Jump to content

Are we allowing the degradation of geocaching?


Followers 5

Recommended Posts

My buddy was frustrated one day and threw his ball a couple of times, (and his putter into the woods). Although we weren't competing, I know that some in our group got tired of it.
Then golf with someone else. And if your buddy does it next week when you're not in his foresome it has absolutely no affect on you or the game of golf....

 

We're turning so many circles here we're just about worn thru to the backside of the forums....

 

Fake logs have little to no direct affect on any of the 46,057 geocahers. People who enter fake logs are either cheating themselves out of the fun of GC or playing some other way that brings them fun. If the game of GC is degraded in anyone's eyes then it's more an issue of one's perception of the situation then the actual conditions of the game.

 

Ahhhh... page 30... time to rest.

Edited by infiniteMPG
Link to comment
The fact that you can list the sandbox rules yourself proves my point:
Yup, proves that *I* had rules for *MY* kids. Did not have *ANY* impact on *ANY* other kids in the sandbox. There was no universal sandbox rules that applied to everyone. And even with my rules, at times my kids got hurt, hurt someone else, and sometimes didn't have a lot of fun. But we kept going to the sandbox, kept playing, and no one felt degraded.
We all need rules.
"If you obey all the rules, you'll miss all the fun." ~Katherine Hepburn

 

Do you ever break the posted speed limit?

Do you ever not come to a complete stop before turing right on red?

Do you ever fail to use your turn signal properly?

 

And these aren't just rules. They're laws. Do you obey them 100% all the time?

Too Tall John's driving habits are completely irrelevant to the position he took that rules are necessary.
Since he is also arguing that the rules must be followed, his driving habits might indeed be relevant.
Where is he arguing that the rules must be followed?
Is it your position that TTJ wants rules, but that he doesn't care whether people follow them, or not

I don't know Too Tall John well enough to know whether he cares if people follow the rules or not. He probably does care. But my point was that whether or not he himself follows all the rules neither supports nor negates his position that some rules are necessary.

 

Also, it does not logically follow that even if someone does believe in both the need for rules and personal adherence to the rules in one endeavor (such as geocaching, or playing in a sandbox), that same person believes in absolute personal adherence to the rules in a completely different endeavor (driving).

Link to comment

...If I go to the bowling alley this afternoon, I am unlikely to suffer the same selfish behavior. Also, if I go to a different bowling alley, I'm unlikely to experience it.

 

It doesn't happen often enough to make an impact on the game, itself....

 

For you then, it's an issue of magnitude. At the current magnitude that you have seen, it's not enough to make the call.

Not really. what I'm saying is that for there to be degragation to the game, then the game must have changed in a readily apparent way. For instance, if a rule was enacted that required all finders of all caches to obtain a code word from each cache to verify their finds, then these actions would have been shown to affect a change and degraded the game....

 

First the game would have been degraded before the codeword action. The point of action is when the magnitude of the problem was enough for those who make those kindes of rules.

 

In your bowling example if all bowlers failed to show the courtesy due the bowlers in the adjoning lane and the numbers of bolwers starts dropping off (for me it's the crying kids in the movies...which is why I rent more these days) there is a degradation. Long before a rule would kick in. (or an usher would herd the errant parents out the door).

 

In my area bogus logs have reached a level that caused a change. Nothing official. Just in our behaviors as cache owners. In our case the logs are not a numbers game as some think are the only reason for bogus logs.

 

Based on what you said, I do think it's a magnitude problem and the only thing is to define for you where it's at. You said a rule change is your point of notice. Obviously my point of noticing is long before a rule change kicks in, but my focus is any one cache and not so much the entire activity.

Link to comment

[Not really. what I'm saying is that for there to be degragation to the game, then the game must have changed in a readily apparent way. For instance, if a rule was enacted that required all finders of all caches to obtain a code word from each cache to verify their finds, then these actions would have been shown to affect a change and degraded the game.

 

However, that's not the case. What is going on is the same activities that have been going on for seven or so years. It hasn't even been shown to be happening in a greater percentage of logs. I suspect that it is actually happening at a much lower percentage than in the past. (Of course, when you are still talking about a small percentage of 1% of the logs, why would that matter?)

 

I'd be willing to bet that at the outset of geocaching, there we relatively very few false logs. I'd also guess that when false logs did start ocurring, the false loggers would at least try to conceal the fact they were doing it. When I now see false loggers acknowledging they do it in forums, and others defending their actions as "their way of geocaching", I get a little bit concerned of the snowball effect.

 

I agree 1% is low, and if the 1% is primarily skulkers hiding their actions, then I'm not so concerned. However if the 1% is people publicly demonstrating their actions, and receiving support from others, then that 1% is going to grow much quicker.

Link to comment
The acid test for a fake log is much more black and white than the slop in most cars odomoters that we use to tell if we are speeding.

The people that fly by me like I'm standing still when I'm already exceeding the posted speed aren't doing it because of mechanical fluctuations in the gearing of their spedometers.

 

The issue is that you cannot expect people in general (and last I checked GC is filled with people in general) to follow GC guidelines any more tightly then people in general follow ANY rules or guidelines as well as harshly punishable laws. There WILL be some that manage to get around any rules/guidelines/laws.

 

We have 46,047 geocachers so you can expect some that don't follow them and some that just plain ol' find joy in breaking as many rules as they can. If anything becomes a big problem you deal with it. Nothing posted in 30 pages of this thread shows that fakes log are even more then a minor inconvienience and basically only affect the purity of the game. So asking if they degrade the game has about as much validity as asking if people signing logs with pencils degrade the game.

 

>>>> No, fake logs don't degrade GC.

Link to comment
In my area bogus logs have reached a level that caused a change. Nothing official. Just in our behaviors as cache owners. In our case the logs are not a numbers game as some think are the only reason for bogus logs.
Did the fake logs cause a problem or was the problem just the fact you had people posting fake logs, you didn't want them posted to your caches so you had to delete them? Did something bad happen because of the fake logs?
Link to comment
However, if we allow things to get as bad as 50% on geocaching.com, then I would probably begin using one of the many other geocaching websites that either exist, or would be created by others who don't agree with false logging (or hopefully someone would have created www.falselogging.com by then).
You think if false logging was that bad on GC it wouldn't be as bad everywhere else? And if you didn't even know it existed unless you dug in deep to find out, then what's the problem?

I think if other sites were created to specifically discourage false logging, then it wouldn't be as bad. I think I'd know it existed long before it reached 50%.

Link to comment
You lost me. What GC "guidelines" are you talking about? :lol:
Therefore, the rules are very simple:

- Take something from the cache

- Leave something in the cache

- Write about it in the logbook

 

I think we're defining a fake log as a log entered on the website and not written in the log book....

Link to comment
My buddy was frustrated one day and threw his ball a couple of times, (and his putter into the woods). Although we weren't competing, I know that some in our group got tired of it. The Marshall also caught him and asked him to stop throwing his ball.
Then golf with someone else. And if your buddy does it next week when you're not in his foresome it has absolutely no affect on you or the game of golf....

Hmmm...I wonder why the Marshall didn't just use your solution and golf with someone else?

Link to comment
I think if other sites were created to specifically discourage false logging, then it wouldn't be as bad. I think I'd know it existed long before it reached 50%.
If you were a puritan at golf and played without sparing a single penalty stroke or even bending a rule, would you still enjoy playing if every other person playing before you and after you cheated their score and didn't follow the rules?

 

If it even was a problem, the only thing that could be done to prevent false logs would be to put more requirements on the cachers and on the owners like a code or something verifiable, but even that could be shared and cheated around (and definitely would be by some). You will never stop it any more then the music industry can stop copying MP3's and they spend billion$ trying.

 

Geocaching is not being degraded by fake logs, they're just part of the dark side of GC that we owners have to deal with as we run across them, just like we do with un-hid containers, damaged caches, full logs, weather, wet contents, missing tracklables, muggled caches, construction, and other things like that. None degrade caching any more then any others, dealing with them is part of maintenance. And just like any of the others, the owners have the right to deal with these as they see fit.

Link to comment

...If I go to the bowling alley this afternoon, I am unlikely to suffer the same selfish behavior. Also, if I go to a different bowling alley, I'm unlikely to experience it.

 

It doesn't happen often enough to make an impact on the game, itself....

 

For you then, it's an issue of magnitude. At the current magnitude that you have seen, it's not enough to make the call.

Not really. what I'm saying is that for there to be degragation to the game, then the game must have changed in a readily apparent way. For instance, if a rule was enacted that required all finders of all caches to obtain a code word from each cache to verify their finds, then these actions would have been shown to affect a change and degraded the game....

 

First the game would have been degraded before the codeword action. The point of action is when the magnitude of the problem was enough for those who make those kindes of rules.

 

In your bowling example if all bowlers failed to show the courtesy due the bowlers in the adjoning lane and the numbers of bolwers starts dropping off (for me it's the crying kids in the movies...which is why I rent more these days) there is a degradation. Long before a rule would kick in. (or an usher would herd the errant parents out the door).

 

In my area bogus logs have reached a level that caused a change. Nothing official. Just in our behaviors as cache owners. In our case the logs are not a numbers game as some think are the only reason for bogus logs.

 

Based on what you said, I do think it's a magnitude problem and the only thing is to define for you where it's at. You said a rule change is your point of notice. Obviously my point of noticing is long before a rule change kicks in, but my focus is any one cache and not so much the entire activity.

Clearly, I'm not adequately describing my position, but basically I agree with you. However, I have not seen an increase in bogus logs that would require anything more than an owner maintaining his/her cache, just as he had for the last several years.

 

<Edited to add that I have not seen an increase in this behavior. My post was unclear on this.>

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
I think if other sites were created to specifically discourage false logging, then it wouldn't be as bad. I think I'd know it existed long before it reached 50%.
If you were a puritan at golf and played without sparing a single penalty stroke or even bending a rule, would you still enjoy playing if every other person playing before you and after you cheated their score and didn't follow the rules?

 

If it even was a problem, the only thing that could be done to prevent false logs would be to put more requirements on the cachers and on the owners like a code or something verifiable, but even that could be shared and cheated around (and definitely would be by some). You will never stop it any more then the music industry can stop copying MP3's and they spend billion$ trying.

 

Geocaching is not being degraded by fake logs, they're just part of the dark side of GC that we owners have to deal with as we run across them, just like we do with un-hid containers, damaged caches, full logs, weather, wet contents, missing tracklables, muggled caches, construction, and other things like that. None degrade caching any more then any others, dealing with them is part of maintenance. And just like any of the others, the owners have the right to deal with these as they see fit.

Link to comment

[Not really. what I'm saying is that for there to be degragation to the game, then the game must have changed in a readily apparent way. For instance, if a rule was enacted that required all finders of all caches to obtain a code word from each cache to verify their finds, then these actions would have been shown to affect a change and degraded the game.

 

However, that's not the case. What is going on is the same activities that have been going on for seven or so years. It hasn't even been shown to be happening in a greater percentage of logs. I suspect that it is actually happening at a much lower percentage than in the past. (Of course, when you are still talking about a small percentage of 1% of the logs, why would that matter?)

 

I'd be willing to bet that at the outset of geocaching, there we relatively very few false logs. I'd also guess that when false logs did start ocurring, the false loggers would at least try to conceal the fact they were doing it. When I now see false loggers acknowledging they do it in forums, and others defending their actions as "their way of geocaching", I get a little bit concerned of the snowball effect.

 

I agree 1% is low, and if the 1% is primarily skulkers hiding their actions, then I'm not so concerned. However if the 1% is people publicly demonstrating their actions, and receiving support from others, then that 1% is going to grow much quicker.

First of all, I believe that there are still 'relatively very few false logs'. Further, I believe that, as a percentage of all logs, there is fewer false logs now than there used to be. Finally, I believe that the percentage of false logs is much less than 1% of all logs.
Link to comment
Hmmm...I wonder why the Marshall didn't just use your solution and golf with someone else?
The Marshall had one goal in mind, protecting the financial interest for the golf course and keep play flowing and not allowing anything that would keep people from returning to add to the course's bank account. If he witnessed it or it was reported to him he would do soemthing about it, if not he'd never know. And if it was bad enough he would kick people out. But the golf course would not be putting a Marshall in every cart to assure that breaking of the rules never happens nor would they make it so hard nosed that if you did break the rules you'd be kicked out, people would find another course to play on and give their money to...

 

.....in other words he is solely there for the protection of the golf course's property and financial welbeing and not there one spec for the prtotection of the sanctity of the game of golf (and couldn't care less about the rules, either).

Edited by infiniteMPG
Link to comment

Geocaching is not being degraded by fake logs

 

We've already shown that it is, but just not badly enough for you to care. The golf analogy is bad because someone else cheating does not affect the people golfing behind them.. A fake log can affect those caching behind them.

 

This has already been established, we just disagree on the "level" of degradation.

Link to comment

....Clearly, I'm not adequately describing my position, but basically I agree with you. However, I have not seen an increase in bogus logs that would require anything more than an owner maintaining his/her cache, just as he had for the last several years.

 

<Edited to add that I have not seen an increase in this behavior. My post was unclear on this.>

 

At this point we are hashing the meanings of a few words, but I'm fairly sure that I do understand your position now.

 

In spite of any real differences in position, we have the same solution in mind. Things are fine the way they are.

Link to comment
You lost me. What GC "guidelines" are you talking about? :lol:
Therefore, the rules are very simple:

- Take something from the cache

- Leave something in the cache

- Write about it in the logbook

 

I think we're defining a fake log as a log entered on the website and not written in the log book....

Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.

Link to comment
In my area bogus logs have reached a level that caused a change. Nothing official. Just in our behaviors as cache owners. In our case the logs are not a numbers game as some think are the only reason for bogus logs.
Did the fake logs cause a problem or was the problem just the fact you had people posting fake logs, you didn't want them posted to your caches so you had to delete them? Did something bad happen because of the fake logs?

 

Short version. Picture the logging equivilent of a forum troll backed up with the activly employed abiltiy to muck with the caches on the ground.

Link to comment

Geocaching is not being degraded by fake logs

 

We've already shown that it is, but just not badly enough for you to care. The golf analogy is bad because someone else cheating does not affect the people golfing behind them.. A fake log can affect those caching behind them.

 

This has already been established, we just disagree on the "level" of degradation.

Fine. Let's put it this way, then:

 

Geocaching is not being degraded by false logs any more than it was degraded by false logs over the last seven years.

Link to comment
In my area bogus logs have reached a level that caused a change. Nothing official. Just in our behaviors as cache owners. In our case the logs are not a numbers game as some think are the only reason for bogus logs.
Did the fake logs cause a problem or was the problem just the fact you had people posting fake logs, you didn't want them posted to your caches so you had to delete them? Did something bad happen because of the fake logs?

 

Short version. Picture the logging equivilent of a forum troll backed up with the activly employed abiltiy to muck with the caches on the ground.

The armchair logger/cache maggot combo platter?

Link to comment

I'll have to agree that the people who post false logs are not geocaching. I have referred to some of this as playing an alternative game. True, throwing a golf ball instead of using your clubs is not golf and certainly a golf course owner would be within his rights to chase you off his course if he found you playing that instead of golf. If you were playing golf and simply had a rule that allowed a certain number of mulligans, the golf course owner may not mind.

 

If a cache owner doesn't want people to use his cache for playing an alternative game, they are allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to delete the bogus logs. If the cache owner wants to permit the alternative game it does not affect anyone who enjoys actually geocaching and finding the cache. No matter how many armchair logs are made on a virtual I can still find it - so long as the cache owner is maintaining his cache by visiting the website at least once a month and doesn't decide to archive his cache instead of maintaining it. A false log on a missing cache may cause me to look for a cache that's not there but if the cache is there it probably won't affect my ability to find it.

 

It seem to me the issue is what role the online logs play in geocaching. Some people seem to feel that online logging is integral to geocaching. Therefore use of the logs for alternative games is degrading the logs. Way way back on the first page of this thread, I made the comment that if this is true then we should be worried about people who actually find caches and sign the physical cache log but never log their finds online. The reaction was how could someone who doesn't report their finds online degrade the logs. I would suspect the if you wanted to look up answers to a virtual and post the certificate of achievement in your personal blog instead of on geocaching.com and then add the cache to your ignore list, people wouldn't care, because the Geocaching online log would still be preserved.

 

I have come to the conclusion that the people who believe false found logs degrade geocaching are confusing the online log with geocaching. If you never use the online log you can play any game you want but the the online logs are the official record of geocaching. It would be like an official scorer at a baseball game recording balls and strikes for pitches that were never thrown. The people who don't see false found logs as degrading geocaching see the online logs for what they are - a service provided by Geocaching.com for cachers and cache owners to record their caching experience. The online log is not an official record, instead is more like a shared geocaching blog. Cachers are free to use any type of log they feel comfortable using when writing about their caching (or alternative) experience with the caveat the a cache owner can delete logs that he feels are inappropriate. (Some use the found it log to be able to filter out the caches they have "completed" in whatever alternative game they are playing.)

 

Official record or shared geocaching blog? Which side are you on?

Link to comment

Geocaching is not being degraded by fake logs

 

We've already shown that it is, but just not badly enough for you to care. The golf analogy is bad because someone else cheating does not affect the people golfing behind them.. A fake log can affect those caching behind them.

 

This has already been established, we just disagree on the "level" of degradation.

Fine. Let's put it this way, then:

 

Geocaching is not being degraded by false logs any more than it was degraded by false logs over the last seven years.

 

I've only been caching for 3 years or so.. I have not personally been affected by false logs at all. But I do not like them, Sam I Am. I do not like them in an ammo box, I do not like them in fake rocks. If they were in micros, i'd never know, because I think micros blow.

Link to comment
The online log is not an official record, instead is more like a shared geocaching blog.
Touche....

 

Official record or shared geocaching blog? Which side are you on?
Since no where on the GC it states anything like "When you reach 500 finds you will be listed as a Mega-Cacher and at 1,000 finds you will be a Master Cacher" GC understands that the numbers are meaningless and carry no weight except to those who challenge themselves. It's a blog, hook, line and sinker.... No merit badges, no rewards, just the personal pride of meeting the challenge the owners place out in the world and the fun of crossing paths with a great bunch of people. If someone wants to cheat themselves out of that, they're already a looser....
Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...

 

Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!

Link to comment
The fact that you can list the sandbox rules yourself proves my point:
Yup, proves that *I* had rules for *MY* kids. Did not have *ANY* impact on *ANY* other kids in the sandbox. There was no universal sandbox rules that applied to everyone. And even with my rules, at times my kids got hurt, hurt someone else, and sometimes didn't have a lot of fun. But we kept going to the sandbox, kept playing, and no one felt degraded.
Even in the absence of parental rules, kids will come up with their own rules when playing together.

 

Even if the only rule is "The toughest kid gets to make & break the rules."

Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...

 

Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!

 

Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

Link to comment
... We have 46,047 geocachers ...
To be fair, there are many more geocachers than this number.

No, they're not caching. If they don't have an account they are not logging their finds online and therefore are not geocaching (or at least not "officially" geocaching) :lol:

Actually, I made this statement because the 46K number is the number of cachers who have logged a cache within the last seven days. I believe that a significant number of cachers go longer than seven days between online logs, from time to time, and that this percentage is probably greater for this time of year.

Link to comment
Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!

Hmmm, if you take it out of gear and push it then it will also move. But if you're talking about how to move your car by virtue of the engine's power then I think you can follow the rules and guidelines in your owner's manual. But I really don't think bringing up a mechanical functionality situation is analogous to what someone does or doesn't do prior to typing something on their computer.

 

How can anyone complain that clicking the FOUND IT button and entering information on a geocache webpage on the GC website is degrading the game of GC when the game of GC doesn't have any rules or guidelines controlling what someone has to do in order to do this?

Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...

 

Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!

 

Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

 

Clearly the vehicle in question is not parked on a level surface, but on a 45 degree incline... So getting out and pushing said car would not be applicable in this case, unless you wanted to push it down the hill backwards. But according to the guidelines, you are suppose to park front facing downwards with the emergency brake on.

Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...
Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!
Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

Clearly the vehicle in question is not parked on a level surface, but on a 45 degree incline... So getting out and pushing said car would not be applicable in this case, unless you wanted to push it down the hill backwards. But according to the guidelines, you are suppose to park front facing downwards with the emergency brake on.
What about those parking places that are on the other side of the road? Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

:wub:

Actually, I made this statement because the 46K number is the number of cachers who have logged a cache within the last seven days. I believe that a significant number of cachers go longer than seven days between online logs, from time to time, and that this percentage is probably greater for this time of year.
Actually according to GPS games by mid-2003 there were over 150,000 registered geocachers and over 7,200 paid subscriptions. http://geocaching.gpsgames.org/history/

 

I think there may of been a few dozen more people register in the last 5 years.... :lol:

Edited by infiniteMPG
Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...

 

Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!

 

Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

 

Clearly the vehicle in question is not parked on a level surface, but on a 45 degree incline... So getting out and pushing said car would not be applicable in this case, unless you wanted to push it down the hill backwards. But according to the guidelines, you are suppose to park front facing downwards with the emergency brake on.

Perhaps we should ask Too Tall John about all this parking stuff. I have reason to believe that he is an excellent, law-abiding driver.

Link to comment

:wub:

Actually, I made this statement because the 46K number is the number of cachers who have logged a cache within the last seven days. I believe that a significant number of cachers go longer than seven days between online logs, from time to time, and that this percentage is probably greater for this time of year.
Actually accourd to GPS games by mid-2003 there were over 150,000 registered geocachers and over 7,200 paid subscriptions. http://geocaching.gpsgames.org/history/

 

I think there may of been a few dozen more people register in the last 5 years.... :lol:

So, your point is that you agree with me?

Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...
Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!
Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

Clearly the vehicle in question is not parked on a level surface, but on a 45 degree incline... So getting out and pushing said car would not be applicable in this case, unless you wanted to push it down the hill backwards. But according to the guidelines, you are suppose to park front facing downwards with the emergency brake on.
Perhaps we should ask Too Tall John about all this parking stuff. I have reason to believe that he is an excellent, law-abiding driver.
Didn't I read somewhere that he was a 'rules are made to be broken' kind of guy? Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
Those are not the guidelines. They aren't even real rules.
Then I guess I'd have to ask where it states you have to physically find a cache to enter a log on the GC website...
Isn't that like saying, "Where does it say I have to start my car before it will move"... Well, nowhere I guess. But good luck with that!
Probably right after the sentence: "When parked on a level surface..............." I do suppose though that if it were a small enough car, you could get out and push.

 

This requires further research.

Clearly the vehicle in question is not parked on a level surface, but on a 45 degree incline... So getting out and pushing said car would not be applicable in this case, unless you wanted to push it down the hill backwards. But according to the guidelines, you are suppose to park front facing downwards with the emergency brake on.
Perhaps we should ask Too Tall John about all this parking stuff. I have reason to believe that he is an excellent, law-abiding driver.
Didn't I read somewhere that he was a 'rules are made to be broken' kind of guy?

Perhaps you are thinking of James "Too Tall" Dean. That's somebody else.

 

In any case, you can't believe everything you read.

Link to comment
So, your point is that you agree with me?
About there being more then 42K cachers? Heck yeah! And as with any group of a quarter million or so people, I think you can pretty much count on some of them being the types that will break the rules in ways we can't even imgine. Just a fact of the human life experience, accept it or pick a different critter to be...

 

As soon as we make a system that is perfectly idiot-proof, someone will come along and invent a perfect idiot....

Link to comment
... We have 46,047 geocachers ...
To be fair, there are many more geocachers than this number.
No, they're not caching. If they don't have an account they are not logging their finds online and therefore are not geocaching (or at least not "officially" geocaching) :wub:
Actually, I made this statement because the 46K number is the number of cachers who have logged a cache within the last seven days. I believe that a significant number of cachers go longer than seven days between online logs, from time to time, and that this percentage is probably greater for this time of year.
Actually accourd to GPS games by mid-2003 there were over 150,000 registered geocachers and over 7,200 paid subscriptions. http://geocaching.gpsgames.org/history/

 

I think there may of been a few dozen more people register in the last 5 years.... :wub:

So, your point is that you agree with me?
About there being more then 42K cachers? Heck yeah! ...
46K.

 

Weren’t you the one that stated that there were 46K cachers that led to me mentioning that there were more than 46k?

 

I'm cornfused. :lol:

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
Also, you were the one that stated that there were 46K cachers that led to me mentioning that there were more than 46k.I'm cornfused. :lol:
My mistake as I am at work and just bounced over the to the GC website and didn't notice the number was for people who logged in the past week. My point was there is a load of geocachers (and the bigger the number the better for the point) and in any large group of people you will have some who enjoy bending/breaking the rules if for no other reason just to do it... just something we have to deal with and even in a police state that will happen. So unless fake logs cause direct problems for people I think it's just a fact of GC life that we need to deal with as we will never completely stop it.

 

And to me just their existence is not reason enough to put a lot of effort into dealing with them until they directly cause problems. If I stumble across them, fine. If they're pointed out to me, fine. But to go on a crusade after them... no way. And since I don't see GC even posting how or why anyone enters info on the log page for a geocache I sure don't see their mere existence causing a degradation of geocaching.

 

Is it beer:30 yet...?

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