Puzzle caches are not necesarily puzzles anymore...

[+Rathergohiking]

Geocaching.com's new puzzle cache guidelines the reviewers are using, in my opinion, leave something to be desired. For the most part, if you have to do something other than signing the log book, the cache will likely be classified as a puzzle cache instead of a traditional cache, even though the cache is at the listed coordinates.

 

For example, I recently put out a cache (now archived) where the cacher had to write an opinion about any subject he/she choose when the cache was logged on line. The cache was at the listed coordinates. The reviewer would not approve it to be published unless I classified it as a puzzle cache.

 

Air Rats on a Light Pole

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f3-508f42c06793

 

I found this cache today and it was a puzzle cache merely because it has a camera in it and the hider requested that you take your picture when you log the cache. The cache was at the listed coordinates:

 

The Crows Nest

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...3d-b518c297dc94

 

Is "political correctness" now corrupting geocaching????

 

You decide for yourself. Here is the puzzle cache description off of Geocaching.com:

 

The "catch-all" of cache types, this form of cache can involve complicated puzzles you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. Examples include sending the cache owner a verification codeword found inside the logbook, performing some task at the cache location and taking a photograph, or writing the online log in a format or with content that satisfies the cache requirements. Due to the increasing creativity of geocaching this becomes the staging ground for new and unique challenges.

Edited October 26, 2008 by rathergohiking

[CoyoteRed]

For example, I recently put out a cache (now archived) where the cacher had to write an opinion about any subject he/she choose when the cache was logged on line. The cache was at the listed coordinates. The reviewer would not approve it to be published unless I classified it as a puzzle cache.

...or removed the additional requirement for logging the cache, I presume.

 

A requirement, other than signing the log, in order to log the cache online makes it an ALR which should be classified as an "Other." (Not a puzzle.) The request that someone take a picture would not make it an ALR and that, alone, should not have made it be an "Other."

 

Note: Other, Unknown, Mystery, and Puzzle are different cache types shoehorned into one category.

[Keystone]

Actually, the relevant guideline text is this:

 

Caches with mandatory requirements in addition to signing the logbook should be listed as mystery caches. Examples include sending the cache owner a verification codeword found inside the logbook, performing some task at the cache location and taking a photograph, or writing the online log in a format or with content that satisfies the cache requirements. The mystery cache designation assists finders in identifying that something extra is required in order to log a find.

 

To log a "found it" on your cache page, all I ought to have to do is find your container and sign the logbook. If you want the power to delete my "found it," then it's only fair to flag your cache as something other than a traditional cache. By definition, a traditional cache is one where I can go to the posted coords, find the container, and sign the log.

 

Political correctness has nothing to do with this guideline. That would be the "Caches That Solicit" guideline.

 

This "new" guideline was effective in February 2007.

[+Rathergohiking]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

[Keystone]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

Fine. So drop the additional logging requirement, and you're good.

[+tozainamboku]

I don't particularly agree with the solution that TPTB came up with to handle ALR caches. But if you wish to talk political correctness, the used to be tons of posts in this forum by people who had there found logs deleted because they didn't want to be bothered to do a totally extraneous activity beyond finding the cache in order to log an online find. Even as recently as last week, there was a complaint about a deleted log on such cache that predated the change in the guidelines to list it a an unknown type. TPTB and the reviewers could have taken the drastic step of archiving any cache that had additional requirement (and certainly not approving any cache that was submitted with a requirement in the write up). Or they could have left things as they were and told people who got their logs deleted that those were the breaks; that cache owners can make up any silly rule for their own cache that they want. After all, Geocaching.com is just a listing service and so long as the cache meets the guidelines the "rules" for logging a find are up to the individual owner. Instead TPTB took a compromise position. Owners could delete logs that didn't meet requirement beyond simply finding the cache, but if they want to do this they must use the unknown cache type. Part of the reason is that some cachers believe that they should be able to load coordinates into their GPS and look for a cache with out ever reading what is on the cache page. (I'll admit that with the advent of paperless caching I generally don't look at the page for a traditional cache until I am stumped and need a hint). Since many unknown caches are not at the posted coordinates, the idea is that people will at least read the page before hunting the cache. Then they can decide if they want to bother with the additional requirement or not.

[+Airmapper]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

 

But look at it from another point of view.

 

ALR caches are very annoying when you run up on them not knowing. I do cache paperless and can read cache pages on the go, but not everyone is, and I don't always look before I go. I see a traditional cache I'm assuming ALL I need is my GPS and an ink pen, sign the log, and off to the next one. Taking photos, writing a silly poem, or e-mailing the owner the answer to a headstone puzzle fall outside a "Traditional" cache's scope in that I have to do more than leave my scribbled name on the log book.

 

If I see the question mark on my GPS screen, it makes me stop and look to see what makes it special, I can look to my PDA and see if it's something I can accomplish. If so I go for it, if not I make a mental note that if I'm in the area again to do my homework on it before attempting.

 

Just consider it common courtesy to give people out there caching a heads up. With this game its a given we have to get our nose out of the computer screen at some point and just go caching.

[+coggins]

You decide for yourself. Here is the puzzle cache description off of Geocaching.com:

That is the description of from a Mystery or Puzzle Caches.

 

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

Right you are, that would be a Mystery Cache.

[+Prime Suspect]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

My view on this is simple: A Traditional cache should require nothing more than finding the cache and signing the log.

 

If you want to enforce mandatory additional conditions, you've moved it beyond the Traditional category.

[+OReviewer]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

There are many great on-site puzzles that require you to solve something at the posted coordinates such as a monkey-puzzle or pick a lock. You can't be saying those are not puzzles people should be made aware of.

[Mr.Yuck]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

 

Not here though. Now maybe if you create another geocaching website, and call it rathergohiking.com, then maybe.

 

Seriously though, the requirement is 1.5 years old, and seems to be working quite well. And I'm not usually one to agree with what The Frog does.

[7rxc]

I have to go look at the symbology involved... As in most of our computer software, I take the ? symbol to be that meaning INFORMATION... Something more involved than normal. I don't take it as meaning a puzzle, quest or any type of cache in particular. Just something you should read more about if you care to... or not. Perhaps those 'technical gear' / extreme type caches should get the ? symbol as well... or perhaps an ! ... as in "oh wow!"

 

I do agree that 'traditional' should be the realm of 'normal' cachers. but I like puzzles and mysteries and even would welcome the odd physical challenge as well... They are all caches.

 

Doug 7RXC

[+Isonzo Karst]

Note: Other, Unknown, Mystery, and Puzzle are different cache types shoehorned into one category.

 

Yep, I don't think it will happen, but I could see turning the current category into 3:

 

One [Puzzle] for all caches that are "front-loaded", ie, you need to do some work before setting out on the hunt to get to the actual coordinates. The caches that many think of as true puzzles. I'd also put the "bonus cache" in this category; the cache that can be found only after finding other caches, travel bugs or some other travel/find.

 

One [Flaming Hoops] for ALR caches (its own category, the better to instant ignore!)

 

One [unknown] for all the rest: the catch-all category for the oddball stuff, and the commoner cache-at-coords with puzzle at coords between cacher and find.

[+briansnat]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

 

Your view maybe, but that's not the way it is. For example I know of a cache that is at the posted coordinates, but it is locked. You need to solve a puzzle to obtain the combination. Tell me that's not a puzzle cache.

 

My view is that if I go to the published coordinates, find a cache and sign the logbook, I should be able to log

a found it. If there is some other requirement I have to fulfill before I can log my find then it's not a traditional.

 

As the guidelines say, the Mystery/Puzzle category is a "catch all" category for any cache that doesn't fit neatly into the other categories. ALR caches fit that description.

[+erik88l-r]

I'm probably not the only one who found a cache using only my GPS, only to discover later that I couldn't log it 'cause I didn't meet the ALR. <rant> A particularly painful one for me was a cache in downtown LA that I walked from my hotel to hunt, then found I was supposed to leave a foreign coin in the sucker to log a find. How many businessmen traveling in their own country carry foreign coins in their pocket? </rant>

 

Anyway, maybe "puzzle/mystery" isn't the best category to use, as "virtual" wasn't the best category to use for "locationless caches" when they first came out, but until they took off there was no need for a separate category. Maybe that was a bad analogy, as the example took off to the point of moving to it's own Waymarking website, but the point is that listing it as a mystery makes people take another look at the text on the page.

 

Perhaps in the future, if Additional Logging Requirements catches on, we can have an additional category just for them. In the meantime, as a cache hider you can avoid that by having an Additional Logging Suggestion", or "Additional Logging Request" that makes taking that photo (or whatever) optional instead of mandatory.

 

~erik~

[Motorcycle_Mama]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

My view on this is simple: A Traditional cache should require nothing more than finding the cache and signing the log.

 

If you want to enforce mandatory additional conditions, you've moved it beyond the Traditional category.

Exactly!

 

If you want to place additional logging requirements on your cache, then it's no longer a traditional cache. It's something else. And Geocaching.com has provided cache owners with the ability to list the cache with the Mystery Cache type.

Edited October 26, 2008 by Motorcycle_Mama

[+wimseyguy]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

My view on this is simple: A Traditional cache should require nothing more than finding the cache and signing the log.

 

If you want to enforce mandatory additional conditions, you've moved it beyond the Traditional category.

Ditto what the gangsta cacher says. You are certainly entitled to your view, and even to express it here. But the ownership and management of this listing service do not share your view, and I'm glad for it.

 

I do wish there was another way of identifying ALR caches as I don't really care for puzzle caches and usually filter them out when traveling. But I would have no trouble writing my log in haiku or rhyme, or even dropping a foreign coin if I knew about that requirement in advance. So I miss out on some caches I might otherwise find.

[+GIDEON-X]

I have a series of access caches (in the Yuma area) most all are at posted locations, yet to open the cache one must do another bit of work (most are math problems), so these are in fact not puzzle caches..........what then?? Puzzel Cache?

[+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher]

I've heard a rumor about ALR caches. Your problems may be mute in the near future.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

[+39chevy]

I'm probably not the only one who found a cache using only my GPS, only to discover later that I couldn't log it 'cause I didn't meet the ALR. <rant> A particularly painful one for me was a cache in downtown LA that I walked from my hotel to hunt, then found I was supposed to leave a foreign coin in the sucker to log a find. How many businessmen traveling in their own country carry foreign coins in their pocket? </rant>

 

 

~erik~

Seems to me if you have to leave a coin (foreign or not) in a cache as an ALR that would be a commercial cache, you have to pay to log.

 

Commercial Caches

 

Commercial caches will not be published on geocaching.com without prior approval from Groundspeak. A commercial cache is a geocache listing or geocache which is perceived by Groundspeak, Groundspeak's employees, or the Volunteer Geocache Reviewers as having been submitted to geocaching.com with the principal or substantial intent of soliciting customers or generating commercial gain. The geocache is presumed to be commercial if the finder is required to go inside a business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, or if the cache listing has overtones of advertising, marketing, or promotion.

[+wesi]

Finding a cache and not being able to log it because I can't meet the ALRs is annoying. Just as annoying as NOT finding a cache and later determining via the listing that I was hunting a virtual or puzzle that just "happened" to have a traditional icon for whatever reason. Both exist, and both make paperless GPS-only caching difficult at times. IMO, if it ain't a pure traditional, it shouldn't have the tradi icon.

[+ChileHead]

I don't see the stigma attached to listing it as an unknown.

[+The Blue Quasar]

Note: Other, Unknown, Mystery, and Puzzle are different cache types shoehorned into one category.

 

Yep, I don't think it will happen, but I could see turning the current category into 3:

 

One [Puzzle] for all caches that are "front-loaded", ie, you need to do some work before setting out on the hunt to get to the actual coordinates. The caches that many think of as true puzzles. I'd also put the "bonus cache" in this category; the cache that can be found only after finding other caches, travel bugs or some other travel/find.

 

One [Flaming Hoops] for ALR caches (its own category, the better to instant ignore!)

 

One [unknown] for all the rest: the catch-all category for the oddball stuff, and the commoner cache-at-coords with puzzle at coords between cacher and find.

 

To be honest, I don't get the [unknown] as it relates to the other two examples. But I really like what you said in the first two examples. Especially the idea that [Puzzle] caches are solved before heading out. The concept of "Bonus Cache" has the potential for abuse, or more accurately as a way to circumvent Multi-Caches. Having made several 'series' where after finding a set of caches people then have the needed info for 'one more cache', I think they are fun but only one "Bonus Cache" should be permitted otherwise it is just a Multi-cache masquerading as several caches that don't even stand alone.

 

The comment about [Flaming Hoops].... these can be quite a turn-off, and add very little to the cache itself. Recently my son and I made a cache like this, and really regret it now. In short, I feel that adding the ALR on our cache keeps some people away and in general we ruined what could have been a good cache.

 

BQ

Edited October 26, 2008 by The Blue Quasar

[Luckless]

I'm probably not the only one who found a cache using only my GPS, only to discover later that I couldn't log it 'cause I didn't meet the ALR. <rant> A particularly painful one for me was a cache in downtown LA that I walked from my hotel to hunt, then found I was supposed to leave a foreign coin in the sucker to log a find. How many businessmen traveling in their own country carry foreign coins in their pocket? </rant>

 

 

~erik~

Seems to me if you have to leave a coin (foreign or not) in a cache as an ALR that would be a commercial cache, you have to pay to log.

 

Commercial Caches

 

Commercial caches will not be published on geocaching.com without prior approval from Groundspeak. A commercial cache is a geocache listing or geocache which is perceived by Groundspeak, Groundspeak's employees, or the Volunteer Geocache Reviewers as having been submitted to geocaching.com with the principal or substantial intent of soliciting customers or generating commercial gain. The geocache is presumed to be commercial if the finder is required to go inside a business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, or if the cache listing has overtones of advertising, marketing, or promotion.

 

Seems these should be theme caches - suggested- not necessarily required.

[+niraD]

One [Puzzle] for all caches that are "front-loaded", ie, you need to do some work before setting out on the hunt to get to the actual coordinates. The caches that many think of as true puzzles. I'd also put the "bonus cache" in this category; the cache that can be found only after finding other caches, travel bugs or some other travel/find.

Not all puzzles are front-loaded. Some of my favorites have been ones where you show up at the posted coordinates, then you find and solve the puzzle.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I'm probably not the only one who found a cache using only my GPS, only to discover later that I couldn't log it 'cause I didn't meet the ALR. <rant> A particularly painful one for me was a cache in downtown LA that I walked from my hotel to hunt, then found I was supposed to leave a foreign coin in the sucker to log a find. How many businessmen traveling in their own country carry foreign coins in their pocket? </rant>

 

Anyway, maybe "puzzle/mystery" isn't the best category to use, as "virtual" wasn't the best category to use for "locationless caches" when they first came out, but until they took off there was no need for a separate category. Maybe that was a bad analogy, as the example took off to the point of moving to it's own Waymarking website, but the point is that listing it as a mystery makes people take another look at the text on the page.

 

Perhaps in the future, if Additional Logging Requirements catches on, we can have an additional category just for them. In the meantime, as a cache hider you can avoid that by having an Additional Logging Suggestion", or "Additional Logging Request" that makes taking that photo (or whatever) optional instead of mandatory.

 

~erik~

 

Yeah.. what everyone else said. Cept that I really would like to know if what I am looking for is NOT at the posted coordinates when I am caching away from my computer. With all these other additions to the definitions thrown into the mix it makes knowing that a lot more complicated, if not impossible.

[+J-Way]

Every so often a suggestion pops up about splitting off a new category from the existing Mystery/Unknown/Puzzle category. It normally either suggests putting ALR caches or PUZZLE caches or both in their own category(ies). After much discussion, arguing, nashing of teeth, and threats of geo-cide, the discussion eventually dies down and is forgotten.

 

I personally would prefer a separate category for "Puzzle" caches, but then comes the problem of defining a "puzzle". Pre-solve only, or pre-and-post solve? At listed coordinates or somewhere else? Are multi-puzzles allowed? And so forth and so on.

 

Another option would be to make ALR caches a separate category (I'd like to see this one happen as well). Basically, any cache where you have to do something other than finding the cache and sign the log would fall in this category (Challenge caches, liar (story) caches, photo caches, code-word caches, etc.).

[+trainlove]

I think the way it is is fine.

People don't normally do puzzle caches blind by coordinates only. So they are well aware of ALL that's required.

 

But if political correctness is going to take hold, then how about splitting up Multi-caches, into Real multi-caches, and those that are really not. To me, a multi-cache should have containers with coordinates at many places, looking at gravestones, monuments, counting trees... to calculate the location of the notebook are NOT real multi-caches.

 

P.S. There is no such thing as Puzzle caches, it's Unknown, and that includes Puzzles, ALR's, and anything you want to make it.

[jholly]

I think the way it is is fine.

People don't normally do puzzle caches blind by coordinates only. So they are well aware of ALL that's required.

 

But if political correctness is going to take hold, then how about splitting up Multi-caches, into Real multi-caches, and those that are really not. To me, a multi-cache should have containers with coordinates at many places, looking at gravestones, monuments, counting trees... to calculate the location of the notebook are NOT real multi-caches.

 

P.S. There is no such thing as Puzzle caches, it's Unknown, and that includes Puzzles, ALR's, and anything you want to make it.

 

Oh, I don't know about that. I have done multi-caches that had only ONE container. Went to the first waypoint to find a couple surveyor ribbons tied on to a tree. Both had co-ordinates one them. Pick one set of co-ordinates and follow them. Each waypoint either had ribbons with co-ordinates or a ribbon with DEAD END. Finally one of the co-ordinates yielded a ammo can.

 

Jim

[+FireRef]

I was told to make the caches that had the requirement to post a photo on the website for them to claim a found-it log ?-type caches. If that's what's required for this listing service to publish my cache, fine, so be it. I have no problem with that.

 

About a week ago, I downloaded a bunch of the "?"type caches in my area, and started working on the puzzles. Turned out a number of them aren't puzzles. One requires you to post a DNF log with your Found-it log. Another requires photos like my caches. Some are puzzles to solve. Some are the cache which requires the collecting of codes from other caches to find it. Yet another, mine, is a 5 step multi that requires quite a bit of problem solving in chemistry before you can get from stage to stage, so I classified it as a ? type.

 

I do think this category should be split up into puzzles, ALR's, and... hmm - any other categories? ALR's should be pretty much their own category, I would think. To say that is what was decided and so we have to stay with it - well, I guess we should be putting food and beer into caches, because that was what was done in the first one, and we better not change those rules.

[+J-Way]

P.S. There is no such thing as Puzzle caches, it's Unknown, and that includes Puzzles, ALR's, and anything you want to make it.

I was going to make this same comment, but I decided to check the Guidelines first:

Cache Types

• Traditional Caches
  
• Multi-Caches
  
• Mystery or Puzzle Caches
  
• Letterbox Hybrid
  

But elsewhere (such as on profile pages) they're known as "Unknown (Mystery) Caches"

 

Oh, I don't know about that. I have done multi-caches that had only ONE container. Went to the first waypoint to find a couple surveyor ribbons tied on to a tree. Both had co-ordinates one them. Pick one set of co-ordinates and follow them. Each waypoint either had ribbons with co-ordinates or a ribbon with DEAD END. Finally one of the co-ordinates yielded a ammo can.

I'd put this one in the "Annoying Cache" category. But multi's with waypoints like this (one container) are legit and quite common. I also like the multis where you do light math (add and subtract only) based on local objects or numbers to derive the final coordinates. Edited October 27, 2008 by J-Way

[+Renegade Knight]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

 

Not exactly.

A puzzle cache is at the coordinates given, AFTER you solve for them some way.

That you have to use fake coordinates to begin with is a constraint of how this site works. Not how the cache itself should work. My solution to Puzzle (and Loctionless) is to use a radius. You can see a list of Puzzle and Locationless caches you are in the area to solve. You never see coords. Just a list of suitable caches.

 

As for the ALR caches they should have their own type. If it was important enough to spin them off traditional, and since there is nothing unknown about them (The ALR is clear and stated up front) They should just be called that. ALR caches.

 

Traditional has been redefined from "a Cache at these given coords" to "A cache at these coods for which you are not expected to do more than find the cache and sign the log".

[+Renegade Knight]

...I personally would prefer a separate category for "Puzzle" caches, but then comes the problem of defining a "puzzle". Pre-solve only, or pre-and-post solve? At listed coordinates or somewhere else? Are multi-puzzles allowed? And so forth and so on.

 

Another option would be to make ALR caches a separate category (I'd like to see this one happen as well). Basically, any cache where you have to do something other than finding the cache and sign the log would fall in this category (Challenge caches, liar (story) caches, photo caches, code-word caches, etc.).

You end up with the problem of defining the cache no matter what you do. I'm still not sure what a mystery cache is other than a catch all for "things that don't fit the other catagories".

 

Interesting that you would think that Challenge caches are ALR. It didn't occure to me. Once you meet the test you are given the coords and can log freely. Seems more like a puzzle. (A puzzle is an ALR with the conditions in front of getting the coords. ALR has conditions after you get the coords).

[+DanOCan]

But if political correctness is going to take hold, then how about splitting up Multi-caches, into Real multi-caches, and those that are really not. To me, a multi-cache should have containers with coordinates at many places, looking at gravestones, monuments, counting trees... to calculate the location of the notebook are NOT real multi-caches.

 

I'll respectfully disagree on that one. I recently did a Multi that involved getting information from a plaque, doing some simple math to derive the next coordinates, then finding a container that contained the next coordinates, which then contained the information needed to do a projection to the final. I didn't feel in any way that not having a container at Stage One or coordinates at Stage Three made this Multi any less "real" than the others I have done that have containers and coordinates at each stage.

 

EDIT: Fixed quotation tags and also to add "Sorry, this is sort of off-topic. My bad."

Edited October 27, 2008 by DanOCan

[+DanOCan]

About a week ago, I downloaded a bunch of the "?"type caches in my area, and started working on the puzzles. Turned out a number of them aren't puzzles. One requires you to post a DNF log with your Found-it log. Another requires photos like my caches. Some are puzzles to solve. Some are the cache which requires the collecting of codes from other caches to find it. Yet another, mine, is a 5 step multi that requires quite a bit of problem solving in chemistry before you can get from stage to stage, so I classified it as a ? type.

 

Yeah, the current method certainly involves more work up front. I have a notification set up when a new ? cache gets published so I can read the description to see if it is a Puzzle or an ALR cache. If it's an ALR I'll put the checkmark next to it in GSAK so I know I can visit the coordinates (but keeping in the back of my mind that as a ? cache I'll have something extra to do) -- otherwise it waits until I can solve it before it gets the checkmark. Any ? cache that doesn't have the checkbox selected never gets dumped to the GPSr.

 

Frankly, I haven't seen an ALR cache yet where I felt the ALR added to the value of the cache -- mostly it takes away from the experience of a good Traditional.

[Clan Riffster]

One [Flaming Hoops] for ALR caches (its own category, the better to instant ignore!)

Can I get an "Amen!"?

I proposed a long time ago the idea that ALR caches should have a separate icon. I'd love to see Groundspeak run with this idea.

[+ThirstyMick]

I love my Colorado and the fact that I can read the cache description while I'm walking to the cache, but I cannot tell you how frustrating it used to be when I'd create a PQ of only traditional caches and then find out when I got home there was some other requirement I hadn't met, or to find out the reason for my DNF was that the traditional cache was an offset. If there are any logging requirements other than signing the physical log or if the cache is not at the posted coordinates, then it is not a "traditional" cache.

[+J-Way]

Another option would be to make ALR caches a separate category (I'd like to see this one happen as well). Basically, any cache where you have to do something other than finding the cache and sign the log would fall in this category (Challenge caches, liar (story) caches, photo caches, code-word caches, etc.).

Interesting that you would think that Challenge caches are ALR. It didn't occure to me. Once you meet the test you are given the coords and can log freely. Seems more like a puzzle. (A puzzle is an ALR with the conditions in front of getting the coords. ALR has conditions after you get the coords).

My personal litmus test for an ALR cache is as follows: If a non-cacher stumbles upon a container in the woods, signs the paper log, then goes to www.geocaching.com (following the directions on the laminated card), is this person allowed to log the find online?

 

With most puzzle, multi, traditional, letterbox, etc. caches the answer is YES, so no ALR. Even most owners of exceptionally hard puzzle caches will allow online logs for people who haven't solved the puzzle as long as they did sign the physical log. Just look at the logs where a large group of people found the cache at once; do you think they all solved the puzzle independantly?

 

With Challenge caches the answer is NO. If I were to find and sign the "Mississippi Alphabet Challenge" (which happens to be located at the listed coordinates) I would not be able to submit an online log because I haven't completed the Additional Requirements - hence it's an ALR cache. Also, most new Challenge caches are required to be located at the listed coordinates because NEW caches that require emailing the owner for additional information aren't allowed. The only thing keeping anyone and everyone from attempting to log them online are the Additional Logging Requirements.

[+Rathergohiking]

In my humble opinion, we need more icons for classifying cache types:

 

Instead of having puzzles, traditionals and mult-caches, how about the following:

 

"Puzzles" - the cache is not at the listed coordinates. You gotta solve something in order to get the coordinates in order to find and log a cache.

"ALR" - the cache is at the listed coordinates. You just have to do something extra to log the cache.

"Traditionals" - at the listed coordinates, find it and log it. Simple as that.

"Traditional multi-cache" - coordinates for interim location(s) are in physical locations; no decyphering or math involved.

"Puzzle multi-cache" - the coordinates to the interim location(s) are not physical in nature or require some sort of computation for each stage.

[+NotThePainter]

Not all puzzles are front-loaded. Some of my favorites have been ones where you show up at the posted coordinates, then you find and solve the puzzle.

Like my "Outstanding in his Field" mini-series.

• Rubik's Cube: Outstanding in his Field #1
   
  
• Quipu: Outstanding in his Field #2
  

You cannot solve these at home. You should do some research at home, but bring your notes with you and solve them in the woods.

 

#3 and #4 were designed but I moved from the area before placing them. I actually have an offer for a local maintainer if I want to travel back and place them, and someday I just might do that!

[Neos2]

I'd like to see the ALR caches have their own icon/be a separate type.

 

I'd also like to see simple offsets be marked in a different way than long multis. (The kind where you go to the cords and solve some short puzzle on-site to get the finaal coords)

 

Both of those types are often very "do-able" while out caching with the usual assortment of equipment. I typically run separate PQs for traditional caches vs "puzzle/mystery" caches and multicaches, then spend as much time as I can spare transferring the can-do caches back into the "traditional" file.

 

Especially if we are traveling, I don't want too many caches we can't do pre-loaded into the gps. Typically while traveling we load caches along our route. As we find a cache we look up the next cache on our route before heading to it and read about it in the PDA.

 

If I leave all the puzzles and multis in the PQ, I spend more time than it's worth sifting through caches in the PDA when I could be driving to the next cache. But I know I am skipping some wonderful caches that we could easily and cheerfully complete just because they are mixed in with the puzzles that require several years (for me) to solve, or take more time to get to all the stages than we have to spare on a trip.

[Skippermark]

My view on this is simple: If the cache is at the listed coordinates, it should NOT be a puzzle cache, period.

Fine. So drop the additional logging requirement, and you're good.

Everything is good the way it is now. Why does everyone always want to change everything?

 

Sometimes people don't always read cache descriptions, and if the cache has a traditional icon, they may not even know they have to do something special. Or, if someone is in the field and only has their GPS, they would have no way of knowing they might need to draw a picture of a horse in the logbook or something like that to make the find count.

[+KBI]

One [Flaming Hoops] for ALR caches (its own category, the better to instant ignore!)

Can I get an "Amen!"?

I proposed a long time ago the idea that ALR caches should have a separate icon. I'd love to see Groundspeak run with this idea.

I own an ALR cache. It used to be listed as a Traditional cache. I had it changed to a Puzzle/Mystery as soon as the guidelines were re-written.

 

I generally support fewer icons, not more, but: If a new icon were created specifically for ALR caches I would be happy to change again, and to flag my cache accordingly so that fine folks like Isonzo Karst and Clan Riffster could easily ignore my cache to their convenience.

[CoyoteRed]

...to make the find count.

Signing the logbook is the only thing you need to do to make the find count. That's why it's called Additional Logging Requirements. It's only if you care about logging that cache online if you really need to concern yourself with the ALR.

[Clan Riffster]

If a new icon were created specifically for ALR caches I would be happy to change again, and to flag my cache accordingly so that fine folks like Isonzo Karst and Clan Riffster could easily ignore my cache to their convenience.

And there was much rejoicing...

[+FireRef]

Honestly, I don't know what the problem with ALR's is - I think they add a different perspective to the game. Like virtuals, locationless caches, etc, they sometimes make the game more fun and sometimes make it more of a hassle.

[Dinoprophet]

In my humble opinion, we need more icons for classifying cache types:

 

Instead of having puzzles, traditionals and mult-caches, how about the following:

 

"Puzzles" - the cache is not at the listed coordinates. You gotta solve something in order to get the coordinates in order to find and log a cache.

"ALR" - the cache is at the listed coordinates. You just have to do something extra to log the cache.

"Traditionals" - at the listed coordinates, find it and log it. Simple as that.

"Traditional multi-cache" - coordinates for interim location(s) are in physical locations; no decyphering or math involved.

"Puzzle multi-cache" - the coordinates to the interim location(s) are not physical in nature or require some sort of computation for each stage.

ALR in-the field puzzle multi-cache Too many variations.

 

What about leaving all the types as they are but adding a flag of some sort indicating "special instructions on cache page". The advantage is that it could be used for everything from restricted availability to puzzles to ALRs. The downsides are, it might get overused (I *really* want you to see my cool page layout!) and it would mean new functionality on the site, as opposed to an adjustment to existing functionality (cache types).

[CoyoteRed]

Honestly, I don't know what the problem with ALR's is - I think they add a different perspective to the game.

Simply adding a new perspective is not always a good thing as evidenced by past attempts. I don't like them because it creates a disconnect between signing the log and logging online.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Geocaching.com's new puzzle cache guidelines the reviewers are using, in my opinion, leave something to be desired. For the most part, if you have to do something other than signing the log book, the cache will likely be classified as a puzzle cache instead of a traditional cache, even though the cache is at the listed coordinates.

 

For example, I recently put out a cache (now archived) where the cacher had to write an opinion about any subject he/she choose when the cache was logged on line. The cache was at the listed coordinates. The reviewer would not approve it to be published unless I classified it as a puzzle cache.

 

Air Rats on a Light Pole

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f3-508f42c06793

 

I found this cache today and it was a puzzle cache merely because it has a camera in it and the hider requested that you take your picture when you log the cache. The cache was at the listed coordinates:

 

The Crows Nest

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...3d-b518c297dc94

 

Is "political correctness" now corrupting geocaching????

 

You decide for yourself. Here is the puzzle cache description off of Geocaching.com:

 

The "catch-all" of cache types, this form of cache can involve complicated puzzles you will first need to solve to determine the coordinates. Examples include sending the cache owner a verification codeword found inside the logbook, performing some task at the cache location and taking a photograph, or writing the online log in a format or with content that satisfies the cache requirements. Due to the increasing creativity of geocaching this becomes the staging ground for new and unique challenges.

Frankly, since you have asked, I cannot fathom why you are getting bent out of shape over the simple rule that additional logging requirement caches, aka ALR caches, should, according to the guidelines, be classified as "?" caches to reflect the fact claiming a find is NOT so simple and easy as simply signing the logbook. I have no idea why this bothers you, and I also have not the slightest idea why you are bringing the concept of "political correctness" and "corruption of geocaching" into the equation. Frankly, your the content of your post comes across as rather irrational, rather curmudgeonly, and very cranky. Wow! Did you perhaps get out of the wrong side of bed this morning? Or did you forget to take your nap?

 

BTW, I happen to like many ALR caches, and I even own a few, and it is obvious that you must like ALRs too, since you created one and then composed your long initial post about the same cache. I wish you much fun in creating and hiding ALRs, and in finding ALRs.

[+Renegade Knight]

Honestly, I don't know what the problem with ALR's is - I think they add a different perspective to the game.

Simply adding a new perspective is not always a good thing as evidenced by past attempts. I don't like them because it creates a disconnect between signing the log and logging online.

There are two disconnect points.

In the brain of the person ignoring the rules and in the ability of the owner to make it so that you can't log the cache log without meeting the ALRs. But for the former the latter would not be a problem.

 

Overall I find finders are a lot like trained lab rats. If you give them the treat then ask them to do the ALR they don't like it. If you ask them to do the ALR before you give them the treat they will work harder. I wish it were all a matter of integrety, but it's not. I've found caches, then learned of the ALR then never logged because I was never going back. The difference at which point htey are allowed to "find the cache" makes all the difference. I've gotten out of the After The Fact ALR business.