Feature Request: Final Coordinate Verification

[+Geo Friends]

Hi

 

I've seen this forum for an answer to my question but I didn't find it.

 

Recently, we wanted to hide a cache. After all the trouble we had doing the cache page, hide the cache in place, we receive a note that the cache wasn't possible because it was to close to a final coordenate.

Looking in the map there are no caches there, so we presume that it's a final coordenate of a mistery or a multi cache.

 

my question (sugestion) is: when we are filling the data in the webpage creation of the new cache, that should be an area that we put the final coordenates of the cache and "geocaching.com" tell us if that coordenate is possible/avaiable or not.

 

what do you think about this idea?

 

greetings from Portugal

Geo Friends

[+Miragee]

Welcome to the Forums!

 

This has been brought up several times before and the reason it won't be implemented is because some people would use it to find the final of a Puzzle or Multi without actually completing those caches.

 

The best thing to do if you are thinking of placing a cache in a "crowded" area is to contact your Reviewer ahead of time. Recently I did this when I was looking for a location for a final cache for a long Multi. I checked out the area on Google Earth, then emailed my Reviewer. After I got the okay, I made the 40-mile drive to place my container.

 

I also had my GPSr loaded with the coordinates of the other caches in that area to make sure I didn't get too close to those while searching for the specific hiding place.

[+radioscout]

This has been brought up several times before and the reason it won't be implemented is because some people would use it to find the final of a Puzzle or Multi without actually completing those caches.

If checking the coordinates is restricted to for example two questions per hour no one could really use it to figure out the coordinates of a cache.

If the tool only says "ok" or "not ok" one even does not know if he is to close to a cache or just a multi cache stage.

 

There are tools like geochecker used to verify the coordinates of "?"-caches. They work fine and can't be used to determine the final coordinates.

[+Tequila]

This has been brought up several times before and the reason it won't be implemented is because some people would use it to find the final of a Puzzle or Multi without actually completing those caches.

If checking the coordinates is restricted to for example two questions per hour no one could really use it to figure out the coordinates of a cache.

If the tool only says "ok" or "not ok" one even does not know if he is to close to a cache or just a multi cache stage.

 

There are tools like geochecker used to verify the coordinates of "?"-caches. They work fine and can't be used to determine the final coordinates.

 

Futhermore, the checker wouldn't need to tell you the location of the other cache. A simple "There is cache within 162 meters" would do. And it would be a great help.

[+trainlove]

This has been brought up several times before and the reason it won't be implemented is because some people would use it to find the final of a Puzzle or Multi without actually completing those caches.

If checking the coordinates is restricted to for example two questions per hour no one could really use it to figure out the coordinates of a cache.

If the tool only says "ok" or "not ok" one even does not know if he is to close to a cache or just a multi cache stage.

 

Not true.

With 24 hours a day, a determined cacher can spend weeks if he wanted to in order to find a difficult puzzle or multi without going out in the field. Even 1 questiion a day, though limiting as it is, will not deter someone.

Triangulation and trilateralization can be done with simple yes/no answers to you are within 528 feet of an existing cache.

[+Tequila]

This has been brought up several times before and the reason it won't be implemented is because some people would use it to find the final of a Puzzle or Multi without actually completing those caches.

If checking the coordinates is restricted to for example two questions per hour no one could really use it to figure out the coordinates of a cache.

If the tool only says "ok" or "not ok" one even does not know if he is to close to a cache or just a multi cache stage.

 

Not true.

With 24 hours a day, a determined cacher can spend weeks if he wanted to in order to find a difficult puzzle or multi without going out in the field. Even 1 questiion a day, though limiting as it is, will not deter someone.

Triangulation and trilateralization can be done with simple yes/no answers to you are within 528 feet of an existing cache.

 

Good grief. Before doing all that, a quick email to one of the finders would probably yield a hint or solution. If someone was willing to do all that, then I say have at it. Why make everyone else do without to prevent one (doubt there is one much less more) person from abusing it. Also, if they were that determined, they would be more inclined to just go to the area and look around.

[+Kit Fox]

Futhermore, the checker wouldn't need to tell you the location of the other cache. A simple "There is cache within 162 meters" would do. And it would be a great help.

 

This is a terrible idea. Many geocachers would use this technique to triangulate the final locations of Multis, L/B Hybrids, and puzzles.

 

 

Good grief. Before doing all that, a quick email to one of the finders would probably yield a hint or solution. If someone was willing to do all that, then I say have at it. Why make everyone else do without to prevent one (doubt there is one much less more) person from abusing it. Also, if they were that determined, they would be more inclined to just go to the area and look around.

 

Suppose nobody has solved the puzzle yet, an elaborate game of battleship using your original idea would occur. I reviewer once mentioned a group of determined cachers, trying to find a 5 star cache, by hiding new caches every .1 miles. They were in essence playing battleship, hoping to find the puzzle cache. By giving the exact distance, you would ruin many good puzzles.

 

I vote no for this feature.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Kit Fox

[+Tequila]

Futhermore, the checker wouldn't need to tell you the location of the other cache. A simple "There is cache within 162 meters" would do. And it would be a great help.

 

This is a terrible idea. Many geocachers would use this technique to triangulate the final locations of Multis, L/B Hybrids, and puzzles.

 

 

Good grief. Before doing all that, a quick email to one of the finders would probably yield a hint or solution. If someone was willing to do all that, then I say have at it. Why make everyone else do without to prevent one (doubt there is one much less more) person from abusing it. Also, if they were that determined, they would be more inclined to just go to the area and look around.

 

Suppose nobody has solved the puzzle yet, an elaborate game of battleship using your original idea would occur. I reviewer once mentioned a group of determined cachers, trying to find a 5 star cache, by hiding new caches every .1 miles. They were in essence playing battleship, hoping to find the puzzle cache. By giving the exact distance, you would ruin many good puzzles.

 

I vote no for this feature.

 

Who said it had to be exact? Just say "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters".

[+Geo Friends]

OK, what about an engine that simply reports:

 

The coords you posted are available/inavailable for a new cache.

 

A simple yes/no is more than enough!!

[+Mopar]

Where's Harrald and his sig line when you need it?

 

Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own.

Sydney J. Harris

 

 

Who said it had to be exact? Just say "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters".

And people would just keep changing the coords on a unlisted cache until it stopped saying "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters". Bingo. Do that 3 times and you know the coords.

Trust me, it would not be one person. It would be thousands of people. Most difficult puzzle caches would be ruined.

Why screw up 10s of thousands of existing caches because a few cache hiders are lazy?

1. Ask permission. If everyone did, then the person you get permission from would know if there are other caches near.

2. Email your local reviewer. S/he can tell you if there is a proximity issue with your location, as well as inform you of other potential problems like permits, or previous problems with other caches at the same spot.

3. Go find the caches in the area you want to hide in. If it's such a great location, why haven't you found the caches in that area already?

 

The current system seems to work fine for all but a handful of the almost 1.5 million registered accounts here. The only way I see it should be a problem is if you are the type of cacher who wants to just toss out a cache and forget about it. If you are placing a quality cache that you intend to maintain, you already planned on making multiple trips to the cache location. One more time to actually place the cache after getting the ok from the reviewer or to tweak the location a bit should be no big deal.

[+Prime Suspect]

OK, what about an engine that simply reports:

 

The coords you posted are available/inavailable for a new cache.

 

A simple yes/no is more than enough!!

You're right. It's more than enough to let people figure out where puzzle/multi-caches are located.

[+Peconic Bay Sailors]

Not true.

With 24 hours a day, a determined cacher can spend weeks if he wanted to in order to find a difficult puzzle or multi without going out in the field. Even 1 questiion a day, though limiting as it is, will not deter someone.

Triangulation and trilateralization can be done with simple yes/no answers to you are within 528 feet of an existing cache.

 

Geeze, wouldn't it just be easier to go find the cache?

[+Tequila]

 

And people would just keep changing the coords on a unlisted cache until it stopped saying "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters". Bingo. Do that 3 times and you know the coords.

 

 

Three times???? I don't think so Tim. The other cache could be anywhere within a 162 meter circle (radius not diameter) from the requested location. If you can narrow that down in three tries, give up geocaching and go to Vegas.

[+Kit Fox]

 

And people would just keep changing the coords on a unlisted cache until it stopped saying "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters". Bingo. Do that 3 times and you know the coords.

 

 

Three times???? I don't think so Tim. The other cache could be anywhere within a 162 meter circle (radius not diameter) from the requested location. If you can narrow that down in three tries, give up geocaching and go to Vegas.

 

There is very accurate triangulation software that can find the exact coordinates of a cache, by using three other sets of coordinates, and their distance from the cache you want to find. Once someone "accidentally" gets close enough (will say 162 meters), they only need to come up with two other spots.

 

I guess you didn't know this.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Kit Fox

[+tozainamboku]

 

And people would just keep changing the coords on a unlisted cache until it stopped saying "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters". Bingo. Do that 3 times and you know the coords.

 

 

Three times???? I don't think so Tim. The other cache could be anywhere within a 162 meter circle (radius not diameter) from the requested location. If you can narrow that down in three tries, give up geocaching and go to Vegas.

 

There is very accurate triangulation software that can find the exact coordinates of a cache, by using three other sets of coordinates, and their distance from the cache you want to find. Once someone "accidentally" gets close enough (will say 162 meters), they only need to come up with two other spots.

 

I guess you didn't know this.

Just knowing yes/no is there another cache within 162 meters (528 ft) of your posted location doesn't give you enough information to triangulate. But you can used a series of guesses to quickly narrow down the search area. If you know the terrain you can probably get close enough to find the cache with only a few guesses. It could be as few as three but that's unlikely. However I would think that within five or six guesses you'd have it narrowed down enough to go and search for the cache.

 

Cache hiders who get frustrated that their cache was turned down don't realize that an automated coordinated checking system can be abused. They just want to find what areas are opened that they can hide a cache there. A system that limits the number of tries per day would probably cause as much frustration for this hider as the current system. Suppose you put in coordinates and were told that there was another a cache within 162 meters. Now what do you do if you have to wait even just a few hours before you can try another set of coordinates? If the system kept track of the coordinates you were trying, perhap it could tell if you were just looking for an empty area or if you were trying to get the location of some puzzle. For example it could check if the coordinates were at least 324 meters away from any other coordinates you have tried in the past. Such a system would be much harder to implement.

 

The current suggestion is generally to email your local reviewer and ask if your proposed coordinates are available. The reviewer may even decide to allow your cache if it only 159 meters away because reviewers have some flexibility in interpreting this guideline. If the review knows there is some obstacle between the existing cache and your suggested coordinates (for example a river with no bridges or other crossings in the immediate area) he may even allow your cache to be much closer. The reviewer can give you suggestion like "try a little farther east" to help you find an open area. And as Mopar points out, your reviewer can let you know about other issues that might occur when placing a cache in that area, such as whether a permit is required.

[+radioscout]

Not true.

With 24 hours a day, a determined cacher can spend weeks if he wanted to in order to find a difficult puzzle or multi without going out in the field.

This can be prevented if trying out different coordinates is blocked if there are no distance violations.

Another try would require a new cache submission and I am sure that every reviewer would stop such misuse if he sees that caches are submitted only to find out the coordinates of a "?"-cache.

[+ChileHead]

Not that I would know anything about this, but you used to be able to play "battleship" in a similar way to find caches before they were listed. A simple yes/no is all it took, and the same could be said here.

 

It can be painful sometimes to find a hiding location, but once you have found all the caches in an area - including the multis and puzzles, your chances are have problems are greatly reduced.

 

Consider saving off all the coordinates to multis & final puzzle locations into a PRIVATE bookmark list for future reference.

[+Prime Suspect]

 

And people would just keep changing the coords on a unlisted cache until it stopped saying "There is another cache/stage within 162 meters". Bingo. Do that 3 times and you know the coords.

 

 

Three times???? I don't think so Tim. The other cache could be anywhere within a 162 meter circle (radius not diameter) from the requested location. If you can narrow that down in three tries, give up geocaching and go to Vegas.

 

The "that" he was referring to was the act identifying a point on the circumference around the cache. Do "that" three times, and you have all you need to triangulate the location.

 

And narrowing it down to a point on the circumference doesn't take that many tries, if you're smart about it. All you need to do is find one point inside the circle, and one outside. Divide the distance in half, and see if it's inside or out. Repeat the process until you've got the distance down to 10' or so. That's as good as it needs to be. With a starting distance of 500 or 600 hundred feet, 8 or 9 tries is all it will take to narrow it down.

[+Prime Suspect]

This can be prevented if trying out different coordinates is blocked if there are no distance violations.

Another try would require a new cache submission and I am sure that every reviewer would stop such misuse if he sees that caches are submitted only to find out the coordinates of a "?"-cache.

But if I'm putting out a multi-cache....?