Logging your own event

May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Edited May 14, 2008 by shearzone

18.9k · May 14, 2008

I log an attended log --- because I did.

5.6k · May 14, 2008

Because they attended the event?

2.6k · May 14, 2008

I've never logged a find on a event. I log an "Attended"

May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

May 14, 2008

So......

If it bothers you don't log when you throw one

22k · May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

ayep.

20.7k · May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

They log that they attended because they attended. Even if I didn't see the logic in doing this, I can't imagine why I would care that other people were doing it.

Turning this issue around a bit, you have 13 'attendeds' for ten events. How is that any different?

Edited May 14, 2008 by sbell111

3.3k · May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

There are better things to worry about, like attending the same event 20 to 100 times.

Rediculious Event: Number Game????

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

22k · May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

They log that they attended because they attended. Even if I didn't see the logic in doing this, I can't imagine why I would care that other people were doing it.

Well, I don't care that you care that I care that someone attended their own party.

Hey! This is kinda fun.

3.9k · May 14, 2008

It's all cool. Remember that the number one priority in this game is to enjoy yourself. Second, to learn stuff. Don't sweat the little stuff.

May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

There are better things to worry about, like attending the same event 20 to 100 times.

Rediculious Event: Number Game????

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

sorry for not scanning the archives for a topic that ended in 2005

May 14, 2008

I log an attended log --- because I did.

Amen!

3.2k · May 14, 2008

Turning this issue around a bit, you have 13 'attendeds' for ten events. How is that any different?

Because "attending" the same event or on the same day is simply wrong and makes no sense.

May 14, 2008

I see nothing wrong with organizers logging an 'attended' log for events that they organized and attended.

As for 'double dipping', I don't see it that way at all.

If they went to the trouble of organizing the event, they deserve the minimal reward of another stat for their organization efforts.

If they attended the event, they deserve to log it just like everyone else who attended.

Edited May 14, 2008 by Stargazer22

10.2k · May 14, 2008

I see nothing wrong with organizers logging an 'attended' log for events that they organized and attended.

As for 'double dipping', I don't see it that way at all.

If they went to the trouble of organizing the event, they deserve the minimal reward of another stat for their organization efforts.

If they attended the event, they deserve to log it just like everyone else who attended.

I don't think this is really a big controversy, as opposed to logging an event in a certain cheese exporting State like 84 times or something. . I'm one of the biggest, most obnoxious Puritans around, and I logged an "attended" for the only event I've hosted, as I did attend. I may never host another event, but if I did, I'm sure I'd attend that also.

3.9k · May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Because they want to, they can, and they enjoy having done it.

Pretty much the same reason any of us find and log any cache. There's lots and lots of reasons not to, and there's lots and lots of reasons why it's okay. Everyone gets to decide on their own if they want to do this or not, and none of them are wrong.

3.9k · May 14, 2008

Much as many other posters have already said, I see nothing wrong with an event organizer logging an "attended" for their own event, so long as they did attend it. To me, this is not double-dipping at all, but simply logging attendance at an event.

1.1k · May 14, 2008

Why do you care what someone else logs... or how someone else logs?

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

Play your own game. Stop trying to micromanage everyone else's.

michelle

3.3k · May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

There are better things to worry about, like attending the same event 20 to 100 times.

Rediculious Event: Number Game????

Your topic has been debated ad nauseum.

sorry for not scanning the archives for a topic that ended in 2005

Actually that topic ended in December of 2007.

Here is full list of contentious topics for you to browse.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...ighlite=%2Btemp

8k · May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

You may be expected to attend your own party but sometimes other things get in the way. I've been to several events where the event owner did not attend because of a last minute family emergency. Since it is possible to not attend your event I think you should get credit when you do attend.

But then the whole concern over double-dipping and whether if you should get your find count incremented along with your hide count doesn't bother me at all. The find count is the count of the number of found, attended, and took picture logs that you have entered on Geocaching.com. The hide count is the number of cache pages that have been published that are owned by your account. In fact when you adopt a cache your hide count goes up one and the hide count of the person you adopted the cache from goes down one. It you remember what the counts really mean and they are not the "score" for the game of geocaching, then this isn't double-dipping.

Edited May 14, 2008 by tozainamboku

May 14, 2008

There is no searching involved in finding an event. I don't have any special knowledge that allows me to attend - I just attend. Therefore, I log that I attended.

6.5k · May 14, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

But the numbers don't really matter, do they?

Actually, my numbers do matter to me; but I don't give a flying fig what you nor anyone thinks about them.

And I don't care much about your numbers neither.

And I like to play by keeping my post count below my find count. YMMV

3.2k · May 14, 2008

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

It was.

38.2k · May 14, 2008

When we logged "found its" for events I didn't log finds on my events. When it changed to "attended" I continued that practice. I figure I already get credit for being the host. I have no quarrel with anybody who does. I don't see it as unethical, cheesy or anything bad. Just a matter of personal preference.

4.2k · May 14, 2008

When we logged "found its" for events I didn't log finds on my events. When it changed to "attended" I continued that practice. I figure I already get credit for being the host. I have no quarrel with anybody who does. I don't see it as unethical, cheesy or anything bad. Just a matter of personal preference.

Ditto. The reward IMO is that you held a fun event and people showed up. I don't need an extra smiley (you get one for hosting) as some type of payout.

24.7k · May 14, 2008

People (generally) don't log finds on their own caches, so why do some event planners log a find on their own event?

Because they can. It's fuzzier now that the log type is "atteneded" rather than found. Even now event planners are hosts and Hosted isn't a log yet. I still think it's cheezy to log your own.

1.4k · May 14, 2008

It's all cool. Remember that the number one priority in this game is to enjoy yourself. Second, to learn stuff. Don't sweat the little stuff.

Not much I can add to this except to say that the key word is "yourself."

1.1k · May 14, 2008

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

It was.

No, you answered a question that sbell asked of the OP. The OP didn't answer.

It's a bit of a double-standard. The OP has some sort of an issue when the party-thrower 'attends' their own event but the OP is ok "attending" an event multiple times, when, really, he only attended once... amazingly enough, just as many times as the person who was sponsoring the event.

michelle

20.7k · May 14, 2008

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

It was.

Unless the OP is your sock, it wasn't.

3.2k · May 14, 2008

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

It was.

Unless the OP is your sock, it wasn't.

Gosh, ya think that might be one of the reasons they include the quote function?

14.3k · May 14, 2008

Much as many other posters have already said, I see nothing wrong with an event organizer logging an "attended" for their own event, so long as they did attend it. To me, this is not double-dipping at all, but simply logging attendance at an event.

Yep! I hosted one event and I also attended it. The attended log gave me a spot to log all the fun I had. I guess I could have logged a note but I would have felt like I was trying to prove some point that didn't need to be made.

20.7k · May 14, 2008

But... it would be kinda neat if you answered sbell's question up there.

It was.

Unless the OP is your sock, it wasn't.

Gosh, ya think that might be one of the reasons they include the quote function?

I don't get your point.

- The OP made a stement.

- I quoted the OP and asked him a question.

- You quoted my question to the OP, giving your opinion on the issue.

- CG asked the OP to answer my question, linking to the post in which I asked the question.

- You quoted CG and stated that the question was answered.

- Both CG and I quoted you and explained that you could not provide the OP's answer on the issue.

How the heck does your post about the quote function resolve the issue? Everybody involved properly quoted the post to which they were referring.

22k · May 14, 2008

huh, I would have guessed we'd go a whole page before a slap-fight broke out.

Edited May 14, 2008 by BlueDeuce

1.1k · May 14, 2008

huh, I would have guessed we'd go a whole page before a slap-fight broke out.

Best to get it started on the first page so people know what they're getting into when they click on '2'

michelle

3.9k · May 14, 2008

Time to chill out and work on making this positive.

2.5k · May 14, 2008

There is nothing wrong with logging a attened to your own event. If you don't want to you don't have to. Just don't log your own caches, that just opens up another can of worms.

14.3k · May 14, 2008

There is nothing wrong with logging a attened to your own event. If you don't want to you don't have to. Just don't log your own caches, that just opens up another can of worms.

I agree...

2.5k · May 14, 2008

That would make a great cache container.

14.3k · May 14, 2008

That would make a great cache container.

May 15, 2008

People are quick to say it's not about the numbers. Take out the options of double dipping and multi logging temp caches at events and you'll see them change their tune real fast. Best thing you can do is keep yourself honest and to heck with the rest. It's not like you get first place for this game and they are only cheating themselves really.

22k · May 15, 2008

People are quick to say it's not about the numbers. Take out the options of double dipping and multi logging temp caches at events and you'll see them change their tune real fast. Best thing you can do is keep yourself honest and to heck with the rest. It's not like you get first place for this game and they are only cheating themselves really.

Oh, it's about the number, although you are about to be ask how it's cheating. Make caches 1 stat only and very few will log temp caches at an event. Remove the Discover option and hardly anyone will let owner know the bug is still in the cache. That's just how it is.

May 15, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

They log that they attended because they attended. Even if I didn't see the logic in doing this, I can't imagine why I would care that other people were doing it.

Turning this issue around a bit, you have 13 'attendeds' for ten events. How is that any different?

I see it differently because 1) I didn't put on the event and 2)I attended an ongoing monthly meeting that uses the same listing from month to month 4 times at four different locations on four different months (look it up for yourself).

Edited May 15, 2008 by shearzone

May 15, 2008

When we logged "found its" for events I didn't log finds on my events. When it changed to "attended" I continued that practice. I figure I already get credit for being the host. I have no quarrel with anybody who does. I don't see it as unethical, cheesy or anything bad. Just a matter of personal preference.

Ditto. The reward IMO is that you held a fun event and people showed up. I don't need an extra smiley (you get one for hosting) as some type of payout.

Guess we're just old school. Go ahead folks, add that +1 to your find coun if it makes you feel good...

1.4k · May 15, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

They log that they attended because they attended. Even if I didn't see the logic in doing this, I can't imagine why I would care that other people were doing it.

Turning this issue around a bit, you have 13 'attendeds' for ten events. How is that any different?

I see it differently because 1) I didn't put on the event and 2)I attended an ongoing monthly meeting that uses the same listing from month to month 4 times on four different days (look it up for yourself).

Shearzone.. have you ever put on an event? I have. It is a heck of a lot of work.

Why not feel fortunate that there is someone in your community that wants to put out all of the time, energy, and money so others can enjoy themselves? I think the fact that you seem to be completely missing this gift you have been given and instead are focused on proposing some sort of restriction on your event host is where most folks in this thread are failing to understand you.

Edited May 15, 2008 by Team GeoBlast

22k · May 15, 2008

you're expected to attend your own party, I still see it as double-dipping because you get a number in both your hide count AND find count

They log that they attended because they attended. Even if I didn't see the logic in doing this, I can't imagine why I would care that other people were doing it.

Turning this issue around a bit, you have 13 'attendeds' for ten events. How is that any different?

I see it differently because 1) I didn't put on the event and 2)I attended an ongoing monthly meeting that uses the same listing from month to month 4 times on four different months (look it up for yourself).

You're logging the same cache more than once. Why, for the number? Certainly not so people know you were there a second time.

May 15, 2008

Shearzone.. have you ever put on an event?

Yes, I've put on two, and in the process of organizing a third one this summer.

I have. It is a heck of a lot of work.

I know, that is why I am proud to see the number '2' right next to the sentence bubble under my hides column. I find that logging my own event would cheapen that feeling

Edited May 15, 2008 by shearzone

May 15, 2008

You're logging the same cache more than once. Why, for the number? Certainly not so people know you were there a second time.

I didn't write that cache page up, and the date changes every month. Why do you think people have logged that event years before the one that hasn't even happened yet? As far as I'm concerned, I am attending a different event each time that just happens to use an ongoing listing. It's a good way to preserve the history of the monthly meetings if you ask me.

Edited May 15, 2008 by shearzone

2.7k · May 15, 2008

I've log an attended with every cache event that I organized. But my final event will be my funeral. I'll attend it thats for sure, but probably won't be able to log and attended. So I go out 1 smiley short and I guess that's the way the cookie crumbles.

22k · May 15, 2008

You're logging the same cache more than once. Why, for the number? Certainly not so people know you were there a second time.

I didn't write that cache page up, and the date changes every month. Why do you think people have logged that event years before the one that hasn't even happened yet? As far as I'm concerned, I am attending a different event each time that just happens to use an ongoing listing. It's a good way to preserve the history of the monthly meetings if you ask me.

Either you have reasons for logging more than once or reasons for not. Taking the stance of 1:1 takes plenty of heat by itself. I don't have the time or the interest of supporting one flavor of multiple logging over another.

Edit: in case I'm not clear, I am definitely talking about getting more than 1 stat per cache.

Edited May 15, 2008 by BlueDeuce

Logging your own event

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation