Jump to content

Beta Testing?


Fugglestone
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Since it ate my original . . . .

 

Now, I can understand if you have a particularly complex multi, or a puzzle or something that is just plain hard you might want to have a friend check it to see that all is in order before you publish the cache. I guess you could consider it a test of the emergency geocaching system.

 

But beyond that, I kind of feel like giving someone the coordinates, and asking them to find it, then logging that find is kind of a cheat for giving away FTF. Not the FTF prize, just the honor of the FTF.

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I get a little charged when there is the possibility of a FTF on a cache, and when I look at a brand new publish that was found and logged 2 days prior (GC1JWDX), it takes some of the joy out. I will still go to it. I will still log it. I just won't run out to do it right away.

 

Not a huge deal. It isn't a game breaker for me. Just a tiny little rant for a wet Monday morning. Thanks for playing, and we will see you next week, same bat-time, same bat-channel!

Link to comment

I've seen people opposed to testing new caches, because it ruins there FTF experience, because they are no longer 'really the first'. I'd say testing your caches is for all the people doing the cache, not just for the few who want to be first.

Normal policy around here is: testers log on page 4 and later, and they wait with logging until the fanatics have had their little game.

 

On the other hand: if the owner doesn't care at all about ftf, why should he be obligated to cater for those who do? If he has a tester, and that tester logs his find on the right day, what's the problem? Too bad for those who see that 'honour' passing by. There'll be other caches.

Link to comment

I've seen people opposed to testing new caches, because it ruins there FTF experience, because they are no longer 'really the first'. I'd say testing your caches is for all the people doing the cache, not just for the few who want to be first.

 

I am not at all opposed to testing caches. Alot of times it makes sense. Like I said originally, if it is particularly complex, or difficult a little test to save everyone down the road some grief just makes sense. But in this particular case that caught my attention this morning, it is a difficulty/terrain 2/1.5, by a very experienced cacher. And what is refered to as a beta test was actually a gimme FTF while the cache was being placed, which when called such, I have no problem with. I have seen alot of "placed in honor of XXXX so they were given the chance to FTF" caches, and I think they are great.

 

I guess what just got me about it was the term. Beta Tester. It just seems like a euphamism for being FTF before anyone else knows the cache even exists. It makes the finder feel good because they don't believe they robbed anyone else of the FTF. It is meant to make the next finder feel good knowing they were first after publish. But I just find it a little silly.

 

I enjoy FTFs. I enjoy chasing them even if I am pretty sure I have no chance of making it before someone else does. I don't expect everyone to enjoy going for them. Nor do I expect cache owners to always cater to my FTF cravings. If I don't get this one, I will chase the next one, not a big deal.

 

I guess "honor" was really the wrong word to have used. I look at it as more of a mini-game within the game. I have fun with it, I enjoy the chase. But if there is already a signature on the book before the cache is published the chase is over. There is no FTF after publish and "real" FTF, there is only the first. There can be only one! :blink:

Link to comment

I'm generally not a big fan of "beta testing." As a cache owner, just be extra careful when placing the cache. If it's a multi, double check your coords before writing them down to make sure they're right, things like that.

 

Periodically, someone will pre-release a cache at an event or in the local forums, things like that. Then the question comes up of who was the first to find. Was it the person who found it first at the event or the first person to find it after publishing.

 

Generally, in those cases, the pre-publication finders, sign the log on page 2 or 3 and wait to log it until the mad rush of FTFers find it. If not, then you get 5 different people claiming the FTF. "FTF before publishing." "FTF while beta testing." "I'm the true FTF because I found it after it was published and became available to everyone..." "FTF after the cache was relocated 35 feet to it's new location, even though 35 people found it before me."

Link to comment

Since it ate my original . . . .

 

Now, I can understand if you have a particularly complex multi, or a puzzle or something that is just plain hard you might want to have a friend check it to see that all is in order before you publish the cache. I guess you could consider it a test of the emergency geocaching system.

 

But beyond that, I kind of feel like giving someone the coordinates, and asking them to find it, then logging that find is kind of a cheat for giving away FTF. Not the FTF prize, just the honor of the FTF.

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I get a little charged when there is the possibility of a FTF on a cache, and when I look at a brand new publish that was found and logged 2 days prior (GC1JWDX), it takes some of the joy out. I will still go to it. I will still log it. I just won't run out to do it right away.

 

Not a huge deal. It isn't a game breaker for me. Just a tiny little rant for a wet Monday morning. Thanks for playing, and we will see you next week, same bat-time, same bat-channel!

If I have one that I need a friend to try for me...I request they sign in the middle of the log book and wait to log their find until after someone else found it post-publish...

Link to comment

I'm generally not a big fan of "beta testing." As a cache owner, just be extra careful when placing the cache. If it's a multi, double check your coords before writing them down to make sure they're right, things like that.

 

Periodically, someone will pre-release a cache at an event or in the local forums, things like that. Then the question comes up of who was the first to find. Was it the person who found it first at the event or the first person to find it after publishing.

 

Generally, in those cases, the pre-publication finders, sign the log on page 2 or 3 and wait to log it until the mad rush of FTFers find it. If not, then you get 5 different people claiming the FTF. "FTF before publishing." "FTF while beta testing." "I'm the true FTF because I found it after it was published and became available to everyone..." "FTF after the cache was relocated 35 feet to it's new location, even though 35 people found it before me."

 

Testing a cache (especially with newer,unexperienced cache owners) can prevent a lot of problems. Caches that are completely unclear, caches with bad waypoints ("just be extra careful"... new cache makers have to learn too), bad locations, caches that can simply be calculated instead of done by walking them, etc. After a cache has been published it is a lot harder to fix all those things, so in many cases it's a good thing to proofwalk the cache before that time.

 

This is something that can raise the entertainment value for each cacher that happens to do the cache. I'd say that is more important than whether or not it might "ruin the fun" for one or two people who feel so bad about seeing someone's log in the book.

 

If people want to play their FTF fun, fine, but keep it as a game to the FTF'ers.

Link to comment

Whenever this topic comes up, I am always glad for two things:

 

1) I don't worry about the FTF so I don't need to care what counts or not.

 

2) I don't "find" caches if I am present at the time they are hidden. I will make a return trip after they are published and then log them as Found and sign the log at that time.

Link to comment

 

2) I don't "find" caches if I am present at the time they are hidden. I will make a return trip after they are published and then log them as Found and sign the log at that time.

I enjoy getting FTF's

We had a couple of people that would hide the caches together, one would put thier name as the owner and the other would put thier name as FTF. The first time this happened to me we saw the e-mail as soon as it was published and were at the cache site 15minutes later. when my wife found it she saw she wasn't FTF. She called me and asked to research the FTF'er. This was the persons first find. She supposedly ran out by herself at 930 at night to find her first cache. I emailed her congrgulating on her FTF. The thing that bothered me was the fact that she didn't ever put a date on her FTF's. This happened a few other times, with other caches and other cachers, always the same hider and same FTF. never a date on the log.

Enough people started getting suspicous, and I guess confronted them because they stoped signing as FTF.

 

On another occassion I came across a fellow Cacher that was placing a cache. I waited for a couple of months before I logged it. It was a multi, that I knew the final location for. I helped my mother-in-law place her first cache. I logged it after all the hoopla about FTF was done.

 

Thats my view on the topic.

 

Cabear

Link to comment

2) I don't "find" caches if I am present at the time they are hidden. I will make a return trip after they are published and then log them as Found and sign the log at that time.

 

I tend to run on this same theory. I haven't been present when many have been hiden, but my girlfriend will always run her ideas past me before hers publishes. By the time the listing goes up, I know what the container is, approximately where it is, and how hard she made it. I won't run off to those because it seems an unfair advantage to get it first.

 

I have always felt that the first finder should have the pure experience of it. No past logs to draw on, no hints from the owner (outside of those on the page) just you, the woods and some pesky little hidden thing. I have seen FTF logs with the cache owner standing over the shoulder of the finder, calls to the owner for hints, etc. And this was in the first day!

Link to comment

obviously fugglestone is talking about me.

 

and it's so much better to talk about people than to them.

 

here's a fun thing about having someone beta test your cache, even if it's simple: they can test whether or not you've really rated it correctly. they can give you feedback on the durability of your hide. they can give you an idea of how long it will take someone to find it, and how likely they are to trample an area, step on important bits of flora, etc., etc.

 

if i know where the blasted thing is, we call it a joint hide. if i have to look for it, we call it beta testing.

 

considering that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can find the parking lot, i'm not sure why i need to make a second trip in order NOT to be the first finder. if i have to go all the way home and then back again, i ought to be eligible for FTF.

 

it is simply a way to recuse myself from the first find competition, and if your first find is so spoiled by my having found it, perhaps you will wish to start a nationwide campaign to revive the droit de seigneur.

 

 

back in the day i used to drive across two states to look for a cache, not find it, go home, read the hint, and then DRIVE BACK ACROSS TWO STATES (not even for a FTF!) just because i'd gotten it into my head that it was only "pure" if i made a separate trip after reading the hint.

 

just as an oh-by-the-way, i used to be the first finder on every new cache in this state as well as parts of two other states and the PQ. it stopped being sporting after a while.

 

well, golly. it turns out that it's the exact same cache in the exact same spot. nothing has changed except that i don't drive an extra four hundred miles.

 

 

instead of griping that your precious virgin logbook has been deflowered and isn't really virgin, how about being happy you have something to find?

 

complaining specifically about your local cachers in the forums has a way of coming back to bite you on the butt.

 

i can't wait to meet you; i'm sure we'll hit it off and be great friends.

Link to comment

Since it was my cache and my choice that started this thread, I suppose I should comment briefly.

I don't worry about beta testing very much. I am a FFW at times so I get to see it from both sides. It is still a first find if the only cacher there before me was the beta tester(s). I can live with that.

I have been a beta tester and signed in numerous places including above the title, on the bottom of the first page and elsewhere. Can't see an appreciable difference there.

I'm sorry if anyone feels that beta testing (or having friends along who DON"T claim a FF) ruins the FF. It is rather irresponsible to waste fuel to drive back many miles just to keep the experience "pure". Not doing it.

FYI: I have been known to rant myself and I try not to get to worked up about same. A good debate is fun and I try to have them whenever a fine opponent is available. I have to go to bed now so enjoy the fun and don't be surprised when I don't respond.

Link to comment
But beyond that, I kind of feel like giving someone the coordinates, and asking them to find it, then logging that find is kind of a cheat for giving away FTF. Not the FTF prize, just the honor of the FTF.

 

What some people don't understand is that this website is simply a listing service. When a cache owner places a cache it's nobody else's business how, where and when he chooses to advertise it. He can run an ad in the paper, give the coordinates to friends, post it on his own website, list it here, list it with another listing service or pay a skywriter to paste it across the sky. It's his choice.

 

I was at an event last weekend where someone placed a half dozen new caches nearby and gave the coordinates to the attendees. By the time the caches were published each logbook probably had 3 dozen plus entries. It's very possible that some geocacher may have run out the moment they were published to bag some FTFs, only to see 40 signatures in each logbook ahead of his. Ya know what? He wasn't FTF. Ya know what else? The cache owner didn't do a thing wrong. They were his caches and they are his business.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Through an odd twist of events, I built my first cache before I had ever been out geocaching and before I was familiar with my GPSr and such things as waypoint averaging. I found my first cache in late May (a couple of weeks before my cache got published) and the owner of that cache kindly offered to Beta test mine for me. It was a two-stage multi, and in fact it had some bugs that I hadn't seen. I was really glad that someone with a fresh set of eyes looked things over. The cache and listing got tweaked and he eventually did log the find, though not as FTF. That was my first introduction to the kindness of geocachers - a stranger who went out of his way during a busy work schedule to help out a newbie.

 

Thank you Cow Islander.

Link to comment

Whether they sign the first space, the middle of the log or at the last spot --> the first cacher to find the cache is the FTF. Published, friend, relative or whatever. Everybody else is just that - everybody else.

I'm generally not a big fan of "beta testing." As a cache owner, just be extra careful when placing the cache. If it's a multi, double check your coords before writing them down to make sure they're right, things like that.

I go by the same philosophy. I do my own beta testing (not only in geocaching, but in other aspects of life, too). I take the FTF seriously, and I won't hide while hiking with friends.

 

If I'm the friend tagging along, i wont seek the cache, even if invited, but will travel back for the find once the cache gets published. If the hider insists, I might go find it, sign on page zero (the page containing $cache_name, hidden on $date, hidden by $hider, beta tested by $me), and log online as a note; will never log a find it in this case.

 

Periodically, someone will pre-release a cache at an event or in the local forums, things like that. Then the question comes up of who was the first to find. Was it the person who found it first at the event or the first person to find it after publishing.

 

Generally, in those cases, the pre-publication finders, sign the log on page 2 or 3 and wait to log it until the mad rush of FTFers find it. If not, then you get 5 different people claiming the FTF. "FTF before publishing." "FTF while beta testing." "I'm the true FTF because I found it after it was published and became available to everyone..." "FTF after the cache was relocated 35 feet to it's new location, even though 35 people found it before me."

 

If the cache I find was, for example, placed on the 16th, found on the 16th, published on the 19th, I'm a bit annoyed, but I won't claim the FTF. Most probably in this case the first finder is friend with the hider, and was either present during the hiding, or waited for the owner to hide and pass the coordinates.

 

If the cache was placed on the 9th, found a dozen times on the 16th and published on the 19th - then the cache was an event cache, and I'm ok with that (the finders had to work from the same information, nobody was served a free FTF.

 

If the cache was placed in 2006 and published in 2008, with several finds during this time, then I would conclude that the cache was previously published on another site, and don't have any problem with that - same as the paragraph above.

Link to comment

Since it ate my original . . . .

 

Now, I can understand if you have a particularly complex multi, or a puzzle or something that is just plain hard you might want to have a friend check it to see that all is in order before you publish the cache. I guess you could consider it a test of the emergency geocaching system.

 

But beyond that, I kind of feel like giving someone the coordinates, and asking them to find it, then logging that find is kind of a cheat for giving away FTF. Not the FTF prize, just the honor of the FTF.

 

Since when has honor had anything to do with being FTF?

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I get a little charged when there is the possibility of a FTF on a cache, and when I look at a brand new publish that was found and logged 2 days prior (GC1JWDX), it takes some of the joy out. I will still go to it. I will still log it. I just won't run out to do it right away.

 

So the cache was only worth finding to you because of the chance at being FTF?

 

Personal opinion don't be offended

 

I see most beta tests coming from cachers who go out together on a hike for other, already placed geocaches. Rather than make a second trip, the friends sign the log of the new cache before it is placed. To me, this a mild form of "number padding."

Edited by Kit Fox
Link to comment

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I get a little charged when there is the possibility of a FTF on a cache, and when I look at a brand new publish that was found and logged 2 days prior (GC1JWDX), it takes some of the joy out. I will still go to it. I will still log it. I just won't run out to do it right away.

 

So the cache was only worth finding to you because of the chance at being FTF?

 

Personal opinion don't be offended

 

I see most beta tests coming from cachers who go out together on a hike for other, already placed geocaches. Rather than make a second trip, the friends sign the log of the new cache before it is placed. To me, this a mild form of "number padding."

 

I never said it was only worth finding if I could be first. Never. I plan on finding the cache, 1st, 5th, 500th, I will still seek it, and still be glad when I find it. I am talking simply about the relationship between FTF and beta tester, which to my mind are the same person.

 

If two people go out on a hike together, Person A hides a cache, Person B then finds it, you can call it beta testing if you want. You can call it FTF before publish, it doesn't matter. B was the first finder. Wether they sign on the first page, or the tenth, they were still first. I just don't see a beta test as a test if you couple it with a found log. That makes it a find, the first one of the cache in fact. Congratulations on your FTF!

 

Obviously everyone has a different opinion on this matter, otherwise what would have been the point of even bringing it up? I appologize if anyone has taken offense to mine, I don't mean to insult or demean with my posts. I am simply trying to sort some definitions in my own mind.

Link to comment
Testing a cache (especially with newer,unexperienced cache owners) can prevent a lot of problems...If people want to play their FTF fun, fine, but keep it as a game to the FTF'ers.

I'm all for people wanting to make their caches better and "right" from the start, and if having someone beta test them, then that's what they should do. I'd rather go to a cache knowing the coords or good or the puzzle can be solved correctly rather than worrying about who signed the log first.

 

Unfortunately, people really get into FTFs, and I've seen problems arise when logs were signed before the cache was published. When it happens around here, the cache usually fills up with 20 notes of people arguing back and forth over it.

 

In the end people need to remember that it's just a game/hobby/sport that people do for fun.

Link to comment
I see most beta tests coming from cachers who go out together on a hike for other, already placed geocaches. Rather than make a second trip, the friends sign the log of the new cache before it is placed. To me, this a mild form of "number padding."

 

I agree. I have had two experiences with this in the past:

 

1) Friend wants us to know nothing about the cache. We didn't see the container, he made us go up the trail and out of site while he hid it and didn't give us the coordinates. Next time I do that hike I'll search for it and it will be as legitimate as any other find in my books.

 

2) Friend hides two caches as we go up the mountain. He gives us the coordinates and on the way back down we verify that the arrow points to the general area where they are hidden. I don't see the need to beta test his coordinates AND claim a Find.

 

In either case it seems to me that it would be "wrong" for me to claim a find on those caches at the time they were hidden. However, the next time I do those hikes (if ever) I have no problems hunting them and logging them as Finds. Under the circumstances, there will have been months between the placement and the hunt so between the natural cache migration which occurs (either because of careless cachers, the weather or wildlife) so it's a good hunt. I know in my mind what constitutes a legitimate find and that's why "the only numbers that matter to me are my own" because I know others have different personal rules.

 

I wonder, particularly on simple caches (not puzzles or multis) where the beta "testers" simply sign the log before the hider gets out of the car to stick the micro under a garbage can or lift the lampskirt.

Link to comment

 

I wonder, particularly on simple caches (not puzzles or multis) where the beta "testers" simply sign the log before the hider gets out of the car to stick the micro under a garbage can or lift the lampskirt.

 

to answer this question, if it's me, i'm probably in the car checking my email or playing minesweeper the entire time the cache is being assembled or placed.

 

like i said, if i know where it is, i call it a joint hide. if i have to LOOK for it, i call it a beta test.

 

crashco and i actually have a joint account for the purpose of hiding caches together. sometimes we use it, and sometimes we don't.

 

for the cache in question there were a very limited number of places that cache could have been once you found the proper parking lot (not hard to find unless you own a white cane), and yet it STILL took me a while to find it.

 

i still don't think it would have been super-smart to make a special trip for the distinction of looking for it some other, later day.

 

you're not planting the flag for spain in the new world; you're finding a container in a parking lot.

 

if you want to be REALLY technical about container virginity, as soon as that puppy was loaded off the assembly line it was found and handled by a variety of people. if that's only significant after it becomes published as a cache, then it's only significant after it becomes published as a cache.

Link to comment

When I have a friend beta test a cache, it is understood that they cannot go for or claim FTF.

Ditto

 

that's WHY we call it beta testing. it is code for "i am recusing myself from the FTF competition. i am not claiming FTF nor am i taking your coveted FTF prize."

 

if you've ever tried to FF a cache that turns out to be 700 feet off in its coordinates, you'd appreciate a beta tester.

 

likewise if you've ever hidden a container for which you think finders will all approach the way you thought of it and your beta tester discovers for you that people NOT thinking like you might accidentally destroy your container during the hunt.

Link to comment

Could you be a beta tester?

 

If someone asked you to go find their newly hidden cache and check the coordinates, told you right where to look, could you go find but not log it? Could you leave the FTF prize and signature alone? When I beta test for someone I don't log it at all. It's a courtesy to the owner to verify his coords, I don't need a smilie to motivate me to do them that favor.

 

Try this... the next 25 or 100 caches you find, sign the cache logbook but don't log them online at all.

 

You'll likely find that the game is just as much fun, you'll learn that smilies are irrelevant, you'll find that you can perform a selfless act with no reward.

 

It might even change your whole attitude toward numbers! ;)

Link to comment

On beta testing I'm not so sure if FTF should count.

 

How ever, I did go over to my brothers house one day and sow him walking out with an ammo can to place his first.

I kicked into Stealth mode and followed him and when I saw him duck under a bridge (no longer under the bridge) I hid and waited till he left. I went and found it, signed the log, checked his account several times a day waiting for the cache to become active and claimed FTF.

Link to comment
Try this... the next 25 or 100 caches you find, sign the cache logbook but don't log them online at all.

 

You'll likely find that the game is just as much fun, you'll learn that smilies are irrelevant, you'll find that you can perform a selfless act with no reward

 

I dispute the idea that logging your find is any kind of reward. Yeah, I know a lot of people seem to think it is, and I think that skewed perspective has damaged the sport. However the purpose of a found it log a simple one - it is to let the owner you found his cache. It also has secondary benefits like allowing you to filter caches you already found from pocket queries, but the chief purpose is to provide feedback to the cache owner.

 

I figure that the owner spent the effort, time and money to hide his cache. The very least I can do is let him know I found it and enjoyed the hunt. I don't see going out and enjoying the fruits of the owner's efforts and not providing feedback to him and the geocaching community as a "selfless act". Actually it seems kind of selfish to me.

Link to comment
Since it ate my original . . . .

 

Now, I can understand if you have a particularly complex multi, or a puzzle or something that is just plain hard you might want to have a friend check it to see that all is in order before you publish the cache. I guess you could consider it a test of the emergency geocaching system.

 

But beyond that, I kind of feel like giving someone the coordinates, and asking them to find it, then logging that find is kind of a cheat for giving away FTF. Not the FTF prize, just the honor of the FTF.

Since when has honor had anything to do with being FTF?
I don't know about the rest of you, but I get a little charged when there is the possibility of a FTF on a cache, and when I look at a brand new publish that was found and logged 2 days prior (GC1JWDX), it takes some of the joy out. I will still go to it. I will still log it. I just won't run out to do it right away.

 

So the cache was only worth finding to you because of the chance at being FTF?

 

Personal opinion don't be offended

 

I see most beta tests coming from cachers who go out together on a hike for other, already placed geocaches. Rather than make a second trip, the friends sign the log of the new cache before it is placed. To me, this a mild form of "number padding."

I agree with almost all of your post, but I think that a significant amount of 'beta testing' is true testing. You hide the cache while I wait down teh trail. You give me the coords and I go find it to ensure that it is at the coords and is rated properly. I see nothing wrong with this and I don't believe it to be 'numbers padding'.

 

It also doesn't affect the FTF hunt, in my opinion, as my definition for FTF is First To Find after listing. A cache could be listed on another site for years and already have two or three signatures in the log book. It still would be FTF for the first person to find it from it's GC.com listing.

Link to comment
Testing a cache (especially with newer,unexperienced cache owners) can prevent a lot of problems...If people want to play their FTF fun, fine, but keep it as a game to the FTF'ers.

I'm all for people wanting to make their caches better and "right" from the start, and if having someone beta test them, then that's what they should do. I'd rather go to a cache knowing the coords or good or the puzzle can be solved correctly rather than worrying about who signed the log first.

 

Unfortunately, people really get into FTFs, and I've seen problems arise when logs were signed before the cache was published. When it happens around here, the cache usually fills up with 20 notes of people arguing back and forth over it.

 

In the end people need to remember that it's just a game/hobby/sport that people do for fun.

Those would be 20 notes that I would happily delete. If the goofballs kept it up, I would ask for intervention from TPTB.

Link to comment

While I am not at all competitive with regards to numbers or FTFs, I will admit that logging a find online is a "reward" to me.

 

I love to see my own numbers climb, although I regularly pick one cache that is more aesthetically pleasing over 10 lamp post caches (but i will hunt those too). I think the idea of order is why i like logging so much. I am one of those anal retentive types that likes to "check that one off my list" and move on to the next area with some ridiculous notion that one day the entire US map will be smileys (ok not really).

 

It is for my own satisfaction that I find smileys a reward, but I certainly don't play the numbers game.

 

For myself, if a friend ask me to do a test run on his/her cache prior to publication, I wouldn't claim a FTF, as I don't think that is in the spirit of good sportsmanship. I would not sign the log or log it, until after it had 3 or 4 other signees, so that those who go in for that wouldn't have their FTF party jeopardized.

Link to comment

One thing that's important to remember.....NOT seeing a smiley next to a cache listing on gc.com doesn't mean that it hasn't been found. Some cachers NEVER log online, they simply sign the book and move on. Some folks aren't able to visit the cache listing to log their find before other would-be FTF obsessed folks log on to check. Not everyone has the ability to log their find online from Ground Zero....and that's basically what would need to happen to save the aggravation of chasing a FTF that isn't there. Even then...how many times have we missed a FTF by ten minutes? Even if they had logged from GZ......I was in the car and on my way. Wouldn't have seen their Smiley and wouldn't have been eligible for a FTF. What's the only way to avoid aggravation in Geocaching, if you are inclined to make YOUR rules applicable to everyone else? Find another hobby. Truly.....does it matter who has a Smiley Face first?

 

Enjoy it for what it is.....have a great holiday season and stay safe!

 

Buzz

VT-GeoDevils

Link to comment
i still don't think it would have been super-smart to make a special trip for the distinction of looking for it some other, later day.

 

you're not planting the flag for spain in the new world; you're finding a container in a parking lot.

 

I guess that's the thing. I'm not going to make a special trip back to log it some other day -- if I happen to be in the area again some time I'll log it. If I don't happen to be in the area I won't. It's the same reason I don't feel the need to sign the log if I am truly beta testing the cache -- it's just a smiley.

Link to comment
However the purpose of a found it log a simple one - it is to let the owner you found his cache. It also has secondary benefits like allowing you to filter caches you already found from pocket queries, but the chief purpose is to provide feedback to the cache owner.

 

True. I've never thought of my online log as a "reward", although I guess it serves as a reward because it provides me a convenient way of tracking my experiences online. Sure, I could do it other ways too, but keeping all my caching experiences on Geocaching.com just makes sense to me.

 

I feel my online log is more of a community service measure than a personal reward. I try to provide feedback to the owners, to let them know the cache is OK, what I thought of the hunt and what my experience was like. I think of it as a way of of telling future seekers things that may be useful such as "If you approach from the north you'll walk right into a homeless camp."

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...