recent DNFs I would have chosen to hunt a different cache, but the cache had recent "found its" that turned out to be bogus.

 

It also affects cache owners. If the cache is missing, a bogus find can delay needed maintenance. A cache of mine had several DNFs and I was about to head out there and check on it when a "found it" log appeared. Great! No problem, so I don't have to worry about it. Well something about the log was fishy to me, so I checked into it and it turned out to be a phony find. There actually was a problem with the cache that I nearly ignored thanks to some liar who gets his jollies by logging fake finds.

 

So by logging phony finds you are screwing with your fellow geocachers. This game isn't solitaire. Our actions do not occur in a vacuum. What we do can and does affect other geocachers.

This is a good, valid and practical objection to the practice of logging bogus finds online. Your point is soundly logical, and therefore inarguable.

 

Such fake logs can mislead, frustrate, and confuse cache owners and seekers alike.

 

I don't think this is what the OP was objecting to however. I do not see your specific point as a moral issue, and therefore would not use the adjective "degrading" to describe the behavior. The OP didn’t seem to be complaining about any such practical issues when he talked about so-called "degrading" behaviors. The OP was clearly upset over what he instead saw as a moral issue.

 

If a cacher logs a find on cache he did not visit (remote logging), he may in fact cause a very real problem. If the cacher’s buddy legitimately finds the container, however, and the cacher has his buddy write his name in the log even though the cacher himself wasn’t there (team logging), then the practical objection you describe does not exist, and, other than the fact that an extra teeny bit of space in the paper log was consumed, there is no way to identify a victim.

 

Remote logging causes an actual, real, genuine problem. Team logging is only a problem in the eyes of those who choose to be offended, who become uncomfortable when observing benign behaviors that need not be any of their business, who feel abused simply because someone else is using a different, yet harmless, personal standard.

 

If there is no victim then there is no abuse. If there is no abuse then there is no basis for objection on practical grounds.

 

If there is no competition (Geocaching is not a competition) then there is no cheating. If there is no cheating then there is no "degradation."

Edited February 3, 2008 by KBI

[+Kit Fox]

Remember when..........

 

You actually put on your hiking boots, wandered onto a new trail, discovered how much you enjoy nature, got some fresh air-n-exercise, felt peaceful, found a geocache, smiled, made a legit-n-equal swap, signed your name into the log book, and smiled some more knowing you actually earned the smile?!

 

Does anyone remember actually geocaching or are you now just playing another online game?

 

Quality over quantity. It is that simple!

 

Remember when........ we said: "There isnt a geocacher that I didn't like".

 

Would you let your children play the way you do? Would you hire this type of person? Someone mentioned Character in an earlier post. Ponder that definition.

 

Remember when..................

 

The majority of my bookmarked favorite caches were hidden between 00 and 03. I think the original cachers really abided by the Language of Location. Once the "cancer of competition" infected the game, it went downhill from their.

 

As a geocachers you can improve the game by hiding great caches in great locations, and by publicly bookmarking your favorite caches. The (all time favorites) public bookmark is a great reward to give cache hiders.

 

Your post reminded me of another post written by Markwell.

 

 

I used to be in the "too many micros" camp - but I now REALLY try to keep an open mind. Someone once told me "Until you find all of the caches of the type you like to find, you shouldn't have anything to complain about." True enough. If I prefer to hunt non-micros, the site has given me the tools to weed them out. What the site it HASN'T given me the ability to weed out are caches that are full sized caches that waste my time. Let me be a little clearer before everyone jumps down my throat...

 

As many have said, and I believe to be ultimately true (and it's a change to my original thinking), a cache's quality is not directly dependent on the size of the container.

 

This is a game about location. Take a look at the top of the forum: Groundspeak: The Language of Location. Jeremy also said it here just this week: The activity used to be about the journey to discover new locations.

 

I think THAT'S what I miss most about the "good old days" in caching. I used to think it was REALLY great when someone took me to a forest preserve I had no idea was nearby, or to a cool little nook of wilderness in an area I was visiting. It was like I had a personal little tour guide telling me "There's something neat here that no one else knows about."

 

But what I've seen recently are caches placed because "there wasn't one here yet." The idea of bringing someone to a neat location has been lost.

 

It's not really Micro Spew - it's Poor Location Spew

 

HERE'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM:

 

There's nothing we can do about it.

 

Nothing.

 

 

If someone wants to place a cache that endeavors to do nothing more than bring me to a dumpster behind a gutted old store in an abandoned parking lot, they have every right to post that cache. I also have every right to do everything in my power to avoid those caches (and the right to say it was a bad experience if the cache slipped through my filters).

 

What I can do is lead by example - place caches that stand out as good locations - full of history and beauty. It doesn't matter if I place a 35mm film canister or a 55 gallon drum. The location should be interesting.

 

The problem, as I've stated in this thread already, is that if people actually like my cache, there's no way for these people to single it out as a cool cache other than the logs and bookmark lists (such as the one on my profile). But there's no way to SEARCH these bookmarks.

 

So, I patiently wait for some form of seeker rating that Jeremy had said would be considered for implementation, and I use my extensive GSAK database to try and find the best caches to find. And I hope for the best when I'm visiting an out-of-town area for finding caches.

[+Bad_CRC]

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

 

 

sure it is. "all people involved" when you are referring to geocaching is *ONE*

 

unless you get mad when your neighbor plays monopoly differently than you do, (and doesn't invite you over to play) then the example doesn't apply.

 

[+Misha]

Bud If it happens once let it be, if they are proceiding systemicly DELETE them!!!

[+JohnnyVegas]

not me

 

I think anyone that will practice of logging the same event several times because they may have found some temporary caches at that event if a pathetic loser. I have this is common practice but I think is just more BS the numbers grabing *&(^*(( practice.

Any one that would someone to log mulit BS finds for an event is also a pathetic loser.

So There

 

What about those who spell poorly or use bad grammar? Are they also considered losers? Aren't they causing pain and suffering by making others read their gibberish? That is also becoming a common practice.

 

I'll never understand why someone else's stats mean so much to other people. If the event owner doesn't want the temps logged several times it's up to them to control it just like any other cache owner. Make it known in the event description, in the temp cache logs, at registration, etc.

so what I get home after driving all day am i am stuck with my lap top with a tiny key board that I hate and I type in a hurry with out looking at what I am typing, so what, you got my point

anything I can do to turn off alpha hotel cachers that do not care about following the guidelines the Groundspeak has in place can go find some other sport/hobby. Myself, I will delete bogus logs in the future as I have in the past. If more cache owners had the brass to delete bugus logs they alpha hotel cachers just might go away.

 

Maybe someone should check some of the caches ScoutingWV has logged finds on, I think ScoutingWV is

rather upset about the prctice of deleting bugous logs.

Edited February 3, 2008 by JohnnyVegas

[+HopsMaltYeast]

I am still trying to grasp why false logging could degrade or destroy GeoCaching.

 

I understand that it is lying, cheating and wrong.

 

I understand and agree that some false logs may delay a cache owner from performing maintenance checks. This seems to be a valid concern, but does not rise to the level of destroying the sport. And besides, the cache would be missing or damaged with or without the false log.

 

But, that was not part of the OP hypothesis or concern. The concern seemed to be with the damage done by false high numbers, logging virtual caches from home or logging a find when you just drive by or having someone else sign a log for you.

 

I cannot see how that hurts the “sport” or me. This is a recreational activity. No national standings or awards are invloved.

 

Falsely claiming to have hidden a cache – I get how that hurts the sport and me. That would be a serious issue.

 

Falsifying golf scores I sort of get; it is degrading to the sport – it effects handicaps and course or club standings, but it does not effect my enjoyment of a day on the links on a given day.

 

If there is a competition on a given day/week/month or in a given area for a club or group I can see that lying about finds would affect the outcome of that particular competition.

 

But, in general, the idea that someone out there in virtual GeoCache computer land has logged 558 caches from their stinky basement computer room wearing grungy pajamas and having Cheeto crumbs on their lips without leaving home does not affect the sport or me one iota.

 

I am extremely thankful for the clever caches that I have found. I am extremely thankful for the caches that I have looked for that brought me to beautiful or interesting sites that I would probably have never visited without GeoCaching.

 

I want to thank the Geocachers that went to the trouble of placing those caches.

 

I feel a little sorry for that guy in his basement that missed out on the experiences I enjoyed, but I do not obsess on it. I hope he is happy in his world.

 

I am envious of the folks whose lives are so blissful, worry-free and problem free that they need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

Me? Worrying about whether it is OK to rotate radial tires from the left side to the right side of my car or should I just go front to back on the same side is at least 200 steps above concern over some pathetic cheater logging GeoCache finds.

 

Note: I agree that false logs are lying and wrong. When I start placing caches I will not do a systematic audit of the paper logs to the online logs. If I notice an obvious false online log I will delete it.

[+TeamGumbo]

I think false logs aren't a big deal...until they happen to a cache you placed.

[+ScoutingWV]

Maybe someone should check some of the caches ScoutingWV has logged finds on, I think ScoutingWV is

rather upset about the prctice of deleting bugous logs.

 

So you know how I feel about this, do you? Go ahead. If my account means that much to you, go right ahead and check it. Big deal. You're too busy feeling offended that you missed my point. Go ahead. Make yourself feel better.

 

Getting a bigger keyboard is going to help spelling as much as deleting logs will stop this practice. I'm not against it (as you may believe) I just don't see it stopping anything. You talk in absolutes and this game doesn't exist that way. People are going to do what they want, how they want. As a cache owner, you control whether or not you will delete any log. As a cache finder, you control whether or not you will log something you really found or not.

 

Want to question how I play or how I log and what I believe in about this game? Let's go caching together sometime and I'll show you.

[+Bad_CRC]

I would like to remind everyone that this is a light and fun sport. If you find yourself getting upset over how other people are playing the game, then you are missing the point.

 

[Mushtang]

As you said, "all agreed who were involved". So if a California cache owner doesn't care that someone in Germany is false logging his cache (or cares so little he doesn't do anything about it), I can't see how a cacher in Georgia (me) can give a hoot. No integrity issues to speak of here either. It may be wrong by your standards to do so, so don't do it.

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

Sure it has. If a cacher in California hides a cache, and a cacher in Germany false logs it, then there are TWO people involved. If they both agree that the Find can stay, then all people involved have agreed to amend the rules.

 

If the cache owner doesn't agree, he deletes the log.

 

If someone from Texas decides that the other two are playing wrong because that's how HE feels the game should be played, what does it matter? Why give Mr Texas' opinion on the matter any weight at all?

[Mushtang]

The majority of my bookmarked favorite caches were hidden between 00 and 03. I think the original cachers really abided by the Language of Location.

You mean they placed the caches using coordinates, and then published the coordinates on the web site? Because that's what the "language of location" is - longitude and latitude. It's a language that uses numbers and the letters N S E W to specify a location.

 

That's all it means. It doesn't mean "a location to hide a cache that is a nice out of the way little known area that Kit Fox would want to visit". Every single cache that has ever been listed on this site has had a location, and coordinates were used to communicate the location to cachers.

 

Once the "cancer of competition" infected the game, it went downhill from their.

From their what?

[+Driver Carries Cache]

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

 

 

sure it is. "all people involved" when you are referring to geocaching is *ONE*

 

unless you get mad when your neighbor plays monopoly differently than you do, (and doesn't invite you over to play) then the example doesn't apply.

 

 

Actually, we are all involved in Geocaching and should all be following the same guidelines/rules/principals that we all agree upon. That's what makes it a cohesive game.

 

DCC

[+ScoutingWV]

I would like to remind everyone that this is a light and fun sport. If you find yourself getting upset over how other people are playing the game, then you are missing the point.

 

 

yep.

[+tozainamboku]

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

The main difference is that Geocaching doesn't have a set of rules like Monopoly and Golf that can be ammended. When I listed the 3 rules - which aren't really rules but the instructions that Dave Ulmer gave in his original USENET post telling people what to do when they found his hidden stash - there was some controversy because these rules talk about taking something and leaving something. Obviously many people are in "violation" of these rules but that doesn't seem to cause the controversy that not signing the logbook does. What is clear is that the 3 rules don't talk about online logging - since Dave Ulmer hadn't envisioned it.

 

There isn't any stated rule about when to log a found it online. To some people, Jeremy's intent in creating a website to log your finds online is clear. Use the online logs to record your geocaching experiences, if you wish to do so. Use the Found It log when you find a cache. Use the Couldn't Find It log when you looked and couldn't find the cache. Otherwise use a Write Note.

 

The website can't tell if you are using the wrong log so it leaves this up to the cache owner. There is a very strong statement in the guidelines that the cache owner has the responsibility to maintain their cache page including 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. The site assumes that cache owners do this. You might be within your rights to record a needs maintenance or even a needs archive on a cache page where you see a cache owner not deleting bogus logs. The reviewers could then archive the cache for lack of maintenance (or force a non-consensual adoption).

 

You should however consider the historical reason for the major cause of bogus logs - armchair virtuals. Originally the website was much more open to new ideas as to what could be considered geocaching. Two of these ideas were virtuals and locationless. A virtual cache allowed you to use an existing object instead of hiding a cache. Since there was no log book, a virtual cache required some other kind of proof it was found. Usually answering a question about the object or taking a picture of the object with your GPS. Locationless caches were meant to have you go and find an example of something and record the coordinates of what you found. Locationless caches were also know as reverse caches; now they are know as Waymarking Categories. There were many people who objected to locationless and virtual caches. This was not geocaching in their opinion. Some would not log these finds. Most however accept that these were alternative games that had their place on the geocaching.com website.

 

It did not take long for someone to "hide" a virtual cache that was meant to be findable by anyone without leaving your house. You would answer a riddle or use Google to look up something about the object at some location. For awhile the site accepted these armchair virtuals. Eventually, the guidelines were changed to make it clearer that a virtual caches was someplace you needed to visit. But even with the change in guidelines, some cache owners would state that if you could find the answers to the verification question you could log the find. Armchair logging clearly became an alternate game with quite a following on Geocaching.com. The big problem came about when armchair loggers started to look for other caches that they could log. Some of them saw that some virtual owners used a password protected certificate of achievement instead of having to respond to each finder's email as to whether they met the requirements to log a find. Armchair loggers began logging any cache with a certificate of achievement. Some even felt that it was OK to use password crackers to claim a find. The guidelines were changed to make it clear that certificates of achievement were not a substitute for finding the virtual and cache owners could delete bogus log with out fear of some armchair cacher saying that he had the certificate of achievement to prove they found the cache.

 

Some cache owners wish to allow alternative games to be played with their caches. Some cache owners simple don't want to do maintenance of logs or will only do maintenance of logs when a log really looks suspicious.

 

IMO, this doesn't actually degrade geocaching. Most people are logging caches that they actually found. The logs are mostly honest. People will say when they didn't find a cache but are taking credit because they left a replacement or because the cache owner wrote them to change their DNF to a find. But owners have no way to force anyone to claim a find he isn't comfortable with. People logging armchair caches or logging a cache where they got a friend to leave their sticker in the log really have no effect on those who only log the caches they actually went to. As stated before, the few totally bogus logs can result in problems for other caches and especially for the cache owner who might postpone a planned maintenance visit because someone said they found their cache. My guess is that in these cases, if the owner can prove the log was bogus, it gets deleted. The owner is likely to not be happy that someone caused any trouble with his cache.

[+Mudfrog]

As you said, "all agreed who were involved". So if a California cache owner doesn't care that someone in Germany is false logging his cache (or cares so little he doesn't do anything about it), I can't see how a cacher in Georgia (me) can give a hoot. No integrity issues to speak of here either. It may be wrong by your standards to do so, so don't do it.

 

The main difference being that all people involved in the Monopoly example agreed to ammend the rules. That hasn't happened in geocaching.

 

DCC

Sure it has. If a cacher in California hides a cache, and a cacher in Germany false logs it, then there are TWO people involved. If they both agree that the Find can stay, then all people involved have agreed to amend the rules.

 

If the cache owner doesn't agree, he deletes the log.

 

If someone from Texas decides that the other two are playing wrong because that's how HE feels the game should be played, what does it matter? Why give Mr Texas' opinion on the matter any weight at all?

Mr Texan, hey, i resemble that remark , might just decide to go over to California and try to hunt for that cache. If the cacher lied about finding it (the cache was actually mia) and the owner let it slide without checking, then their actions would affect me. You're wrong in stating that only two people are involved since the cache was put out for everyone who caches (unless it's a PMOC) to find.

Edited February 3, 2008 by Mudfrog

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Such fake logs can mislead, frustrate, and confuse cache owners and seekers alike.

 

I don't think this is what the OP was objecting to however. I do not see your specific point as a moral issue, and therefore would not use the adjective "degrading" to describe the behavior. The OP didn’t seem to be complaining about any such practical issues when he talked about so-called "degrading" behaviors. The OP was clearly upset over what he instead saw as a moral issue.

 

Although I did mention practical issues with false logs in post #20, KBI, you are correct that I see it as more of a moral issue. However I don't agree that words such as degrade can not apply to moral issues.

 

If there is no competition (Geocaching is not a competition) then there is no cheating. If there is no cheating then there is no "degradation."

So are you suggesting that only competition can be degraded?

 

I can think of many things that might be very degrading/demeaning/shameful to various organizations such as the military, universities, corporations, etc. as a result of the negative actions of some of their members. It might be even more degrading for these organizations if some innocent members ignored, or even condoned, the negative behavior.

 

Please don't assume that I'm suggesting we take geocaching as seriously as some of the things I mentioned above, but should we have to put our principles aside because it is only a game?

[+briansnat]

I am envious of the folks whose lives are so blissful, worry-free and problem free that they need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

Judging from the number of times you've addressed this subject, your life is so blissful, worry-free and problem free that you have a need to be concerned about those who have a need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

Edited February 3, 2008 by briansnat

[+Kit Fox]

The majority of my bookmarked favorite caches were hidden between 00 and 03. I think the original cachers really abided by the Language of Location.

You mean they placed the caches using coordinates, and then published the coordinates on the web site? Because that's what the "language of location" is - longitude and latitude. It's a language that uses numbers and the letters N S E W to specify a location.

 

That's all it means. It doesn't mean "a location to hide a cache that is a nice out of the way little known area that Kit Fox would want to visit". Every single cache that has ever been listed on this site has had a location, and coordinates were used to communicate the location to cachers.

 

Once the "cancer of competition" infected the game, it went downhill from their.

From their what?

 

* Fake found it logs for the purpose of increasing your find count. Found it = didn't find it

* Power cachers who spend 3 minutes looking for a cache, then place their own cache when they can't find it, just so they aren't denied a smiley for their "effort."

* Placement of non GC approved caches which are then logged as "attended event" to further increase find counts

*Pocket caches

*Geocoin Sheets passed around to increase trackable stats

*Micro spew / Lame Location spew (not to be confused with creative caches hidden in creative locations)

*FTF seekers who ignore posted signs, hours, etc, so they can be FTF and pound their chest.

[+HopsMaltYeast]

I am envious of the folks whose lives are so blissful, worry-free and problem free that they need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

Judging from the number of times you've addressed this subject, your life is so blissful, worry-free and problem free that you have a need to be concerned about those who have a need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

touche

[+briansnat]

The majority of my bookmarked favorite caches were hidden between 00 and 03. I think the original cachers really abided by the Language of Location.

You mean they placed the caches using coordinates, and then published the coordinates on the web site? Because that's what the "language of location" is - longitude and latitude. It's a language that uses numbers and the letters N S E W to specify a location.

 

That's all it means. It doesn't mean "a location to hide a cache that is a nice out of the way little known area that Kit Fox would want to visit". Every single cache that has ever been listed on this site has had a location, and coordinates were used to communicate the location to cachers.

 

Once the "cancer of competition" infected the game, it went downhill from their.

From their what?

 

* Fake found it logs for the purpose of increasing your find count. Found it = didn't find it

* Power cachers who spend 3 minutes looking for a cache, then place their own cache when they can't find it, just so they aren't denied a smiley for their "effort."

* Placement of non GC approved caches which are then logged as "attended event" to further increase find counts

*Pocket caches

*Geocoin Sheets passed around to increase trackable stats

*Micro spew / Lame Location spew (not to be confused with creative caches hidden in creative locations)

*FTF seekers who ignore posted signs, hours, etc, so they can be FTF and pound their chest.

 

You forgot retirement cards.

[+HopsMaltYeast]

I am envious of the folks whose lives are so blissful, worry-free and problem free that they need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

Judging from the number of times you've addressed this subject, your life is so blissful, worry-free and problem free that you have a need to be concerned about those who have a need to be concerned about the geek in dirty PJ’s in his mom’s basement falsely logging cache finds.

 

touche

 

Oh, and the next time your Mom comes down to the basement with clean jammies and to pick up the empty Cheetos bags tell her I sad hello. ;-)

[+KBI]

Such fake logs can mislead, frustrate, and confuse cache owners and seekers alike.

 

I don't think this is what the OP was objecting to however. I do not see your specific point as a moral issue, and therefore would not use the adjective "degrading" to describe the behavior. The OP didn’t seem to be complaining about any such practical issues when he talked about so-called "degrading" behaviors. The OP was clearly upset over what he instead saw as a moral issue.

Although I did mention practical issues with false logs in post #20, KBI, you are correct that I see it as more of a moral issue. However I don't agree that words such as degrade can not apply to moral issues.

That's not what I said at all. I said the word degrade implies a moral issue.

 

I was simply agreeing with Briansnat's objection, and pointing out that his objection was a practical objection, not a moral objection.

 

If there is no competition (Geocaching is not a competition) then there is no cheating. If there is no cheating then there is no "degradation."

So are you suggesting that only competition can be degraded?

Not exactly. I’m saying that if one person lies about finding another person's ammo can in the woods, it simply doesn’t matter to anyone else on a moral level – unless that third party chooses to be bothered. One can choose to be offended by anything, but the mere fact that one has chosen to be offended by a thing doesn't make the thing bad.

 

Here is what my thesaurus gives as synonyms for the word "degrade:" humiliate, shame, disgrace, demean, debase, corrupt.

 

You and I are both Geocachers. If you log an online find for a cache that your buddy found even though you weren’t with him when he found it, I cannot see how your action would cause me to be humiliated, shamed, disgraced, demeaned, debased, or corrupted. I therefore do not see how the game as a whole could be similarly affected. Geocaching is, therefore, not "deraded" by your fib.

 

Internet dictionaries define "degrade" as: to bring to low esteem or into disrepute; to lower in dignity, dishonor or disgrace; to lower in moral or intellectual character; to reduce in worth or value.

 

None of those things apply to me when someone else logs a team find to his individual account without actually having visited the cache. If you "team log" a find, your action does not affect my esteem. It does not reduce the worth or value of the game to me. It does not dishonor or disgrace any of my existing or future finds. It does not "degrade" Geocaching.

 

I can think of many things that might be very degrading/demeaning/shameful to various organizations such as the military, universities, corporations, etc. as a result of the negative actions of some of their members. It might be even more degrading for these organizations if some innocent members ignored, or even condoned, the negative behavior.

 

Please don't assume that I'm suggesting we take geocaching as seriously as some of the things I mentioned above, but should we have to put our principles aside because it is only a game?

Geocaching is nothing but finding hidden containers using GPS. That’s all it is. It's something to do for fun. It only becomes more than that if you make it more than that.

 

If I lie about being with my buddy when he finds a box of trinkets in the woods, it doesn’t make any more difference than if I write something in my personal diary that isn’t true. The only person I’m cheating when I lie in my diary is me. If that’s the way I like to entertain myself, why should anyone else care? What difference does it make to you what I write in my diary? The only difference between my diary and my online cache log is that the cache owner might object to the way I log. Most cache owners don’t seem to care if one cacher makes the entry in the paper log for a group, present or not, who then logs their finds online individually. I know I don’t. Those owners who DO object are within their rights to police their cache page as they see fit, but it’s really nobody else’s business, because there is absolutely no reason for it to matter to anyone else.

 

I don’t give a flying handshake what anyone else writes in their diary or how they log their own cache finds. Not only does it NOT dishonor me, disgrace me, or affect my esteem – it's not even on my radar. I don't care. All I’m concerned with is my own diary and my own finds.

 

If someone is unclear, sloppy or innacurate with the way they document their own finds, yet you allow that person's differing standards to make you feel "degraded," then you are giving that person's actions way more control over your own happiness than they deserve.

 

I am not promoting such bogus logs. I am only pointing out that, unless they cause practical problems like what Briansnat described, they simply don’t matter.

Edited February 4, 2008 by KBI

[+sbell111]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

[+BlueDeuce]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

 

No merit badge for you.

[+Renegade Knight]

Geocaching is nothing but finding hiden containers using GPS. That’s all it is. ....

 

Excellent summary. I agree. Thus if someone were not even looking for the box, they ain't caching. So their log such as it is, is really about some other activity and would best be logged on whatever other site is accepting those kinds of logs.

 

It really is simple when you break it down to the basics.

 

fakelogging.com looks to be available for anyone who wants to make a go of it.

Edited February 4, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+TrailGators]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

[+Mudfrog]

Geocaching is nothing but finding hiden containers using GPS. That’s all it is. It's something to do for fun. It only becomes more than that if you make it more than that.

You are way off base with this! Well, unless you actually do only find those hidden containers and never interact with other cachers in any way.

 

However, for alot of us, i'd even say the majority of us, geocaching is much more than just the finding of a hidden container with a GPSr. It's a hobby that incorporates many social aspects with it such as interaction through cache logs, going out with good friends, helping someone you don't even know with cache repairs, throwing and attending events, and even, quibbling back and forth here in the forums.

 

Because of this social aspect, the conduct and morals of others do enter into the equation and will sometimes be called into question.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

That's not what I said at all. I said the word degrade implies a moral issue.

I misread what you wrote. Sorry, my fault.

 

As for the rest of what you wrote, I certainly understand your opinions, and even agree with them in many respects. But we may have to agree to disagree on our opinion as to what might cause the degradation of geocaching.

 

I know that I personally have less of an opinion of the geocaching community than I once did, and I know of some fellow cachers that feel the same way (per actual discussions). I also know why we feel this way. If we chose to feel this way, we certainly did not set out to do so.

[+BlueDeuce]

Geocaching is nothing but finding hiden containers using GPS. That’s all it is. It's something to do for fun. It only becomes more than that if you make it more than that.

You are way off base with this! Well, unless you actually do only find those hidden containers and never interact with other cachers in any way.

 

However, for alot of us, i'd even say the majority of us, geocaching is much more than just the finding of a hidden container with a GPSr. It's a hobby that incorporates many social aspects with it such as interaction through cache logs, going out with good friends, helping someone you don't even know with cache repairs, throwing and attending events, and even, quibbling back and forth here in the forums.

 

Because of this social aspect, the conduct and morals of others do enter into the equation and will sometimes be called into question.

 

Yes, the community is a very big part of geocaching.

[+sbell111]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Cheat? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

Edited February 4, 2008 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Why are you calling me a cheater? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

I never said that you did. I was pointing out that you didn't degrade the game if you did cheat. Edited February 4, 2008 by TrailGators

[+BlueDeuce]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Why are you calling me a cheater? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

 

Yeah I know, some of us saw that coming.

 

So..how was it?

[+sbell111]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Why are you calling me a cheater? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

Yeah I know, some of us saw that coming.

 

So..how was it?

It was OK.

 

The cache was one of those where you have to go into a business and ask for the cache.

 

The cache owner listed the hours of operation and I showed up during those hours. Unfortunately, they changed their operating hours for the winter. They are now closed on Sundays.

 

I spotted the cache behind the counter and photographed it through the window. I logged it as a find and sent the owner an email explaining everything and offering to change it to a note, if he preferred.

Edited February 4, 2008 by sbell111

[+BlueDeuce]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Why are you calling me a cheater? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

Yeah I know, some of us saw that coming.

 

So..how was it?

It was OK.

 

The cache was one of those where you have to go into a business and ask for the cache.

 

The cache owner listed the hours of operation and I showed up during those hours. Unfortunately, they changed their operating hours for the winter. They are now closed on Sundays.

 

I spotted the cache behind the counter and photographed it through the window. I logged it as a find and sent the owner an email explaining everything and offering to change it to a note, if he preferred.

 

Ah, so it was bogus. My bad.

 

edit: and yes I am fully aware I am giving you posting fodder.

 

Still bogus.

Edited February 4, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[+TrailGators]

I degraded the game today.

 

I logged a find on a cache of which I did not sign the log.

 

I don't feel at all bad.

I don't think you degraded the game. I think you degraded yourself. Some people cheat at poker but does that make it a lesser game?

Why are you calling me a cheater? I never said that I cheated. In fact, I didn't.

Yeah I know, some of us saw that coming.

 

So..how was it?

It was OK.

 

The cache was one of those where you have to go into a business and ask for the cache.

 

The cache owner listed the hours of operation and I showed up during those hours. Unfortunately, they changed their operating hours for the winter. They are now closed on Sundays.

 

I spotted the cache behind the counter and photographed it through the window. I logged it as a find and sent the owner an email explaining everything and offering to change it to a note, if he preferred.

I figured that you found a virtual....