+sbell111 Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 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... Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 At what point does this alternative game play take geocaching to where it's unrecognizable. If I use a baseball bat to hit a soccer ball on a golf course am I still playing golf? Long as you don't slow down the pace of play, and you replace your dadgum divots (gotta figure a baseball bat is going to require some extended turf repair), you'll be fun to watch! I have enough trouble with a 2 iron. Link to comment
CoyoteRed Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 The things I agree on (and correct me if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly)1) False logs are not, in fact, causing a degradation of geocaching (as the thread title suggests). 2) If I know a log on one of my own caches is bogus, I'll delete it. 3) Other people won't delete logs, and I don't care. It doesn't bother me if it doesn't bother them. 1) Add: "...in my area that I've seen." I'm not speaking for areas outside my awareness. 2) Bingo. 3) "Not condone" is not the same as "not caring." Nor would I say it doesn't bother me. Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 I know some folks will never call someone on a log. So what? I will. I do. I will continue to do so. Some people just don't care, but I think some fear the repercussions. Some cachers are so brazen that they take exception when their phony logs are deleted. And heaven forbid if the phony is a well known, popular cacher. You suddenly find yourself a pariah. I think a lot of people just don't want to deal with that. Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) I know some folks will never call someone on a log. So what? I will. I do. I will continue to do so. Some people just don't care, but I think some fear the repercussions. Some cachers are so brazen that they take exception when their phony logs are deleted. And heaven forbid if the phony is a well known, popular cacher. You suddenly find yourself a pariah. I think a lot of people just don't want to deal with that. That's me all right. I care, I care a lot. But I do fear repercussions. Those brazen type cachers really scare me. No one wants to find themselves a pariah, certainly not me. That would just ruin my whole life. Have mercy. Edited February 2, 2008 by Team Cotati Link to comment
+Cedar Grove Seekers Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) This thread has opened my eyes to how devious and underhanded I am. My dad accompanies me on caches once in a while. He's never interested in signing the log so I write in both our names, for the benefit of those who read the log. I created an account for him a while back and have logged some (not all) of those finds online for him, again for the benefit of the hider. It seems in my good intentions, I've actually been doing the hider a horrible disservice. I've also signed physical logs as my family account but logged online as both the family and personal account. Keeping track of my finds with two accounts seemed pointless. But apparently it preserved my integrity. I guess I won't be letting my kids create their own accounts and retroactively log caches we found as a family over the years. My son's still only three, I better wait until he can write his name to let him have an account. The sad thing is, I'm being facetious, but some people will agree with all of this. I see nothing wrong with what you're doing, and I have done similar things myself. The intent of this thread was to discuss people not visiting the cache, and how some people justify this as a form of geocaching. Edited February 2, 2008 by Cedar Grove Seekers Link to comment
CoyoteRed Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 I know some folks will never call someone on a log. So what? I will. I do. I will continue to do so. Some people just don't care, but I think some fear the repercussions. Some cachers are so brazen that they take exception when their phony logs are deleted. And heaven forbid if the phony is a well known, popular cacher. You suddenly find yourself a pariah. I think a lot of people just don't want to deal with that. Good point. You can even see a bit of that in a lot of these types of threads. Link to comment
+Driver Carries Cache Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 This whole discussion has gone off the deep end. We started out talking about logging and dishonesty. I don't think anyone objects if two people are caching and while one does the trading, the other signs the log for both. That is not dishonesty. And as far as the "monopoly" theory goes... games are played by an agreed-upon set of rules. If you agree upon the "free parking" rule, no one is cheating. Geocaching also has a set of rules that we agree upon. If you don't agree on the rules here at GC.com, feel free to start your own website and make up your own rules, but GC.com has set up rules that cover how the game is played here. I'm waiting for someone to post the "what counts as a find" meter (I know I've seen it before) DCC Link to comment
+rlridgeway Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 As a casual geocacher I find all this somewhat interesting. Its kind of humorous that people will actually lie about how many finds they have. Its equally humorous that others get so worked up about the lying. Link to comment
+Bad_CRC Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 back on the topic of bogus logs, The practice of logging the same event 20 times because you may or may not have found several temporary caches at that event... is that ok? I'm curious how the people fall on this issue based upon comments here. Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Geocaching also has a set of rules that we agree upon. If geocaching has rules, they are unlike the rule of monopoly or golf. 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. I prefer to look a geocaching as very simple activity. You go out and find caches. The logging of your finds on geocaching.com or any other website is not geocaching. The online logs serve as a way for geocachers to keep track of their finds record their experience in a blog for others to see thank cache owners for the hide let the owner and others know when there is a problem with a cache Bogus logs may be a misuse of the online logs but can't possibly degrade geocaching itself. Suppose some created a website - mygolfscore.com. Any can sign up for this website and use it to record their golf games. The website has no way to tell if someone is lying about their golf game. You wouldn't know if some used their own rules - such as allowing mulligans - unless they wrote that in their log. You wouldn't even know if the person actually played the game of golf he is claiming. Would you say that people abusing this website were degrading golf? No matter how many cheaters, some golfers would probably still find the website useful. Individuals would now have a record of all their golf games (or at least the ones they entered) that they could go back and look at. There might even be tools to calculate statistics they could use to see where they need to improve their game. People might enjoy reading about their friends golf games or posting about their games for their friend to read. The logs could be used to thank the golf course and to let the course and other golfers know about problems with the course (such as group that was hitting a soccer ball with baseball bats ) (FWIW looks like there are several sites out there for tracking your golf scores) Link to comment
+KoosKoos Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) Geocaching also has a set of rules that we agree upon. If you don't agree on the rules here at GC.com, feel free to start your own website and make up your own rules, but GC.com has set up rules that cover how the game is played here. I'm waiting for someone to post the "what counts as a find" meter (I know I've seen it before) DCC What are the rules in Geocaching? Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple: 1. Take something from the cache 2. Leave something in the cache 3. Write about it in the logbook So, if I don't trade, I'm breaking the rules? Odd, I see no rules written there about when you can and can't log your find online. Seems to me that TPTB have stated numerous times that logging online is between the cache hider and finder. And unless TPTB see outrageous abuse, they're not going to bother with how people log "smilies" online. Because in the end, your little smilie count doesn't matter. I have a hard time calling other people's smiley count a "Find" count these days because I don't know how they play the game. I just worry about my own and don't care what others do to inflate or deflate the number of smilies they have on geocaching.com edit - Dang Toz making my points again. Edited February 2, 2008 by KoosKoos Link to comment
+geomann1 Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Geocaching also has a set of rules that we agree upon. If geocaching has rules, they are unlike the rule of monopoly or golf. 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. I prefer to look a geocaching as very simple activity. You go out and find caches. The logging of your finds on geocaching.com or any other website is not geocaching. The online logs serve as a way for geocachers to keep track of their finds record their experience in a blog for others to see thank cache owners for the hide let the owner and others know when there is a problem with a cache Bogus logs may be a misuse of the online logs but can't possibly degrade geocaching itself. Excellent point, which is also the spirit of sport in the official getting started section as below: Step 4 – The Find Huzzah! You found the cache! Congratulations! Now what? Usually you take an item and leave an item, and enter your name and experience you had into the log book. Some people prefer to just enter their name into the log book. It’s an accomplishment enough to locate the cache. Make sure to seal the cache and place it back where you found it. If it had some rocks covering it, please replace them. It’s pretty straightforward. Remember that waypoint we suggested you create where your car/trail was located? Use that now to get back! You’ll be glad you had it. When you get home, email the person who hid the cache and let them know you found it! They’re always happy to know the condition of their cache and it’s nice to know that people are looking for them. The trading and logging of the cache are peripheral issues!!!!!! According to the above a cache is found when you found it (duh). The trade and logging are something you do after the cache is found. Once I find the cache, I've acheived my goal; anything beyond that is a nicety to the cache owner. All of the problems (degradation issues) stem from the fact that ones find count on GC is public, which brings out the worse (obsessive competetiveness) in a small faction of the cachers in either (1) logging false finds or (2) becoming obsessive about others scores. Link to comment
+KBI Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) All of the problems (degradation issues) stem from the fact that ones find count on GC is public, which brings out the worse (obsessive competitiveness) in a small faction of the cachers in either (1) logging false finds or (2) becoming obsessive about others scores. As I was just saying in another thread: I've learned that although one's find count is clearly unusable as any kind of meaningful score to be compared between cachers for competitive reasons, some people will nevertheless get all wrapped around the axle (inconsolably distressed) over the way others choose to log finds. Nobody ever achieved a smiley for themselves by criticizing – or glaring disapprovingly at – another person's numbers, but that doesn’t seem to stop people from trying. Edited February 2, 2008 by KBI Link to comment
+neat_guy Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Just to add a couple more cents to this conversation, go ahead and log finds from the warm comfort of your armchair! This saves me the worry that you may have gone out and actually defaced the physical condition of the cache so when I finally get to it, I can have the satisfaction that I put in the effort and feel good about actually finding it. But on the other hand, without false logs I would only be at <-- 67 finds! I'm not sure what I feel would be an appropriate time frame to log a find, but off the top off my head I can think of three caches I forgot to post a find for and enough time has passed I am going to go back and sign the log books again before posting. Link to comment
Dinoprophet Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 This thread has opened my eyes to how devious and underhanded I am. My dad accompanies me on caches once in a while. He's never interested in signing the log so I write in both our names, for the benefit of those who read the log. I created an account for him a while back and have logged some (not all) of those finds online for him, again for the benefit of the hider. It seems in my good intentions, I've actually been doing the hider a horrible disservice. I've also signed physical logs as my family account but logged online as both the family and personal account. Keeping track of my finds with two accounts seemed pointless. But apparently it preserved my integrity. I guess I won't be letting my kids create their own accounts and retroactively log caches we found as a family over the years. My son's still only three, I better wait until he can write his name to let him have an account. The sad thing is, I'm being facetious, but some people will agree with all of this. I see nothing wrong with what you're doing, and I have done similar things myself. The intent of this thread was to discuss people not visiting the cache, and how some people justify this as a form of geocaching. 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. Link to comment
+UncleJimbo Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) Sometimes it takes more then one person to figure out a puzzle cache. And what about a group of people caching together? You put 8 people out caching together, one person finds the cache, should they be quiet and run off somewhere and wait until each individual in the group personally finds it??? Some groups do it that way. Edited February 2, 2008 by UncleJimbo Link to comment
+Cedar Grove Seekers Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 I prefer to look a geocaching as very simple activity. You go out and find caches. The logging of your finds on geocaching.com or any other website is not geocaching. The online logs serve as a way for geocachers to keep track of their finds record their experience in a blog for others to see thank cache owners for the hide let the owner and others know when there is a problem with a cache I've thought about this before, but I came to the conclusion that geocaching.com (or other sites) forms an integral part of geocaching. The website is where you actually get the coords of the caches you find. I think the site itself forms part of the basis of the geocaching community, with the ability to communicate with other cachers, view their finds, logs, forum posts, etc. Suppose some created a website - mygolfscore.com. Any can sign up for this website and use it to record their golf games. The website has no way to tell if someone is lying about their golf game. You wouldn't know if some used their own rules - such as allowing mulligans - unless they wrote that in their log. You wouldn't even know if the person actually played the game of golf he is claiming. Would you say that people abusing this website were degrading golf? No matter how many cheaters, some golfers would probably still find the website useful. Individuals would now have a record of all their golf games (or at least the ones they entered) that they could go back and look at. There might even be tools to calculate statistics they could use to see where they need to improve their game. People might enjoy reading about their friends golf games or posting about their games for their friend to read. The logs could be used to thank the golf course and to let the course and other golfers know about problems with the course (such as group that was hitting a soccer ball with baseball bats ) (FWIW looks like there are several sites out there for tracking your golf scores) I don't think that golf websites are as integral to golf as geocaching.com (or other sites) is to geocaching. Link to comment
+Cedar Grove Seekers Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 This thread has opened my eyes to how devious and underhanded I am. My dad accompanies me on caches once in a while. He's never interested in signing the log so I write in both our names, for the benefit of those who read the log. I created an account for him a while back and have logged some (not all) of those finds online for him, again for the benefit of the hider. It seems in my good intentions, I've actually been doing the hider a horrible disservice. I've also signed physical logs as my family account but logged online as both the family and personal account. Keeping track of my finds with two accounts seemed pointless. But apparently it preserved my integrity. I guess I won't be letting my kids create their own accounts and retroactively log caches we found as a family over the years. My son's still only three, I better wait until he can write his name to let him have an account. The sad thing is, I'm being facetious, but some people will agree with all of this. I see nothing wrong with what you're doing, and I have done similar things myself. The intent of this thread was to discuss people not visiting the cache, and how some people justify this as a form of geocaching. 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. Those minor differences on the definition of visiting a cache are what I consider the grey areas. They may be annoying to some people, but I don't think they turn people off geocaching. This is when people decide to cache their own way. Not physically visiting the cache is not grey, but black and white, you did not visit it. I think that some peoples' insistance to allow this as 'another way to geocache' is more likely to turn people off. Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 I prefer to look a geocaching as very simple activity. You go out and find caches. The logging of your finds on geocaching.com or any other website is not geocaching. The online logs serve as a way for geocachers to keep track of their finds record their experience in a blog for others to see thank cache owners for the hide let the owner and others know when there is a problem with a cache I've thought about this before, but I came to the conclusion that geocaching.com (or other sites) forms an integral part of geocaching. The website is where you actually get the coords of the caches you find. I think the site itself forms part of the basis of the geocaching community, with the ability to communicate with other cachers, view their finds, logs, forum posts, etc. Then once again I ask as I did in post #6 - do you cross out the names in the physical log of people who don't log online? Because by your definition, these people are not geocaching. They are simply degrading the sport by filling up logs with irrelevant information and forcing cache owners to do more maintenance. Please also note in my post that you quoted I said Bogus logs may be a misuse of the online logs but can't possibly degrade geocaching itself. So in a way, I agree that people who use the geocaching.com online logging system to log armchair virtuals or 'found it' where they gave a sticker to their friend to leave in a cache they never went to are not using the online log as intended. You simply have not made your point as to why this degrades geocaching. Link to comment
+Cedar Grove Seekers Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 Then once again I ask as I did in post #6 - do you cross out the names in the physical log of people who don't log online? Because by your definition, these people are not geocaching. They are simply degrading the sport by filling up logs with irrelevant information and forcing cache owners to do more maintenance. My definition of geocaching does not insist on logging on-line. Not logging on-line is certainly not the topic I wanted to discuss. I am talking about people not visiting the cache. My definition of geocaching does include the requirement to actually visit the cache. As previously stated I believe geocaching.com forms an integral (read important) part of geocaching. How else do you even get the coordinates? If one is able to somehow get the coordinates by in no way relying on the web-site, and then go and find the cache, I'd say they are still geocaching. No, I would not delete their log. I'm really not sure why you keep insisting that I should be just as concerned about the reverse situation of finding a cache and not logging on-line? I don’t agree with your logic. Please also note in my post that you quoted I said Bogus logs may be a misuse of the online logs but can't possibly degrade geocaching itself. So in a way, I agree that people who use the geocaching.com online logging system to log armchair virtuals or 'found it' where they gave a sticker to their friend to leave in a cache they never went to are not using the online log as intended. You simply have not made your point as to why this degrades geocaching. I answered the 'degrading' question in post #20 (sorry, not sure how to add link). I can totally understand how you might not agree if you see geocaching and geocaching.com as things that are not necessarily related. Bye the way, when you originally posted #6, I just thought you were taking the thread off-topic and airing one of your own beefs. Maybe my fault for being a little thick. Link to comment
+edscott Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 If it is your cache and you are really getting worked up over false logs, add a code number to the inside of the cache lid and require that number be emailed to you or the log gets deleted. If it's not your cache and not your stats then just get over it. This sort of thing has gone on in one form or another since before I started caching. The first huge example I remember was when a prominent cacher with loads of hides decided to archive a bunch of them and invited several friends to log them beforehand. Some people from a thousand miles or more away logged a few hundred "finds" over the course of a few weeks having never left their computers. addendum.. this thread has reached 8 pages in about 4 days.. is this a record? Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple: 1. Take something from the cache 2. Leave something in the cache 3. Write about it in the logbook So, if I don't trade, I'm breaking the rules? . Well you take the log from the cache, sign it and leave it in the cache, so I think you're in the clear. The rules don't specify what you have to take and leave in the cache. Link to comment
Mushtang Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple: 1. Take something from the cache 2. Leave something in the cache 3. Write about it in the logbook So, if I don't trade, I'm breaking the rules? . Well you take the log from the cache, sign it and leave it in the cache, so I think you're in the clear. The rules don't specify what you have to take and leave in the cache. Nor do they specify that you have to put the cache in a spot worthy of a tour guide. Link to comment
+Cedar Grove Seekers Posted February 2, 2008 Author Share Posted February 2, 2008 Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple: 1. Take something from the cache 2. Leave something in the cache 3. Write about it in the logbook So, if I don't trade, I'm breaking the rules? . Well you take the log from the cache, sign it and leave it in the cache, so I think you're in the clear. The rules don't specify what you have to take and leave in the cache. At a minimum I always leave a GPS and take a GPS. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 ... addendum.. this thread has reached 8 pages in about 4 days.. is this a record?Not even close. MadMarty's opus went ten pages in less than four hours. Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 back on the topic of bogus logs, The practice of logging the same event 20 times because you may or may not have found several temporary caches at that event... is that ok? I'm curious how the people fall on this issue based upon comments here. 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 Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) In before lock. Just kidding. Personally I think it's fine to have an opinion either way. I choose to say it's wrong to falsely log caches and I think people should say it's wrong, and on occasion I might even tell that false logger they are wrong. Sue me. Edited February 3, 2008 by BlueDeuce Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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 **(%^ Link to comment
+KBI Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Any one that would someone to log mulit BS finds for an event is also a pathetic loser. Why go through all the inconvenient hassle of presenting convincing logic and reason to defend your point of view when you can simply call someone an insulting name instead? Link to comment
+Kit Fox Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 back on the topic of bogus logs, The practice of logging the same event 20 times because you may or may not have found several temporary caches at that event... is that ok? I'm curious how the people fall on this issue based upon comments here. 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 I agree with JV! I'm really surprised that Bad CRC didn't bother to do his homework and check out the other threads about temp caches. Markwell Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) 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 involved 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 **(%^ Edited February 3, 2008 by JohnnyVegas Link to comment
+Kit Fox Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Rules don't stop the rule breakers... Link to comment
+ScoutingWV Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Oh, please. There are probably a fair number of the "wishy washy" types that would like the hardliners to gradually disappear, too. There are no "rules" and it's not a sport. There are guidelines. It's a game of hide and seek. It's good that it's flexible and people can play their own way - you, me, anyone. But if you think "hardline rules" are in anyway going to change irresponsible behavior I think you will be severely disappointed. Link to comment
Mushtang Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 ...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. I'm pretty sure I could follow the mess there. Apparently you're calling someone else pathetic. The game to got band becuse of some self centered **(%^But I've got no idea what you're going for here. Maybe you're again trying to point out that someone is pathetic? I don't know. Link to comment
+ScoutingWV Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Link to comment
+geomann1 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 I'll never understand why someone else's stats mean so much to other people. Particularly that stats of strangers! This is the million dollar question. In my opinion, falsely logged finds are a threat to the status of hard liners, who are seeking to obtain 'alpha' cacher status. Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. Tell me about it.... The solution is to never reward/congratulate cheaters. That takes away their reason for cheating. Link to comment
+1NatureMom Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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.................. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 back on the topic of bogus logs, The practice of logging the same event 20 times because you may or may not have found several temporary caches at that event... is that ok? I'm curious how the people fall on this issue based upon comments here. 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 Wow. Walking on the edge of the guidelines, huh? Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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.................. I remember when because that's how I always cache. Nice avatar! Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) There are no "rules" ..snip To log and list caches and TBs here, yes there are rules. but we know that.... Some say that people can do whatever - no they can't. And some say that people can't do certain things - yes they can. These days I'm more annoyed by the people who tell me I can't disagree and say so. eh? Edited February 3, 2008 by BlueDeuce Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 These days I'm more annoyed by the people who tell me I can't disagree and say so. eh? BD, I ignore those types using the "Ignored Users" feature in my Forum Control Panel... Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) These days I'm more annoyed by the people who tell me I can't disagree and say so. eh? BD, I ignore those types using the "Ignored Users" feature in my Forum Control Panel... Great, so eventually I'll just be reading Ambrosia's postings. Edited February 3, 2008 by BlueDeuce Link to comment
+Team Cotati Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Boy, I bet that sumpin really cool happens when a cacher obtains 'alpha' cacher status. I admit that I don't know what that might be, but you just know from the sound of it that it must be really really cool. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) What a train wreck! Remember when this thread had a topic? Edited February 3, 2008 by sbell111 Link to comment
+BlueDeuce Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 I'll do what I can to prevent degradation, but otherwise I don't have much more to say here. Link to comment
+Bad_CRC Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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. That seems like quite a leap to make without a basis to make it, don't you think? I thought we were talking about people who logged a cache without visiting it. How do they destroy landscaping and ignore posted hours if they never were there? Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 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.That seems like quite a leap to make without a basis to make it, don't you think? I thought we were talking about people who logged a cache without visiting it. How do they destroy landscaping and ignore posted hours if they never were there? There's always some joker who has to go and inject logic into a perfectly entertaining rant. Link to comment
Recommended Posts